TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @FatEmperor
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
My Epstein Release - Have a Look at the Top Ten Revelations - Incredible Stuff! You're gonna love this one - now embedded here in X! 😉🔥
Video Transcript AI Summary
The video presents a sweeping throughline of Epstein “files” and related documents, claiming they reveal a tightly connected elite network that uses philanthropy, health funding, and geopolitical strategy for profit and control. Key points include:
- Robert Trivers, a Harvard biologist, is shown in emails to Jeffrey Epstein discussing material the video labels as “sick” and representing elite thinking. The presenter cites a 2014 suspension and a 2015 Reuters interview in which Trivers described Epstein as a person of integrity and suggested Epstein’s acts were not heinous because “by the time girls are 14 or 15, they're like grown women.” The video asserts Trivers criticized Epstein and attempted to discredit him publicly, while continuing to discuss Epstein privately.
- The broadcast references additional emails and unread content from Trivers and others, claiming the material demonstrates how elites think and act. It highlights a controversial line about intervening earlier in children’s development with hormones, framed as part of a broader claim about elite dynamics and manipulation.
- Tablet magazine is cited as documenting years of foundations, media influence, and funding aimed at spreading the “trans thing” as a social contagion controlled from the top. The presenter claims the average trans person’s life costs and the notion that profit from “a life ruined” could reach up to a million dollars per life.
- Norman Finkelstein is praised for criticizing Trevor’s, Alan Dershowitz, and Epstein, with the presenter quoting harsh exchanges and calling out supposed threats and jabs within the Epstein network.
- The focus shifts to Bill Gates, JP Morgan, Tony Blair, Boris Nikolik, and others, alleging a shared interest in domestic health, neurotech brain science, and a panel on Global Health Investment Fund and impact investing. The video ties these figures to pandemic planning and profiteering, asserting they coordinated with the World Health Organization on pandemic strategy.
- A central claim is that Epstein’s files outline a twenty-year financial architecture to turn pandemics into profit, including offshore vaccine funds, pandemic reinsurance triggers, donor-advised fund structures, and career pipelines into pharma and the World Economic Forum. The narrative ties these structures to events before COVID-19 and to Gates, JPMorgan, and Epstein, with references to a 2019 event and planning for involvement of the WHO and ICRC.
- The discussion presents four specific “bombshells” from the Epstein-Gates email chains: (1) a donor-advised fund linked to Gates with an offshore arm for vaccines; (2) Epstein noting the money-making potential of charitable activity requiring arm’s-length arrangements; (3) Boris Nikolik and Gates considering donor-advised funds for energy and pandemics; (4) a Swiss Re parametric trigger development for health products and a pandemic bond trigger later issued by the World Bank.
- A fifth bombshell claims an agreement letter where Gates asked Epstein to personally represent Boris Nikolik in Gates’ organization, with broad indemnification and access to elite legal and advisory networks.
- The presenter argues that the real question is not whether a pandemic was planned but what safeguards existed to prevent profiteering, and he accuses a globalist network of using Epstein as an agent to manipulate public opinion and finance.
- The video ties Epstein to broader conspiratorial narratives about Rothschilds, Davos, the World Economic Forum, cyber and genetics issues, and a globalist power network, asserting that the Epstein files reveal a coordinated, non-organic elite framework.
- A closing appeal invites readers to Tragedy and Hope for context on how the network operates, positioning the book as essential for understanding the Epstein revelations and urging wider discussion and dissemination of the linked material.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Okay, guys. This is a killer compilation. So I've done all the work. I've pulled together a ton of the incredible stuff that's coming out of the recent Epstein release, and I put it all here together for you. So please share, subscribe, and absolutely comment down below.
This one's a doozy. You don't want to miss it. Okay. So you're wondering where all the trans madness came from? Hardly organic now, was it?
Well, we get some answers in the old files. So here we have Robert Trivers, a Harvard biologist, in just one of his, emails to Jeffrey, and he's talking stuff here that's pretty sick. And the thing is that this guy, he was thrown out of his university, suspended in 2014, and in a 2015 interview with Reuters, Trivers called Jeffrey a person of integrity and did not see Epstein's acts as so heinous because by the time girls are 14 or 15, they're like grown women where sixty years ago, he said on the record. And he also blew about Epstein and how great he was and how what a real pleasure he was and a lot of other stuff. But let's look at his content in this email.
Now, I won't read this out, but this is the kind of stuff we're talking about. This is how the elites think. And here's another one I won't read out, but, you get the idea. And I will read out this piece. By the way, we are now pushing intervention earlier.
Oh, I bet you are. So you notice your three year old son has trans tendencies? So now you intervene with hormones. I'd be frightened to do that, but who knows? What a sick puppy, And, of course, we know many, many cases of the elites and the billionaires.
This is Tablet magazine quite a few years ago, 2022, setting up foundations, funding, funding, funding, and the media, of course, as well to get the whole trans thing as widely spread as possible. It's a social contagion run pretty much from tops down. Now, another factor, of course, in their zeal in this perverse matter is that the average trans person, as they ruin their lives with all the operations and medications, has been estimated to be worth perhaps up to a million dollars per life ruined. So there's a lot of profit on the table too. Now, a shout out here to Norman Finkelstein, a holocaust background survivor person, and he basically dealt with this guy, Trevor's, in no uncertain terms, calling Alan Dershowitz a and saying Trevor should be a shame for defending them and both should be strangled instead apparently.
But anyway, that's what's in the Epstein files. Good job Norman. But let's move on quickly from the trans debacle to this human debacle here, mister Gates. And of course, plenty in the latest release, right, about this guy. And here they are all connecting together, particularly interested in domestic health and neurotech brain science.
Yeah? And this was 2017, long after Epstein was convicted for child mansing type stuff. But that doesn't bother Billy when he's getting involved with the big finance to profiteer on people's health. And here we have JP Morgan in the room. Yeah.
We got Tony Blair. We got Billy Boy. And Boris Nikolik. I think he's Ukraine. And they're all talking about a panel discussion on Global Health Investment Fund and Impact Investing.
So all the elites, all the banksters together with the child trafficker, right, scheming around exploiting health dollars. And, of course, the World Health Organization. We can't leave those guys out, can we? Not after the big pandemic. Well, here they are in 2015 preparing for pandemics.
So we have Gaetzee, Epstein, and all the usual characters. Please find attached a draft agenda for the meeting on preparing for pandemics as requested. Let's discuss next steps. For example, how to officially involve the WHO and ICRC, I. E.
Co branding. Best regards and I hope we can pull this off. But this is a classic released just yesterday from Sayr G, so I'm going to briefly go through it. This is the bombshell in the Epstein files. The blueprint for a twenty year financial architecture designed to turn pandemics into a profit center.
Offshore vaccine funds, pandemic reinsurance triggers, donor advised fund structures designed for profit under the cover of simulation programs, remember event two zero one in twenty nineteen, career pipelines into pharma and the world economic forum, all built in the years before COVID nineteen, all running through Gates, JPMorgan and Epstein. We now have the documents. So let's have a look at the first bombshell. So Mary Erdow, CEO of Morgan's $2,000,000,000,000 asset management division, outlines a Gates linked donor advised fund. However, we should be ready with an offshore arm, especially for vaccines.
So she got in with a convicted sex offender, juvenile, trafficker, to start organizing for pandemic profiteering, and we all know what happened after. Let's go on. A bombshell too. So same email chain and Epstein writing to them, the tension is making money from a charitable org, therefore the money making parts needs to be arm's length. Right?
So this architect of this structure, convicted of sex crimes against minors, is explicitly acknowledging that the vehicle is designed to generate profit under the legal cover of charity. Bombshell three, three years before the COVID flu, Boris Nikolik, Bill Gates' chief science and technology adviser, emails Epstein and Gates about donor advised funds and rights. It might be a great path forward for some key areas such as energy, pandemic, etcetera. These scamsters, look what they put us through. Pandemic listed like energy, a standing investment vertical, not an emergency, a portfolio strategy.
All in the vials. Bombshell four, the parametric trigger. Swiss Re Reinsurance team, we need to join developing health products did one for pandemics helped develop parametric trigger. A parametric trigger is a financial instrument that automatically pays out when a pandemic is declared, developed by someone in Epstein's career placement network. Six months later, the World Bank issued its first ever pandemic catastrophe bonds, structured by Swiss Re with exactly these triggers.
Covi flu was a listed peril. Bombshell five, five years after Epstein's conviction. An agreement letter addressed to William h Gates states that Gates specifically requested that Jeffrey Epstein personally serve as the representative of Boris Nikolak in Gates' organization. Gates waves conflicts of interest, provides broad indemnification in writing. He had access to every law firm, every advisor, every institution on earth.
He chose a registered sex offender and put it on paper. This is big guys. This is where CoV flu essentially came from, at least the worst parts of it. Now the question you aren't supposed to ask, and I have to read this out, nobody builds a fire station after the fire. What these documents reveal is a fire station built beside a factory that stores accelerants owned by the same people who wrote the building code.
Patents, simulations, reinsurance triggers, offshore vehicles, career pipelines, all operational before the COVID flu. The question isn't whether they planned a pandemic. The question is what structural safeguard existed to ensure they didn't profit from one. And again, the link is down here. You can go and read the full blog post.
It's astonishing stuff. Now we'll go on to what happened yesterday. So with all these revelations, right, from Epstein's files, which show the usual western bankster class and corporate class all conspiring together to treat us like cattle, Yesterday, we get an explosion of new insights where actually Epstein was Putin's agent. Big bad Putin. He's a Russian.
Talk about a big lie. What a comical psyop this is. All through the Epstein files, Mossad, etcetera, is mentioned and we know who Geoffrey was and we know its connections to Robert Maxwell, Ghislain and all the Mossad stuff. But not a word. No.
The Russians are coming, And here, Catelyn says it well. Epstein documents have been confirming for months that he was clearly and undeniably an Israeli intelligence operative, so naturally the western media are running with the story that he worked for Putin. You couldn't make this up. It's like a sigh up from a kindergarten intelligence team. But this is what they give to the cattle, sadly, us.
Lots of jokes coming out about this unsurprisingly. I'll let you read them yourself. I mean, seriously. They are truly treating us like idiots. Now, just a quick note on this guy in The UK.
Simon Dixon here is brilliant on geopolitics. I recommend you follow him. Astonishing analyst. But yeah, what is the story with this guy? I always thought there was something very smelly about Tommy Robinson.
Something really didn't add up. And sure enough, he's all the way through the files. And Epstein gushed about Tommy and seemed to like Tommy and also made holocaust jokes with Tommy. I mean, if I did that, I'd be called antiseptic, but apparently this guy is allowed to do it. So Robinson's up to his neck with Epstein, and the press had fun with it.
The far right again. But Epstein's clearly pumping Robinson. How could that be if Robinson seems to be on our side? And with regard to those jokes, disgraceful jokes about that period in history, yeah, Epstein is straight from the hip. Kristallnacht always has the big fire.
Come join us at Auschwitz opening night special. So Epstein is allowed to apparently joke about the holocaust. In any case, let's move on. No surprises that Rothschild comes up all through the emails and the files. They're discussing all the things that are happening to the world, of course, because they're deeply embedded in them and decisions relating to them, Ukraine just being one.
And we see from Rothschild, Ukraine upheaval should provide many opportunities. Many. Absolute scamsters. Doesn't matter how many people die, it's all about money and power. And indeed, the Rothschilds are mentioned 12,000 times in the Epstein files.
Who really ran the show? Whereas Putin and the Russians, I haven't seen anything at all yet and it's all in the data. Epstein to Thiel, I represent the Rothschilds. This email explains more about how the world actually works than any White House presser or Trump speech. The people at the top don't just know each other.
They operate as a single insulated power network. Absolutely. And I'll tell you at the end, you read Tragedy and Hope and you'll know how this stuff works. And as well, World Economic Forum? Yeah.
That's all in there. Davos can really replace the UN. Cyber, crypto, genetics, international coordination, like my stint at the trilateral. These are Epstein's word. Issues now need to deal with the distributed trust and Internet fallout.
So Jeffrey was assigned, I think in 2000, to the Rockefeller Foundation, but Rockefeller, W. F, Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission, Council Foreign Relations, they're all just shells for these globalist bankster scamsters. So they're all just part of the same rotten structure. Unsurprisingly, there's plenty in there as well about profiteering millions of Libya before and after Gaddafi. So the usual suspects, always the same.
And interestingly, Zoran Mandami's mother, you saw that recent absurdity going on in New York, well his mother is pictured with Epstein and I think Clinton and all engaged, I think holding Zoran as a baby. So every piece of politics is engineered. No question about it. No conspiracy theory here. The big lie, the big scam, we're all being laughed at.
It's time we all talk about this and make people aware. Bitcoin, don't like to have to say this, but there's quite a bit of Bitcoin in there as well, with Epstein claiming to meet the Bitcoin founders Satoshi's mentioned. As he said, and it's not necessarily true, but 2016, I've spoken to some of the founders of Bitcoin and he's all into Sharia coin and all this stuff. Always the same crap. And apparently, Epstein, through secretive funding, when Bitcoin Foundation kind of collapsed, put in a whole ton of money into it.
So apparently, 75% of Bitcoin cold and development since Epstein's money totally took over. So I don't know what backdoors or other shenanigans are going on there, but I would be concerned. I was disappointed with this one and it's not antiseptic because Alex Jones tweeted this just February 2, got millions of views, so I'm just reporting the news, but apparently Epstein emails are full of anti white, anti Christian slurs and, in Alex's words, Jewish supremacist rhetoric. And indeed, I checked, but, there are videos about this all over the place, and, it's detailed everywhere, apparently, talking about the Goyim and and how dreadful we are. And here's just some of the examples.
I won't even read them out, but it's pretty disturbing stuff, And I wonder how widely this attitude is taken amongst the elites, to be quite honest. Now, gonna finish with this one because it's a personal note in a sense. So this guy, Atiyah, way back in 2018, he came out with a lot of pro pharma anti coronary calcification, gulf, and I took him on with data on Twitter, so he blocked me. And then afterwards he said, I don't agree with a thing this guy says about heart disease, but I assumed he was just wrong out of poor knowledge or ignorance. Now, I'm nearly fifteen years in the science of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, insulin resistance, etcetera.
I have a massive worldwide network, in fairness, and absolutely everything I've said on heart disease is correct and he's saying he doesn't agree with any of it. So what did he believe then? But in any case, it was clear that Atiyah, a good few years ago, suddenly switched from focusing on insulin resistance and low carbon keto and the real science and switched to statins, PCSK9 inhibitors and promoting the absurd and ludicrous cholesterol hypothesis. And soon after he blocked me for trying to call him on it. So I was kind of interested the other day when it turns out he's up to his neck in the Epstein files.
1,700 mentions and emails, etcetera. And there's articles in all the lame stream about this and obviously he's in a pickle now. No Schadenfreude on my part, but poetic justice, yeah. Here's some of his emails. Apparently, according to Atia, the biggest problem with becoming friends with Epstein is that the life that Epstein leads is so outrageous, and yet, Atia can't tell a soul.
That's in an email. Got her fresh shipment. And here, I won't read it out, but apparently it is indeed low carb. Still awaiting results on gluten content though. So joking about this kind of stuff with a known convicted child offender.
Here's another one for fun. Atiya says, hopefully Epstein's in town when I'm back in two weeks. I think this one when he was staying in his New York apartment. I go into Epstein withdrawal when I don't see him. Pretty sick puppy stuff.
And, needless to say, his Instagram is bombed. Even on older posts, there's comments like these with up to 5,000 likes. So, in fairness, Etihad and the path he took, he has been the architect of his own destruction. Last point, he just released a mea culpa of sorts. Absolutely hilarious read, but one part I show here and he actually claims that he asked Epstein about what was that stuff again you were involved in and Epstein says, oh, just a bit of prostitution and Atiyah said, oh, okay then.
That's alright. But of course, everyone knew what Epstein was into. The dogs in the street knew long before Atia met Epstein, so it's farcical. Now, I'm just gonna show you, you can Google for this and see it, Epstein interviewed by Bannon. There's around fifteen hours of interviews that Bannon did and this one's a couple hours long.
Very interesting, very financial though, but this was the best comment. Bro casually confirmed every conspiracy theory ever. Now, in fairness, the big conspiracy theories he reveals are more around the trilateral commission and and all the involvement of the elites together in the financial world. So he wasn't a total idiot to reveal too much, but you might want to watch this video. And to close.
So this is my root cause diagram. It's been very popular. I might put a link to it down below so you can discuss it in the pub. But the globalist utopia that the globalist banksters are aiming for, for many, many decades, there are many strategies they use and they all have one common link. They all weaken society and they make this into a cattle mart of the masses.
And the whole Epstein thing and all the releases are simply explained. The globalist bankster class, the network in Tragedy and Hope, simply were using Epstein as an agent to ply weak people, greedy people, sociopathic sociopathic people, people, and nasty assed influencers. Ply them with money, oh, and politicians especially. Ply them with money, trap them with money and success that could be given to them, doors opened, and if you could manage it, trap them in blackmail. But whatever, often when someone has taken the 40 pieces of silver and become successful from dealing with the devil, often those people will behave almost as if they're blackmailed.
They're gonna keep their mouth shut and they're gonna always support the hand that fed them. So everything rotten in our world today is a, largely orchestrated, not organic, and b, largely organized and driven by the network of which Epstein was an agent and a highly successful one. And that explains all the reveals coming out in the Epstein files. So if you really want to know the true history of how we got here and this mess we're in, read Tragedy and Hope for free. It's at tragedyandhope.com.
Free audiobook, free book, few hours read and it'll give you from the eighteen hundreds right up to pretty much today what's actually going on in the world and you'll fully understand Epstein after reading Tragedy and Hope. So guys, we need to spread this link and get everyone reading this book and getting aligned on how the system actually works and not get distracted by chemtrails and five g and other stuff. Focus on the true geopolitical history, the facts, and then have a mature discussion with any or everyone to spread understanding about the facts. That is my plea to you. That'll do it folks.
Astonishing stuff, But nothing really surprising because the network in tragedyandhope.com is alive and well and it was just tied together somewhat by this fellow Epstein who is working on behalf of the network, of course. Just another reminder for my app for weight loss, longevity, and metabolic health. It'll help so much with people who've had difficulty getting healthy or losing weight before, so check out the homepage linked down below. And for those of you, as gold and silver are now recovering from the bankster led collapse, selling paper shorts and all that knavery, well, the link is down below to Pure Gold where you can get a free consultation and I think a period of free storage, though many will want to take possession of their metals themselves, particularly after last week's shenanigans, right? So if you want to explore that further with experts who really know the world of precious metals and including knowing all about what went on in the last few days, try the link down below and follow-up yourself.
No financial advice. Up to you. So thank you.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Prof John Mearsheimer: "DISMANTLING IRAN, The Four Part Strategy" Globalist Bankers are making a big push here, after decades of trying - what'll happen do you think? 🧐 Background story at http://www.JoePlummer.com
Video Transcript AI Summary
John Stubtack outlines a four-part regime-change playbook shearing Iran from the U.S.-Israeli perspective: 1) sanctions to wreck the economy and provoke public misery; 2) foment and fuel massive protests, with evidence cited of Mossad involvement and public statements by Trump and Pompeo supporting U.S. participation; 3) a massive disinformation campaign to sell to the West that protests are internally generated and that the regime is finished; 4) U.S. and likely Israeli military intervention to finish off the regime and topple it.
He argues that, in Iran, phase four has not occurred and the protests have diminished significantly since their peak a week earlier. A Jerusalem Post December 29 article is cited as indicating Mossad’s deep involvement, and Trump and Pompeo are portrayed as openly backing the regime-change effort. There are other signals discussed: 40,000 Starlink terminals supplied to protesters after Iran shut down the Internet; Qatar and India issuing warnings to their citizens to leave the region; and an Israeli plane movement described as signaling preparation for potential action.
Speaker 1 (Danny) and Speaker 2 (Lindsey Graham) are referenced to illustrate mainstream political support for regime change and the belief that the plan is underway, with Graham saying it would be the biggest change in the Middle East in a thousand years if successful. Pompeo is shown as publicly celebrating Mossad agents “beside them.” Stubtack downplays Graham’s credibility but emphasizes Pompeo’s statements as the more consequential evidence.
In discussing current capabilities and risks, Stubtack notes that American combat power in the region has diminished since June 2025, though the U.S. could still strike. He emphasizes that Iranian ballistic missiles, which became more effective later in the June 12-day war, could overwhelm defenses, and that Iran has threatened retaliation against both Israel and U.S. bases. He highlights three key deterrents: Iran shutting down the Straits of Hormuz, the limited ability of U.S. and Israeli defenses to stop Iranian missiles from hitting Israel, and the question of what military action would actually achieve—arguing that past strikes would likely rally the Iranian population and fail to produce regime change.
Stubtack contends the four-point plan has failed in practice, making continued military action a cockamamie idea. He suggests the real aim for the United States and Israel is to wreck Iran and break it apart, similar to their approach in Syria, rather than to foster liberal democracy. He argues the Israelis are committed to eradicating serious threats to their existence, and that the United States and Israel operate as a tag team in the region.
On diplomacy, Stubtack posits that a negotiated deal could be possible—resembling the JCPOA in preventing Iran from weaponizing its enrichment program and allowing for improved relations with both Israel and the United States—though he stresses Iran would not abandon enrichment entirely and would resist giving up nuclear capabilities completely. He notes that even with diplomacy, Iran and Israel might still have tensions, but a workable modus vivendi could exist.
Looking ahead five years, Stubtack predicts the regime will likely remain in place in Iran, Israel will likely be more hawkish, and the United States will stay closely aligned with Israel. He suggests Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah will persist as threats, and questions whether Iran will acquire nuclear weapons—arguing that if Iran had them earlier, U.S. and Israeli pressure might have been different. He leaves open the possibility of diplomacy but remains skeptical of a peaceful, full resolution in the near term.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is what is going on in Iran is right from The US Israeli playbook on how to produce regime change. We have basically a four part strategy. Using the US military is the fourth part of the strategy. But let me just quickly walk you through the first three elements of the strategy. The first element is that we put sanctions on a country, and we wreck that country's economy.
We do all sorts of things to make the body populace in that country profoundly unhappy because they're suffering enormous costs. We're punishing them with these sanctions. This is what we did in Venezuela. This is what we did in Iran. So you wanna remember when these people are protesting, right, they're protesting because of the terrible economic conditions.
But who played the principal role in creating those terrible economic conditions? It is The United States Of America. So that's the first step. Then the second step is we decide at some point that we're gonna foment massive protests, and we're gonna fuel those massive protests. And this is what happened in Iran in late December of last year, December 2025.
And there's all sorts of evidence now. There's a very famous piece that came out in the Jerusalem Post on December 29 that makes it clear that Mossad was deeply involved in what has been happening in Iran. Furthermore, there are comments by president Trump and, former secretary of state Mike Pompeo that make it clear that The United States has been involved from the get go in terms of fueling this crisis. I would also note to you that, when the Iranians turned off, the Internet and they shut down phone services, what the protesters then were using were Starlink terminals. And it turns out they had 40,000 Starlink terminals.
Who do you think gave them those Starlink terminals? We know the answer to that. So the second step, again, is to foment and fuel, protests, which eventually turn into a revolution and regime change. The third step in the process is to foment a massive disinformation campaign. That's to convince everybody in the West, that this these protests are generated internally, that The United States and Israel have nothing to do with it, and that the protesters are noble patriots and that we have every incentive to back them.
And furthermore, this disinformation campaign sends the message inside of Iran that, the regime is finished. The protesters are on a roll. There's no way, the regime can shut this down. This time is different. So what we're trying to do is generate momentum with this disinformation campaign inside of Iran.
Then the fourth step in the process is the United States military, and probably the Israeli military as well, come in once the protests have reached a certain point. And we attack all sorts of critical infrastructure, all sorts of elites inside of Iran, and we deliver the coup de grace. We finish off the regime. This is the basic playbook. Right?
You see it at play in Venezuela. Right? It's regime change of the sort we've seen many times before. Now one final point. It's failed.
Speaker 1: What do you mean by it's failed?
Speaker 0: Well
Speaker 1: Because we haven't done phase four yet, which we're gonna get to in just a second.
Speaker 0: First of all, the number of protests in Iran has been reduced drastically. There are remarkably few protests today compared to how many there were a week ago. So it's just very important to understand that. Furthermore, a very important Israeli commentator, he he's on channel twelve in Israel, who's highly respected inside Israel and outside of Israel, has said explicitly that the protests have failed, that the government crackdown has succeeded. And by the way, I think if you listen carefully to what president Trump is saying and doing, he recognizes that this, campaign to overthrow the regime has failed.
And if it's failed in terms of the second and third strands of the playbook, how do you use military force to rescue the situation? Right? Trump is Trump was intending to use military force for sure, but that's that that was intended to be used. That military force was intended to be used once the regime was on its last legs. Well, the regime is not on its last legs.
The regime has triumphed here. It has shut down the protest. Not completely, but it will completely shut down the protest, and it will hang large numbers of the leaders of those protests. Right? So the question is, what can Trump do now?
Right? He's in he's in a different situation than he thought he would be. Does he think he can rescue the situation with military force?
Speaker 1: Well and and if I could just tell you if that's what worries me, that point right there, because he may think that. Now I I just wanna tell for everybody who's watching here, what you just said there is not a theory. This four point plan that you talk about, I mean, you Gary had a one headline up there a second ago from the Jerusalem poster Israeli media. Here's another one from Mike Pompeo also talking about from the Jerusalem Post here how he tweeted out publicly on x that, yeah, this this, you know, the Mossad's on the ground, two thumbs up. Totally validating what you said there.
Then let's go back home to Lindsey Graham, who said this about what he's unambiguously believes is the expectation of The United States.
Speaker 2: This tyrannical regime needs to end. We need to end this for the good people of Iran and for our own selves and the people of Israel. We need to take this guy down. He needs to leave standing up or laying down. I don't care.
And if we can pull this off, it'd be biggest change in The Mideast in a thousand years.
Speaker 1: It'd be the biggest change in a thousand years. No doubt about that, but this there's nothing about protesters. There's nothing about protecting democracy. This is all about regime change, and he is the unambiguous about that. And and here's that comment from, from Mike Pompeo here where he celebrates.
Happy New Year to Iranians and Mossad agents beside them. So what what what do you say about what Lindsey Graham is openly talking about here?
Speaker 0: Again, I find it very hard to take Lindsey Graham seriously. I mean, I think what Pompeo is saying is what really matters. What we saw in the Jerusalem Post in that famous December 29 article is what really matters. And by the way, if you listen to president Trump or you read president Trump's, tweets on Truth Social, right, it's very clear that he is deeply committed to making this, revolution in Iran work. This, of course, is why you're worried that he may use military force now that, everything else seems to have failed.
But we're we're deeply involved in this. And Lindsey Graham is just a cheerleader. And and, again, I find this hardly surprising. We see this in Venezuela, and and what's happening in Iran in Iran is hardly surprising.
Speaker 1: And I wanna just talk to you a little bit about about where we're at now because, Qatar, just again, just right before we came on the air here, Qatar is warning its personnel that they need to leave the IUD, at least certain categories. India has issued warnings for its citizens to leave students, etcetera. Israeli wing of sign, which is basically their Air Force One has been seen to party for Creek, which happened the last time before we attacked in June. And then then then there's the question of how much combat power do we have in the region? I want to I want you to focus on this for just a second before we get back into what may happen.
Prior to June, there was a lot of American combat power that went up there. Two aircraft carriers track groups at one point. We're both in the air that also was in 2024. But right now, we still have the Ford around Venezuela. So we don't have a lot of combat power up in the region.
We definitely can strike. But the question is, if Iran makes good on its threat and, dear, if we still have that one, you can see that Iran has has on a full screen here has said that they will retaliate this time against both Israel and against American bases. Unlike the last time, they said that they're actually gonna do that and and and hit back at Americans. So the first question I ask, do you think we have enough combat power if our bluff is cold and we get into a shooting war with Iran?
Speaker 0: Well, there are a couple points to be made here. First of all, we had a lot more combat power back in June 2025, when you had the twelve day war, than we have there now. But you want to remember that that combat power did not prove effective at, shooting down, ballistic missiles, Iranian ballistic missiles in large numbers over time. At first, the combat power that we had there was quite effective at shooting down or helping the Israelis shoot down, Iranian ballistic missiles. But as the war went on, both the Iranians I mean, both the Americans and the Israelis, found themselves in a situation where increasing numbers of Iranian ballistic missiles were getting through.
As is almost always happens when you have a war, the forces on both sides, learn, and they figure out how to beat the other side's defenses. And the Iranians got much smarter in terms of how they launched their ballistic missiles, as the war wore on. And many people believe that the Israelis were interested in entering the war over after twelve days, and we were interested in ending the war after twelve days, because, so many Iranian ballistic missiles were getting through. Our defenses and the Israeli defenses were wearing out. And there were people at the time, I'm sure you remember this, who argued that the Iranians were foolish to agree to a ceasefire, that the balance of power had shifted in their favor, and they should, they meaning the Iranians, should have continued pounding Israel.
So the question you wanna ask yourself, given that we have less firepower, less defensive capability in The Gulf at this point in time, What's gonna happen when the Iranians, who are gonna be smarter this time, and still have lots of ballistic missiles, start pounding Israel? And the fact is I don't understand why the Israelis and the Americans are interested in starting a war with Iran given that the Iranians have all those ballistic missiles, and our defenses, America's defenses, and Israel's defenses are not terribly effective at dealing with those ballistic.
Speaker 1: Well, I I'll tell you, John. I I I fear it's because president Trump doesn't understand those kinds of things, or he doesn't understand it limits to his power. I want you to watch this next clip here because he was point blank asked yesterday. Okay. Iran that referring to that that full screen I just showed you a second ago.
Iran has said that they're gonna this time retaliate, which they didn't do last time against both Israel and US military bases. What do you think about that? Watch Trump's answer.
Speaker 3: Iran says that it will retaliate in the instance of US strikes against US assets in The Middle East. What do you say to US service members about why it is worth the risk to intervene in Iran?
Speaker 4: Yeah. Iran said that the last time I blew them up with the nuclear capability that which they don't have any longer. So Iran said that the last time they better behave.
Speaker 1: Yeah. He says they better behave, but I mean, see, that's what worries me. He says logic there. Hey. Well, I knocked out Venezuela.
I did this. I knocked this person out. They all went down. Same thing will happen here. He may believe that, John.
Speaker 0: I think, Danny, there's a very important element in this story that's missing, and that is the ability of the Iranians, to shut down oil traffic coming out of the Persian Gulf, to close the Straits Of Hormuz. There's a lot of evidence that one of the reasons, one of the two reasons that we were anxious, we meaning The United States, were anxious to stop the twelve day war after twelve days, was not simply because of the fact that Iranian ballistic missiles were pounding Israel. It was also because we got wind of the fact the Iranians were moving to shut down the Straits Of Hormuz and stop the flow of oil out of the Gulf. It's very important to understand that. That was said at the time to spook president Trump.
So if you're the Iranians, I don't think you wanna emphasize that you're going to attack American bases. You can do that, but I would not emphasize that. I would emphasize that you have every intention of shutting down, the Straits Of Hormuz, and I think that will have a significant effect.
Speaker 1: Wait. Wait. So are are you saying that because you think that the potential for oil will move president Trump, whereas the risk to American troops won't? Because that was one of the things that jumped out at me about that last comment where Trump is literally willing to roll the dice and risk American troops. The question that was asked, what if they attack American troops?
He's like, yeah. I don't think they will. So he's willing to risk the lives of all of our American troops there in the hopes that Iran doesn't do anything. But you suggest that maybe the oil will move president Trump. Is that is that what I'm understanding?
Speaker 0: I don't think that he believes that Iran will kill many Americans. And if they kill a handful of Americans, that will justify his attack on Iran. So I think that the the attack on American bases is not gonna be the threat of an attack on American bases and killing some small number of American military personnel is not gonna deter him. I think that what will deter him, is, number one, the fact that the Iranians might shut down the Straits Of Hormuz. Number two, that the Israelis and the Americans don't have the capability, to prevent, Iranian ballistic missiles from pounding Israel.
And number three, and this is of great importance, for what purpose are we doing this? What are we gonna accomplish? Let's assume that the Iranians don't shut down the Straits Of Hormuz and the Israelis and the Americans do a reasonably good job of, knocking down Iranian ballistic missiles. Where does that leave us? What do we gain here?
Does anybody really believe this is gonna produce regime change? Almost everybody I know believes that if we hit Iran with military force as we did in the twelve day war this past June, what that will do is cause the populace to rally around the government. It will have the exact opposite effect of what Trump and the Israelis have intended. So if we use military force, what's gonna be the happy ending for us? And the answer is there is no happy ending for us.
Speaker 1: Well, that good. Trump was kinda asked that question. Gary, if you can play next a little bit out of order here, The one that where it says Trump, Iran, win. It's a forty four second clip there. Here is where Trump was asked a lot.
What is your objective? Watch this.
Speaker 4: The endgame is to win. I like winning. How do you define that in Iran? Well, let's define it in Venezuela. Let's define it with al Baghdadi.
He was wiped out. Let's define it with Soleimani. And let's define it in Iran where he wiped out their Iran nuclear threat in a period of about fifteen minutes once the b twos got there. And that was a complete obliteration as it turns out, which is what I said initially. Then some questioned it and they said, you know, Trump was right.
So we've been right about everything. We don't wanna see what's happening in Iran happen. And, you know, if they wanna have protests, that's one thing. When they start killing thousands of people and now you're telling me about hanging, we'll see how that works out for them. It's not gonna work out good.
Speaker 1: And see that that's what I worry about here. He's he thinks we're right about everything. He thinks if he thinks it, it's right, and then he cites those examples of things you said are probably disastrous and mistakes and errors. He thinks that it validates what he said, which makes me worry that he may take action here in Iran that contradicts what you just laid out as very logical, rational reasons not to go in militarily, to recognize this four phase operation has not already failed, but he may double down on it. What is your level of concern?
Speaker 0: Well, he may. He he may behave in a foolish way. He has a history of doing that, so I wouldn't argue that that's impossible by any means. But I would note to you, Danny, he did not answer the question. And talking about what we did on June 22 when we attacked the nuclear sites, in Iran is irrelevant for what is, going on today.
Nobody's talking about reattacking the nuclear sites. That's not the issue. The issue here is regime change. That's the goal. And, excuse me, I would point out to you, as I did before, using military force was originally intended to be part of a strategy of regime change that had four elements to it, the fourth of which was using military force to finish off the Iranian regime.
But the first three elements of that plan failed to put the Iranians in a position where we could come in with military force and deliver the coup de grace. That didn't happen. Regime change has failed. So the question is, can we now switch gears in terms of how we use our military force to use the American military and the Israeli military to produce the regime change that the protest failed to produce.
Speaker 1: And I Now correct me if I'm wrong, but if if if the protest in sales failed to result in the the weakening of the house of cards that it could really collapse with a few missiles, if that didn't succeed and I think that we saw I believe you mentioned it before that after the June attack of last year, it actually consolidated information or or support around the regime. If the protest failed and we go in with more, won't that produce the opposite outcome?
Speaker 0: Yes. Yes. That's why it's a cockamamie idea to use military force. And, again, you wanna remember, the Iranians can retaliate as we were just talking about. So not only is this use of military force not gonna produce the desired outcome, and as you just said, have exactly the opposite effect.
It's also the case that the Iranians have options of their own. They can use military force against Israel and do significant damage inside Israel, and they can damage the international economy in a major way by shut shutting down the Straits Of Hormuz.
Speaker 1: Now what what are the things that a lot of people that I've been talking to here that we have some association with the administration. They're saying, look, the reason why they didn't do the hormones the first time is the same reason they won't do it now is that they, the Iranians themselves, would be hurt so much by the economic cost, quits, and consequences. So they would be cutting their own throat that they did that. So they're not even worried about that. What do you say to that argument?
Speaker 0: Well, when countries get desperate, and here we're talking about Iran being in a desperate situation, and then to be and being in a situation where its economy has already been badly damaged, it will pursue highly risky strategies in all likelihood. The Iranians don't want to shut down the Straits Of Hormuz for the reasons that you just said. The Iranians don't want a war against Israel. They don't want a war against The United States. In fact, the Iranians for a long time have been trying to develop good relations with The United States, but that's not happening.
And The United States is an is an existential threat to Iran. Israel is an existential threat to Iran. I would note to you, Danny, you know, we talk about regime change, and it's a nice term to use. But The United States is interested in more than regime change. I mean, we we definitely wanna overthrow, the Khomeini government.
No question. But we're also interested in breaking Iran apart. We're interested in wrecking Iran. We wanna do to Iran what we did to Syria. You wanna understand that The United States, with its economic policies, with its sanctions against Syria, basically wrecked Syria and made it easy to produce regime change in Syria.
What we wanna do is the same thing in Iran. We do want regime change. There's no question about it. But we're not talking about regime change and then bringing in a liberal democratic political system, and keeping Iran whole and helping Iran to grow more powerful. But as a liberal democracy, that's not the game here.
We're not interested in fostering liberal democracy in Iran anymore than we're interested in fostering liberal democracy in Venezuela. What we wanna do in Iran is topple the regime and then break the country apart, break it into constituent parts just as we did in Syria. You wanna understand, we wrecked Syria. The idea that what has happened, since the Assad government has been overthrown has improved Syria's situation is not an argument that I accept. This is not to say that life under Assad was, good in, any meaningful way.
But relative to where the Syrians are today, I think they were better off when Syria was intact. But The United States was deeply committed for many years to breaking Syria apart, in large part because this is what the Israelis want. And we're doing
Speaker 1: yeah. And let me ask you. This it it took eleven years about to get the Assad regime finally broken apart and to bring in Al Sharap. Do you see the possibility that this will just be the next generation that, God willing Trump won't launch military operations? Although I think that I think he's kind of backed himself into a corner.
I expect that he probably will this time, but let's hope that's wrong and that he does it. If he does it, do you see that they'll just reload and wait to get a number of years and then try another four point plan or something else like that until they finally succeed?
Speaker 0: No question. No question. It's mainly because of the Israelis. The Israelis are committed to creating a situation in The Middle East where there are no serious threats to Israel's existence. They wanna take countries like Syria and Lebanon and Iran, and they wanna break them up.
They wanna make sure that they are not in any way powerful states that can cause trouble for Israel. And if you look at what they've done with Jordan and Egypt, in in cahoots with The United States, it's very important to understand that The United States and Israel are basically a tag team here. We were a tag team in Syria. Right? We're a tag team in Iran, and we're gonna continue to be a tag team.
The Israelis basically own us. The Israel lobby owns Donald Trump. What the Israelis want, the Israelis get with Donald Trump, and the Israelis want to wreck Iran. They have been deeply committed to wrecking Iran for a long period of time. And the idea that if we fail here, we're gonna say, well, we've tried.
Now it's time to see if we can maybe improve relations with Iran, and live happily ever after. That's not gonna happen. We're just gonna Yeah.
Speaker 1: Let me ask you this question. Last question here. I wanna look more onto your international relations theorist hat, for this year. Let let's say that this doesn't succeed here, and and maybe some sober thoughts fall into the mind of Benjamin Netanyahu Trump, and a bunch of other people. Is there even the theoretical possibility that Israel's future and security could be better supplied and encouraged by saying, alright, we're gonna go on a diplomatic opportunity.
We're gonna use negotiations and diplomacy and instead of having this antagonist trying to destroy the regimes, we're actually gonna try to just get along and cooperate to do that with them. Is that possible or is as the Israelis claim that many of the Israeli friends that there is no negotiations possible with the the likes of Iran and some of these others because they're only bent on our destruction. So how do you negotiate with somebody who wants to destroy you? It's this or death. What do you say?
Speaker 0: Well, I don't accept that narrative. I think it's basically the Israelis who first put their gun sight on gun sights on Iran. This started in the early nineteen nineties. Trita Parsi has written a brilliant book that lays this all out based on extensive discussions with Israeli officials. They decided in the early nineteen nineties, the Israelis, that they were gonna put their gun sights on Iran, and they've kept their gun sights on Iran.
I would note that in the nineteen nineties, the Iranians went to some lengths to try and improve relations with The United States. The Israel lobby moved in very quickly, and it made it clear to the Clinton administration in no uncertain terms that we, The United States, could not improve relations with Iran. And the Iranians, of course, have reacted to this, and the Iranians go to enormous lengths to cause trouble for Israel. And, of course, the Israelis continue to try to cause enormous problems for Iran. But the idea that the Iranians are in the driver's seat and they're committed to erasing Israel from the map with military force, I don't think is supported by the available evidence.
But given Israel's position on this, they're not gonna try diplomacy. The Israelis are not into diplomacy. They may be interested in diplomacy with distant countries like the Gulf States, but the countries that are immediately around them, countries like Iran, Iraq oh, by the way, we haven't talked much about Iraq. If you go back to 2003, the Israelis themselves and the Israel lobby in The United States played a central role in pushing The United States into war against Iraq. Of course, in the American media, and in the West more generally, this argument is hardly ever made today because Iraq turned out to be a disaster, and nobody wants to blame Israel or the Israel lobby for that disaster.
But if you go back and look at the evidence, just read the chapter on Iraq in the book that Steve Walt and I wrote on the Israel lobby, and you'll see that it's manifestly clear that Israel was deeply committed to pushing us into war against Iraq in 2003. This is the standard Israeli playbook.
Speaker 1: So so you you you correctly pointed out, I mean, self evident that Israel isn't interested right now. But in the event that they did, I guess this is a specific question I wanna ask. Given all that's happened, don't so don't change anything that's happened up to this day and all the stuff with JCPOA get rid of and everything that's happened since with the twenty twenty four, twenty twenty five attacks is would Iran actually respond well if there were actual diplomatic or is it just too late? Have they just lost all trust Now that they're just gonna go on a fortress mentality. Is it possible or no?
Speaker 0: Look. I think if you pursued a diplomatic route, you meaning the Israelis and the Americans, with Iran, you would not be able to get them to give up their nuclear enrichment capability, which the Israelis are desperate to do. They would not give up their nuclear enrichment capability. But I do believe you could work out a deal, where it was impossible for them to go beyond nuclear enrichment and weaponize, build nuclear weapons, something along the lines of JCPOA, and you could create decent relations between Israel and Iran and between The United States and Iran. Look.
Iran is in desperate straits. There's no question about it. These sanctions that we've put on Iran have done enormous damage to Iran. That's why the Iranian government is constantly trying to get us to reach some sort of modus vivendi so they can get out of this pickle that they're in. So Iran has made it clear that it has an interest in working out some sort of deal with The United States.
And if that involves working out a deal with Israel as well, I believe they would do it in a second. This doesn't mean the Iranians are gonna roll over and play dead, and they're gonna say Israel dominates the region. We're second class citizens and so forth and so on. That's not gonna happen. But you could have decent relations between Israel and Iran.
And by the way, you've had decent relations between those two countries in the past.
Speaker 1: We have. Finally, final question here is kinda putting on your prognosticator. Give it all that is occurred up to this moment and what looks like the preparation for military operations in Iran today. Whatever it hadn't happened, but that's what's what's on the horizon. Going back to in 2014, you were the the first one to really call what was gonna end up happening between Russia and Ukraine and all that.
So you saw all the pieces at play there. What do you see happening? And we'll just make it a five year time frame. What do you see happening in The Middle East regarding Israel and Iran, right now?
Speaker 0: Well, I think that we will basically be in the same situation five years from now that we're in today. My guess would be and, again, these things are hard to call, but my guess would be that the regime will still be in place in Iran in five years. The Israelis will be acting in five years the way they're acting today. They may be even more hawkish then since the political center of gravity is moving steadily to the right inside of Israel, and The United States will still be joined at the hip with Israel. So I don't see much change in the situation.
I mean, the fact is that Iran is not going away. And it it's the same is true of Hezbollah and Hamas, Danny. You know? The idea that the Israelis are gonna get rid of Hamas and that gonna live happily ever after they're gonna live happily ever after in Gaza, I wouldn't bet a lot of money on that. Hamas is still here.
It's still a major threat, and Hezbollah is still here, and Iran will be here. I think one interesting question to throw out on the table that we haven't talked about is whether or not Iran will get nuclear weapons. I have long argued that if I were an Iranian, if I were the Iranian national security adviser, they would have had nuclear weapons a long time ago. You notice we don't play these games in North Korea, and we don't play these games in North Korea because they have nuclear weapons. If the Iranians had a nuclear arsenal, The United States and Israel would not be pursuing the policies towards Iran, that they're now pursuing.
So Iran should have from its own point of view, not from our point of view, From our point of view, American point of view, and from Israel's point of view, we do not want Iran to have nuclear weapons. But from Iran's point of view, they were foolish not to get nuclear weapons a long time ago.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I've always feared that our actions would push them in the very direction we claim to wanna prevent, but we'll have to wait and see. We your crystal ball has been right before. We'll we'll wait and see how it's gonna turn out in the future here, but as always, we're very grateful to have him to come on. Be sure and look to John Stubtack at Meersheimer dot substack dot com or you don't have to wait for him to be on our show to find out all the great things he's talking about here.
Right now, there's a lot of stuff going on in the world, much there to read, so recommend people go there. As always, John, thanks so much for coming on today.
Speaker 0: Thanks for having me on, Danny. It was my pleasure. I enjoyed our conversation greatly.
Speaker 1: As as do I all the time. And let you know that just less than an hour from now, we're gonna have Doug McGregor on, and you you're not gonna wanna miss his comments because he's got some very interesting things to say about some national security issues in Iran, in Greenland, in the Russia Ukraine situation as only he can. Don't miss this, folks. 12:00 today, and I'll be coming to you right here from New York City. Talk to you soon.
See you then. You know, we don't have sponsors because we hate to hit you over the head with ads. I don't like them. So show a little love back. Subscribe, like, and send this to somebody you care about.
Tragedy & Hope 101: Free Book by Joe Plummer
Read Tragedy & Hope 101 for free: A condensed summary of Carroll Quigley's works exposing secret networks, elite power structures, and the illusion of democracy. Includes chapters, audio, PDF, and multilingual versions.
joeplummer.com
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Fascism, Communism or something else - which is it running the world today? 🤔🧐 WELL HERE'S THE ANSWER! 💯
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker sets out to “clear up” fascism, communism, and totalitarianism by arguing they are not simple opposites but rival forms arising from the same collectivist impulse. He cites Mussolini’s definition of fascism as corporatism—the merger of corporate and government power—and the view that “for the fascist, everything is the state and nothing human or spiritual exists, much less has value outside the state.” He then paraphrases Ayn Rand, saying “Fascism and communism are not two opposites, but two rival gangs fighting over the same territory” based on the collectivist principle that man is the rightless slave of the state. He notes that the Nazis’ National Socialism fused unions, industry, and state into a totalitarian system, and labels that form of totalitarianism as fascism.
Turning to today, he argues Mussolini’s corporatist definition best fits recent developments, with “the corporate and governments joining into a merger” aided by the World Economic Forum (WEF), United Nations (UN), and related entities. He traces a historical lineage: in the late 1950s, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund funded the Special Studies Project, with Nelson Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger involved, aiming to “shape a new world order” across spiritual, economic, political, and social dimensions. The CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) and David Rockefeller are described as coordinating global leaders to build a globalist system, identifying global challenges—health, pandemics, population, climate change—as pathways to global governance. He emphasizes climate change as an opportunity to promote globalism, noting Harvard’s International Seminar (funded by Ford, Rockefeller, and others) and Klaus Schwab’s rise to prominence, leading to the European Economic Forum in 1971 and its evolution into the World Economic Forum (WEF).
Key players and structures are listed: Barbara Ward’s push for sustainable development and climate focus; the Club of Rome and its Limits to Growth; Giovanni Agnelli linking banking and big oil with Rockefeller figures; the Davos forum’s shift to sustainability, stakeholder capitalism, and climate. He highlights funding and influence from major banks and financial institutions, the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, and Bilderberg participants, asserting a broad network guiding global policy.
From the 1970s onward, he covers milestones: the 1972 Stockholm conference on climate, the 1987 World Commission on Environment and Development (Brundtland) and Our Common Future; Agenda 21 (1992) from Rio; Bilderberg meetings; the 1990s and 2000s’s Davos and the emergence of the Global Leaders of the WEF; the 2020 initiative and the identification of pandemics, climate risk, and digital governance as future imperatives. He notes the 2006 Global Risks report’s mention of a pandemic and misinformation, arguing they anticipated the 2020 pandemic and the censorship that followed.
He argues that public-private partnerships represent totalitarianism, with “the state and corporate power” merged and “the politicians… taking orders from the top levels.” He contends the UN Global Goals and the 2019 formal joining of WEF with the UN formalize a global government, promoting the Fourth Industrial Revolution to reshape the physical world, environment, space surveillance, and digital technology. The Decade of Action (2019) culminates in a 2020 pandemic as part of a planned sequence toward global governance. He concludes that fascism, communism, and totalitarianism are effectively the same at core: “the state” or “the corporate governmental” structure controlling individuals, with “fascism and communism” as rival narratives used to advance a single collectivist end.
The closing thanks acknowledge supporters and invite further contributions.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Gotta close with Iron Rand. Fascism and communism are not two opposites. Of course, they're two rival gangs fighting over the same territory. And it's all based on the collectivist principle, the fairy story they tell us about diversity, equality, inclusion, saving granny, yada yada yada. Over the past few years, especially since early twenty twenty, are you a bit confused about what's going on in the world?
So many things happening, climate, viral pandemics, wars, and a lot of sex stuff as well. It's quite confusing. Have we got a kind of fascism going on, or is it communism like some people are saying? Totalitarianism? Very confusing terms.
So this quick video is gonna run you through geopolitical history and pretty much explain everything and leave no questions remaining. And I'll do it in around fifteen minutes, I hope. Okay. Let's clear a couple of these fascist communist things up. So Mussolini had the best definition of fascism, and it should rightly be called corporatism as it's the merger of corporate and government power.
And that's what fascism is. It's kind of extremism in the sense that it's totalitarianism and collectivism. He also said this, which is very important, for the fascist, everything is the state and nothing human or spiritual exists, much less has value outside the state. In this sense, fascism is totalitarian. Of course it is.
It's a form of totalitarianism. Now what about communism? Well, Ayn Rand said it very well. Fascism and communism are not two opposites, but two rival gangs fighting over the same territory based on the collectivist principle that man is the rightless slave of the state. So without going into too much detail and keeping this simple, the Nazi thing in Germany in the thirties and through World War two and that other bad guy in Germany, right, it was National Socialism and it brought together the unions, the industry, and state into a totalitarian system.
They called it fascism, but it's totalitarianism. It's always the same. So hopefully that clears that up. So let's see what we've got in the world today. And Mussolini's version is the most important one, that fascism is corporatism, merger of corporate and government power.
And this is obviously the closest definition of what we have over the past few years. It's the corporate and governments joining into a merger and helped along by the WEF and the UN and all the other people. So let's actually have a quick look at the high level view and the history that shows us where we are today. So really quickly, back in the late fifties, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund put a lot of money together and brought in a lot of big hitters, and they had a prospect for America, the Special Studies Project. And Nelson was kinda leading it up, one of the Rockefeller sons, and Henry Kissinger was brought in and he was identified as a particularly associate I mean, person who could help run this show for the coming decades.
And the Rockefeller brothers themselves, this is their quote, we cannot escape, yada yada yada, shaping a new world order. So they saw it as their duty and all its dimensions would be spiritual, economic, political, and social. So you can see the sheer magnitude of this endeavor. Their challenge, in their words, to build a new structure which will make possible the fulfillment of, of what? Of the basic purposes of humanity.
So I think you can see now where the modern totalitarianism actually came from. Right? In any case, I'm gonna speed through this. It went on to them forming the Council for Foreign Relations and they had David Rockefeller as the chair, and that's just a super high level, bring in all the presidents and dignitaries from around the world and let's all agree we need a globalist system to run everything kind of thing, very powerful, and then it merged into, you know, identifying global challenges that would enable the new global government. And interestingly, they had health and pandemics and human resources and kind of population being too big and all these global challenges.
And they identified climate change with no scientists in the room, interesting, as an opportunity to help bring in globalism, way back in the fifties. These global challenges led to Harvard's International Seminar, and this was a Rockefeller gig, of course, Ford Foundation funding also, Rockefeller Foundation, Kissinger is in there running it, a who's who of powerful people and power politics, all talking about globalism and global challenges and global government. And it turned out afterwards the CIA was actually funding it too. Interesting. This went on to Klaus Schwab, of course, identified like Kissinger was in '67 and they brought him in and said, hey, this guy this guy we can use.
And the European Economic Forum was set up in '71 and later in the eighties it would become the World Economic Forum which we all know and love. So just a quick word on the management forum, it became the World Economic Forum, but the initial few people who came in were kind of handpicked. And Barbara Ward is interesting because she was banging on about sustainable development and she was an economist actually and this was her big thing. And the forum would, of course, all be about sustainable development, climate, stakeholder capitalism, all of this stuff. And partners now, just coming up to the present day for a moment, well, it's the who's who of the biggest of the big and these are just the primary funding partners of the WEF, but there's myriad more.
And if you just go on the website, I just pulled them out here, it's pretty much corporate across the board, our funding partners and that's just the way it is. Board of trustees, all the top banks are key at the top level, including the Spearbank in Russia, and of course the Bank of International Settlements, the Bank of Banks, the Central Bank of the World. So the banks are kind of a huge part of running this beautiful globalist ideal that we're all suffering under in the past few years. The trustees 2019, I don't have to read out some of those names, but you get the idea. And a couple of interesting trustees there as well, Larry Fink, of course, and we know he's been pushing out DEI and trans and all this kind of stuff, and Council of Foreign Relations are in there, Trilateral Commission, they're all members, Rubenstein from the Carlyle Group.
And remember the Davos manifesto, the management has to serve society. It must assume the role of a trustee of the material universe for future generations. So you get the idea, a bunch of crazies, but they have a lot of power clearly. So we go on with the story from 1972, the Stockholm conference and climate, climate, climate, planet, planet, all this stuff, only one earth got a huge amount of coverage and Barbara Ward there who set up the WAF and was key in that, well, she came out with this kind of nonsense and we had Maurice Strong, he was a Rockefeller kind of guy from the oil industry, big oil money, and they rocketed him up to become senior in the UN in no time. So that was Morris Strong and Rockefeller Foundation, Clubberfroam, Climate Club of rich guys, all together, all funding, all making this happen.
Mars, by the way, was the major mentor of Klaus Schwab, so all in it together. And we have the Club of Rome just mentioned, set up in late sixties into '70, and it was basically a super rich guys climate disaster propaganda club, and they had the world problematic and all this stuff completely made up. Aurelio Pecce had set it up, but the Limits to Growth was the book they had, and again, huge coverage, got all the citizens concerned about catastrophe and probably a freezing planet back then. It's a warming planet now, but whatever you're having yourself. Whatever you're having yourself.
And Giovanni Agnelli funded this and he, of course, good buddies with David Rockefeller, of course, and in Chase Manhattan Bank as well, where I think they were both directors or David was the head, but it's all about banking and money and the intention to get a globalized system and a global government, always. Global management is required for these catastrophic climate things. Right? Yeah. Right.
And here's the book from the Club of Rome, the first global revolution. Look a bit communist now, fascist with the colors and all? Yeah. Because it is. In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like would fit the bill.
Well, it would fit the bill. So we'll make up some stuff, but the threat of global warming would fit the bill best, fit our bill. And all these dangers are caused by humans, so ultimately the real enemy, we are saying now, the real enemy then is humanity itself. See how they did that just there? They said, hey, all you little ant people, you're the enemy and we need to get all you ants into a nice little land farm and make sure you don't hurt yourselves.
Really going quickly, I went through this here. Davos Manifesto pops out in '73, again, same bunch of rich guys, you know, overlapping. And then that goes on to the Trilateral Commission and Richard Gardner and the Foreign Affairs magazine where they have all the globalist stuff is really exploding. So you can see there November 3, the hard road to world order, you know, they're all talking about world order and there was the World Future Society that Rockefeller was up to his neck in and a futurist nutter, Warren Wagner, and they're all talking about crisis and opportunities. It's always about problem reaction solution, identify global crises supposedly and then say we need a globalized management solution.
Yada yada yada. And look at this Turkey Maristron looking a bit older there. This is him in 1987, I think, or no, 1972, the UN environment protection boss warns we have ten years to stop the catastrophe. Right? Ten years.
Well, ten years came, another ten years, another ten years, another ten years, another ten years, still no catastrophe, nothing even worth a toss has changed and another hundred years, bugger all is going to change. We'll just have the weather and it'll shift slowly over time. But the World Economic Forum was renamed from the European Management Forum in 'eighty seven because these guys are going seriously global now and they're doing pretty well in fairness, they want to expand. Our Common Future in 1987, the World Commission on Environment, right? And there you have the Brundtland Commission, Harlan Brundtland, Morris Strong and they're all connected in heavily to Big Oil, the Rockefeller's Trilateral Club of Rome.
Yada yada yada. It's a big club and no, we're not in it, sadly. And a sustainable development gig was what it was, and the inclusion of climate change specifically was initiated and funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Go figure. So I'm gonna speed ahead.
We have the common future. It goes to agenda 21. That's 1992. Horrifying document to read. There was the In Our Hands Earth Summit in Rio De Janeiro in '92, and they basically got a 150 countries or so, all the heads of state to sign up to this crazy stuff.
Nonsense. But they all signed up on our behalf, sadly. So I'd say the big boys and the rich boys, they had a good laugh that night, a lot of champagne and caviar thinking, well, we got all these leaders to sign up all the countries and all the ads to a pile of utter nonsense we put together. Aren't we great? So the air charter commission followed the course and that's Nelson Rockefeller and you've got Prince Bernard of The Netherlands who set up Bilderberg for God's sake.
His daughter Queen Beatrix is up to her neck in it, you have Morris, you have Steven Rockefeller, Nelson's son coming in to take over, and they've got all of the world leaders kind of in their pocket. Great Transition Initiative two thousand and two, more the same, disaster's coming, but we've got the solution to the problem. Blah blah blah. You've got the global leaders of the World Economic Forum. They're getting all the leaders together and making sure they indoctrinate them and they get them on board.
Started in 'ninety three with Bill Gates and a couple other early adopters, but here you can see over the next ten or fifteen years the kind of people that they've actually got on board. I don't need to read them out. Anyway, 2020 initiative. Back in 2005, they were doing the 2020 initiative and they basically had all of these young global leaders brainstorming, whiteboarding, and creating task forces basically on the kind of nonsense that we actually got in 2020 in the end. So you can see how this all works.
Right? It's not rocket science. Global risk report 2006, interesting. They're identifying all kinds of global risks, you know, and again, it's the world economic forum chaperoning all of this ridiculousness, just to get the global government. And they mentioned, oh, of course, a pandemic flu, you know, risk of a pandemic could be really important, and they also noted back in 2006, oh, the threat of misinformation, oh, yeah, yeah, leading to a breakdown of public trust and the ability of governments, yada yada yada yada, and they're talking about this misinformation from the citizens leading to spread of fear and amplifying the consequences of a threat.
But you see how they're doing what they're accusing you of? They amplified the fear beyond all belief during the so called pandemic, but they're accusing you and me of doing it and misinformation. So it's basically opposites stay with these guys, and I think I forget which figure in the past said it, maybe Machiavelli or maybe it was Mussolini or someone. Always accuse your opponent of what you are actually doing yourself. Actually, it could have been Goebbels, but anyway.
So we lash on. They have the global technological revolution twenty twenty, and this is big money and big power behind these. These are not trivial. Global Brains Trust set up by the W. F.
After the financial crash. They jumped in, saw an opportunity, started pulling together brains. And remember, financial collapse was identified way before as a potential opportunity to take advantage of as well as pandemics and climate change. Right? So this is right on cue, and they set up these councils, 70 global councils, 1,500 so called experts, and Claus and the boys in the WEF are pulling this all this together on the back of the financial crisis because it's an opportunity.
Let's jump in, pile in the money, run off to Dubai or somewhere and let's start getting it together the next stages of our BS plan. So he was with this guy back then. They were good buddies. Slightly different now. So Kissinger in the New York Times, 2009, you get accused of being conspiracy terrorist when you use this term, New World Order, right?
Yeah, but that's the title of his article in the Times for God's sake in 2009, and that's all they want. The ultimate challenge to shape the common concern and they're going on about terrorism and climate all this kind of stuff that permit no national or regional solution, I. E. You need us to give you the solution, the solution is totalitarianism, clearly. And yet the London summit and the G20 and all that stuff set up, so now they're expanding out the governance structures across the world and getting it all together.
And the global shapers community was added in the WF in 2011, and they have under the age of 30 influencers, and they're brought in and they have 14,000 of them, 479 hubs in a 150 countries and they're picking the guys with a lot of influence, young people, internet people, very clever. And you can't get in unless you're brought in by an existing member or you're already a member of WEF, etcetera. So they're making sure there's no moles get in there. Clever. And Rockefeller Foundation lockstep in 2010, it laid out this scenario you may have heard of, which was an absolute carbon copy of what happened in March 2020 with the lockdowns.
They wrote it all out, what would happen in a future pandemic, and they wrote it all in 2010. And this was dog whistling and just letting everyone in the whole organizations know how it needed to be run when the time comes. And when the time comes, you'll tend to know it because all the media will be bleating like sheep and suddenly you'll realize, oh, this is the, quote, pandemic that we all talked about for the last twenty years. Here we are, guys, and they know what they all talked about for the last twenty years and they know the way it's gonna run. Right?
So they're well trained. Well trained like Pavlov's dogs. And I think this one, the last one's public private partnership, read totalitarianism, read fascism, read pseudo communism. That's what it is. It's a stakeholder paradigm of international governments and it is corporate and state joining together with corporate running the show and the state and the government of the politicians as lapdogs, pretty much.
And I remind you how he started, fascism, corporatism, it's the merger of state and corporate power. So now you can see how it ties back to the start of the video and fascism, communism, totalitarianism. Yeah? So we'll just finish off. This goes on to the UN Global Goals, horrifying stuff really, all couched in lovely, nice, save granny language.
And, of course, fourth industrial revolution just being laid out, dog whistling from Claus to all the people involved, what way it's gonna go, you know, where it's gonna go and what to be doing and what to be saying, and they're gonna reshape everything, the physical world, alter the human, integrate the environment with space surveillance and digital technology, yada yada yada. All words solid, but basically it is totalitarian control. Clear as crystal. Really big event just before the pandemic kicked off 2019. The WF and the UN who are already part of the structure I've just described to you, Rockefeller, Club of Rome, Trilateral Commission, etcetera, etcetera, and the WF of course and UN, they're all together anyway, but they officially joined up in 2019, that the WEF would bring in all the corporate funding partners and fund the UN to achieve the goals, which is the global government and all of these ridiculous goals.
And of course then the censorship went into overdrive because all the media companies are all up to their neck in these organizations, of course, and we have the common agenda 2019 looking at 2030, And, of course, it is climate change, health pandemics, nonsense pandemics, yada yada, digital cooperation, that's digital tracking QR codes, vaccine passports, all that stuff. The gender equality and empowerment of women, that's all the gender nonsense you're seeing the last couple of years. It's it's not to do a real equality or really caring about women. It's just another thing to confuse and open society and have everyone not knowing what the hell is going on. It's a great thing to confuse people, this gender bend or sex stuff.
And education skills, of course, we know for decades now the universities have turned into Marxist kind of hot beds and nurseries, so education is very important to make the next generation much much weaker and easier to control than the last. And here we are, global governments, and this is where we are now, there's more coming, I'll deal with that in other videos, but in a nutshell, you've got global governments, you've got the banks at the top and the central banks in a sense, but really you've got the UN, the WF joined together, and you have the G20 to bring in all the countries specifically. That's the global governments that they're currently reasonably successful at running the world. But then you have the regional level, of course, and then national level and then local level, and then you've got the individuals. But the politicians we vote for, they're down here somewhere and they just take their marching orders from the top levels.
Like any corporation or any corporate to state or corporate system, the VPs and the top directors basically dictate everything and then the managers and politicians and low level employees down the bottom, they pretty much do what they're told or they're in trouble. So Decade of Action is coming. Twenty fourth September two thousand nineteen, they announced the Decade of Action, and I guess within a few months, we saw some action. Right? We saw a, quote, pandemic.
Okay. And that unleashed a lot of Pandora's box kind of craziness on us and we're still seeing it now. But at least now you know what the geopolitical history is, who's doing it, who's running it, what the structures are, and where we are now hopefully totally makes sense to you. And I'm gonna finish off with just going back to what we started with for the fascist or communist or totalitarian or they're all the same. Everything is the state and nothing human or spiritual exists, much less has value outside the state.
In this sense, fascism is totalitarian. Of course it is. Communism's the same with a different narrative or bedtime story to cover it about happy, crappy, everyone sharing everything. But at the end of the day, they're all pretty much the same and we know now who's running the latest rendition of bringing in totalitarianism. Humanity have gone through this for thousands of years.
It's always similar. We're just through the current manifestation of this kind of problem. And of course, gotta close when I ran, fascism and communism are not two opposites. Of course, they're two rival gangs fighting over the same territory. And it's all based on the collectivist principle, the fairy story they tell us about diversity, equality, inclusion, saving granny, yada yada yada.
It's always a story, but at the end of the day, the whole goal is that man, the ordinary man, and woman are the rightless slaves of the state or the corporate governmental, you know, totalitarian structure. It doesn't matter. So there you are. At least you know now how it all works and why it's all happening. So there you have it folks, all cleared up.
And as always, huge thanks to my Patreon, PayPal supporters. I do a lot of work, travel, etcetera, to get the message out and explain things clearly so everyone can understand. And really appreciate if anyone else can help out even a little, and the links are all down below. So thanks, everyone.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
This guy was hilarious, and absolutely cracked the tops-down manufactured Covid Scam in the summer of 2020 - enjoy this nostalgic piece, and NEVER FORGET that Covid was an orchestrated tops-down program to throw the people into mass formation compliance! H/T to Brian Raddock 😃
Video Transcript AI Summary
Masks are about compliance, leading to contact tracing and mandatory vaccines because Canadians do what they're told. After vaccination, restrictions will remain, including masks, contact tracing, and social distancing.
The result will be a year of travel restrictions, business closures, and forced vaccinations, with the same death rate. Lockdowns will cycle perpetually, taking rights, freedoms, and wealth to make people dependent on the government.
Independent people make the government work for them, but dependence creates a government-ruling class structure. The goal is to create a slave class dependent on the government for survival.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Don't need a mask. The mask is about compliance because they know Canadians like to do what they're told. So if they tell you you have to wear a mask, next, they're gonna tell you you have to contact trace. Then they're gonna tell you you have to take the vaccine. And because Canadians like to do what they're told, they're hoping that everyone just complies.
And then guess what, kids? Once you take your vaccine, like a dumb person that doesn't know any better, they're gonna tell you, sorry. The vaccine isn't as effective as we thought it was gonna be. So now you still gotta wear your mask, still gotta get contact traced, still have all the restrictions and social distancing, and still take your vaccine. And then what did you get out of all of this?
You got a whole year where you weren't allowed to travel. Your business was closed. They took your rights and freedoms. They forced the vaccine on you. And what happened?
The same amount of people died. Everything is the exact same. And now they're gonna put you back on lockdown and bring it all the way till July of next year so they can do the same thing again. Bring you from July, August, and September, getting you off lockdown, but just to bring you back on lockdown again. If you idiots haven't figured it out yet, it's a perpetual cycle that you never get out of, and it's a way to take your rights, your freedoms, close your business, take your wealth.
Why? So you become dependent on government. Why? If you're independent, the government works for you like it's supposed to. If you depend on the government to give you a paycheck to feed your family every month because they closed your business on you, now the government doesn't work for you.
The government rules you. So instead of a middle class, we have the government, upper class, and the lower class dependence that rely on the government to survive. In other words, we have a slave class, and that's what they're trying to do. It's that simple.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
So, so true: https://t.co/LJv2iqWKwC
Video Transcript AI Summary
Let me tell you about Jimmy. He starts his day with sugary cereal and juice, leading to crashes at school, followed by a lunch of grilled cheese, Cheetos, and soda. Educators suggest medication, and he spends his time indoors, glued to screens.
After school, he's stuck inside, later eating takeout with his parents. Before bed, more screen time disrupts his sleep. This continues for years, leaving him overweight, lonely, depressed, and overmedicated.
He seeks guidance on TV but sees politicians, funded by industry, cutting off the person speaking. There are millions of Jimmys in this country who want to get healthy but lack the means to do so. RFK Jr. has the knowledge, experience, skills, and passion to address this chronic disease epidemic, because this is not just an economic issue, it is a spiritual one.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I wanna tell you a little story about Jimmy. So Jimmy wakes up in the morning and both parents work, so they don't have time to make him eggs. And he has frosted flakes and fruit juice. So he goes to school and he's all hopped up on sugar, and then he crashes. And then he does the school lunch program and he has grilled cheese, Cheetos, and cherry coke.
Hopped up again, then crashes. The people at the school tell the parents, man, this kid must be bipolar or ADHD. You gotta medicate him. So he's medicated. And then he doesn't really do recess because he's looking on his phone the whole time.
After school program, he's inside. And then he goes home and since his parents are helicopter parents, they don't let him outside to play in the neighborhood because they're worried about pedophiles. So he goes inside, plops himself in front of the television until his parents come home, and they're too busy because they're back from work, and so they order takeout. Mhmm. More fried food.
And then he sits in front of his iPad before he goes to sleep. And he doesn't get a good sleep because he's had screen time all day, no sunlight, and no exercise. And this cycle repeats itself for years until he's single, suicidal, over medicated, fat, sick, lonely, and depressed. And then he turns on TV because he wants to see what a Kennedy has to say about making America healthy again. And what does he see?
He sees disgusting looking senators who are funded by industry cutting him off so we can't even hear what the guy has to say. Are millions of Jimmy's out there in this country. They've been neglected, they've been preyed upon, and they wanna get healthy. But they don't have the knowledge, the support system, or the environment to make it happen. RFK Jr.
Is not a perfect person. None of the great leaders are. But he is the perfect person because he has the knowledge, the experience, the skills, the passion to get inside of the government and turn this chronic disease epidemic around. Because this is not just an economic issue. It is a spiritual issue.
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared an important climate change clip that's just 4 minutes long. I urge everyone to watch it, absorb the information, and think critically about the graph presented. It's crucial to engage with this topic thoughtfully.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Important repost: "Listen carefully, very carefully. This is the most important climate change clip you will ever watch - and only 4mins long. Watch and judge yourself. ABSORB the graph shown. THINK on it. USE your brain."
Video Transcript AI Summary
Ice from the Viking Age, around the year 1000, indicates that Greenland was about 1.5 degrees warmer than today. The Nordgrip project is drilling through the ice sheet to gather a 3-kilometer ice core, which holds climate data spanning over 120,000 years. By inserting a thermometer into the drilled hole, researchers can accurately map historical temperatures, reconstructing the last 10,000 years. Temperature data shows that around 4,000 years ago, it was 2.5 degrees warmer than now, followed by a gradual decline until the medieval warm period a thousand years ago. Other core samples confirm the end of the Little Ice Age about 140 years ago. While there has been a global temperature increase in the 20th century, determining whether this rise is man-made or a natural variation is challenging, as observations began at the coldest point in the last 10,000 years.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This ice is from the Viking Age, around year 1000, also called the medieval warm period. We believe that in Greenland, the medieval warm period was about 1 and a half degrees warmer on average than than today.
Speaker 1: Nordgrip, the Greenland ice core project, is being reopened to drill the last few meters through the ice sheet to the rock beneath the research station. The ice core, over 3 kilometers in length, has been hauled up to the surface piece by piece and contains important data on the history of the climate of the earth. It bears the fingerprints of climatic conditions over more than 120000 years.
Speaker 0: When we remove or drill the ice core, we leave a hole, and we insert a thermometer in the hole. We are able to map out the temperature through the 3 kilometer ice sheet. Now, that temperature, if we do it precisely enough, a thousandth of a degree accuracy. Then, the ice has not forgotten how cold or warm it was on the surface at the time the snow fell. So using those temperatures, we have been able to reconstruct the temperatures of the last 10000 years.
Here we have our picture of the temperature reconstructions that we have from Greenland in a graphical form. And if we go back along this axis, it's going back in time. This is the last 8000 years we have plotted here. On this axis, we have the temperatures at the site in in Greenland. And we can see that if we go back from now about 4000 years ago, we would have temperatures up here for about 4000 years that were 2 and a half degrees warmer on average than today.
Now as we go approach our time, we can see that in the period between 4000 years ago and back to the period 2000 years ago, which is actually the Roman age, the temperatures have been decreasing in Greenland by 2 and a half degrees. Then the temperatures increased gradually up to a maximum point around the medieval warm period, we call it a 1000 years ago. And then temperature has declined and goes down to minimum around 1650 AD, comes back up a little in the 18th century. And then around 1875, we have the lowest point in the last 10 8000 years right here. And that matches exactly the time when meteorological observations started.
Speaker 1: Other core samples from elsewhere in Greenland confirm that the little ice age ended about 140 years ago, at the coldest point in the last 10000 years. The natural, pronounced alteration of warm and cold periods back in time has also been confirmed elsewhere in the northern hemisphere. Carbon 14 dating of organic matter from peat bogs and tree rings confirms the pattern. So do data from site type caves in China and measurements from North Africa.
Speaker 0: The problem is that we I agreed completely that we have had a global temperature increase in the 20th century. Yes. But an increase from what? Probably an increase from the lowest point we've had for the last 10000 years. And this means, that it will be very hard indeed to prove whether the increase of temperature in the 20th century was man made, or it's a natural variation.
That will be very hard because we made ourselves an extremely poor experiment. We started to observe meteorology at the coldest spot in the last 10000 years.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1mjG_F8ppw
Video Not Available
youtube.com
reSee.it AI Summary
I can't believe I'm actually seeing this! I had assumed the mainstream media was completely bought and paid for on this topic. Wow! If you share the article on FascistBook, it might spark some interesting discussions.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
OMG I can't believe I'm actually seeing this - I had assumed lamestream media was 100% bought and paid for on this topic. Wow: Article link: https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/06/04/covid-vaccines-may-have-helped-fuel-rise-in-excess-deaths/
Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths
Experts call for more research into side effects and possible links to mortality rates
telegraph.co.uk
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Probably the most important #BillGates video you will ever see. Maybe the most important full stop. I am serious here - if everyone knew about this, many of our modern issues would be resolved. This is so important it defies definition: https://t.co/N9dMqKlTSv
Video Transcript AI Summary
According to legend, Bill Gates built his empire from nothing, but he was born into wealth and privilege. Gates dropped out of college to start Microsoft but didn't invent Windows; he bought and modified an existing operating system. While co-founder Paul Allen was sick, Gates allegedly tried to cheat him out of his share.
In 1998, the Justice Department sued Microsoft for antitrust violations. Gates then invested in the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, transforming his image into a philanthropist and doubling his net worth. He called vaccines the "best investment" he's ever made, with a 20 to 1 return.
The Gates Foundation has been accused of investing in companies that contribute to the problems it seeks to solve. As a top donor to the WHO and CDC, Gates has immense influence over global health. Following mass vaccinations in India, some tribal girls experienced severe injuries and deaths, leading to parliamentary investigation and the expulsion of the Gates Foundation. A study indicated that a Gates-supported polio vaccine caused paralysis in nearly half a million Indian children.
Gates is involved in projects like blocking out the sun, global surveillance, and injecting vaccines with medical records via quantum dot tattoos. He also partnered with Jeffrey Epstein, even after Epstein's sex crime conviction, to co-found a charitable fund.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: According to legend, young Bill Gates built his computer empire out of his garage. Reality tells another story, that Bill Gates was born into wealth and privilege. Both his grandfather and great grandfather were banking muggles. His father, William Gates senior, was a prominent Seattle based lawyer and political lobbyist. Through his father, Bill Gates learned the ins and outs of law and politics and how to manipulate those governing forces.
Speaker 1: I'm Bill Gates, chairman of Microsoft.
Speaker 0: Bill Gates dropped out of college to start Microsoft. He is credited with inventing the operating system that became Windows. However, he played no part in the invention of Windows. The fact is, he bought an existing operating system from Seattle Computer Products, had it modified, then licensed it to IBM. That didn't stop him from taking all the credit.
Speaker 2: I don't see Bill Gates as this great creative person. I see him as an opportunist.
Speaker 0: While Microsoft's cofounder Paul Allen was struggling with cancer, Bill Gates seized the opportunity by attempting to cheat him out of his share of the company's fortune.
Speaker 3: They're basically talking about how they were planning to dilute my share down to almost nothing. And it was, you know, really a shocking and disheartening moment for me.
Speaker 4: And you were sick?
Speaker 3: Well, I think I was still probably in the middle of radiation therapy.
Speaker 0: Gates' business strategies came under fire in 1998 when the United States Department of Justice sued Microsoft for antitrust violations. This is take 3 of the videotape deposition of Bill Gates on September During the 18 month trial, Gates gave hours of videotape testimony.
Speaker 5: What were the non Microsoft browsers that you were concerned about in January of 1996? That month. Yeah. Sorry. And what about it?
What non Microsoft browsers were you concerned about in January of 1996?
Speaker 1: I don't know. What do you mean concerned?
Speaker 5: What is it about the word concerned that you don't understand?
Speaker 1: I'm not sure what you mean by it.
Speaker 6: The justice department has charged Microsoft with engaging in anticompetitive and exclusionary practices designed to maintain its monopoly in personal computer operating systems.
Speaker 0: In a move to overshadow the negative press, Gates invested $100,000,000 to set up the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Overnight, Bill Gates transformed his public image from ruthless tech monopolizer to the world's most generous philanthropist.
Speaker 1: I'm pleased to announce that we're pledging an additional $1,000,000,000, to sell.
Speaker 2: We had the chance to witness Bill Gates 2 point o, the man you don't know.
Speaker 0: The rebranding campaign paid off. His net worth swiftly doubled, earning Bill Gates the title of richest man in the world.
Speaker 7: You've invested $10,000,000,000 in vaccinations over the last 2 decades,
Speaker 8: and you figured out the return on investment for that. It kind of stunned me. Can you walk us through the math?
Speaker 0: In a Wall Street essay, Bill Gates declared vaccines the best investment I've ever made.
Speaker 1: There's been over a 20 to 1 return. So if you just look at the economic benefits, that's a pretty strong number compared to anything else.
Speaker 0: The Gates Foundation expanded rapidly into a massive vertically integrated multinational corporation controlling every step in a supply chain that reaches from its Seattle based boardrooms to the villages of Africa and Asia.
Speaker 9: Is the world's largest private philanthropy causing harm? The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has made 1,000,000 of dollars each year from companies blamed for many of the same social and health problems the foundation seeks to address. Gates Foundation has investments in 69 of the worst polluting companies in the US and Canada. Other companies in the foundation's portfolio have been accused of transgressions, including forcing thousands of people to lose their homes, supporting child labor, defrauding, and neglecting patients in need of medical care. The Gates Foundation has not provided details.
Speaker 0: William h Gates the third and Melinda French Gates. As a top donor to both the WHO and the CDC, no one man has more power than Bill Gates to influence and control the health and medical freedom of all people.
Speaker 1: Normalcy only returns when we've largely vaccinated the entire global population.
Speaker 10: This will be the new normal until a vaccine is developed.
Speaker 3: Until we find a vaccine, going back to normal means putting lives at risk.
Speaker 4: We need to produce it and to deploy it in every single corner of the world.
Speaker 11: Full vaccination of our children and pregnant women.
Speaker 0: Development of new vaccines therapeutics and diagnostics.
Speaker 4: And infectious vaccines and therapeutics are developed.
Speaker 7: Vaccines.
Speaker 6: We've already bought the syringes. We already know where it's gonna happen. We're thinking about what that's going to be. It's all part of this plan.
Speaker 12: Our military is now being mobilized. So at the end of the year, we're gonna be able to give it to a lot of people very, very rapidly.
Speaker 0: In 1986, president Ronald Reagan signed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, granting total immunity to vaccine manufacturers. After a decade of lawsuits related to vaccine injuries and deaths, vaccine makers were going bankrupt. In a move to coerce policy makers, vaccine companies threatened to stop making vaccines until they could be legally shielded from liability. To this day, when someone is injured or killed as the result of an adverse reaction, it is the US taxpayers that pay for the damages.
Speaker 13: Welcome back. Were several Indian tribal girls used as guinea pigs? The report alleges that 2 American farmer Giants untested vaccine was administered to thousands of tribal girls without proper study and paperwork.
Speaker 0: India was among the hardest hit after Bollywood celebrities were incentivized by the Gates Foundation to urge the public to submit to mass vaccinations. In 2009, tribal children were administered the HPV vaccine. Over 24,000 girls were told they were being given wellness shots, in many cases, without the informed consent of a parent or guardian.
Speaker 14: The people that were administering these vaccines lied to the guardians of these girls and told the girls, oh, this is
Speaker 15: gonna cure cancer. You're never gonna have cancer. And these girls became severely injured. Some of them developed seizures, some of them developed cancer. And 7 girls died and there was no insurance, there was no assistance for them and the Gates Foundation denied that it had been clinical trials.
And it was so bad that the parliament in India created a task force. They studied it, and they kicked out the Gates Foundation.
Speaker 11: But India is a barbaric country. Things happen here in a very barbaric way. But I was surprised to find an American organization operating in broad daylight, doing things in a very, very, let's say, Indian fashion. And so the route I took was that I want the whole procedure to be investigated. The Indian parliament formed a committee, and it was to be a rather surprising move because you generally don't often have such a high level inquiry into matters affecting poor people.
And that was such an extraordinary report. I don't think Indian parliament has ever come out with such a scathing report. And the government officials came up and said, we shouldn't have authorized this. We are sorry. We're not going to allow them again.
And now they are back doing their same old tricks again.
Speaker 16: The good news is that human clinical trials can start as early as July 2020 for India's first COVID 19 indigenous vaccine that's been developed by Bharat VITAC.
Speaker 11: So you can imagine how the manipulation of the media by the media, the manipulation of public opinion by leaders from all political parties unanimously saying, we want the vaccine. And the worst thing is they are taken as philanthropists. Whereas what this actually is is the acquisition of political and financial power. And I think the second most populous country with 1,300,000,000 people is going to be a good base for pharmaceutical companies to make a killing and also kill a lot of people in the process. Yes.
I just find it a pity that we haven't been able to get any benefit for the girls who suffered, you know. It's so terrifying as to what they're actually doing with the world.
Speaker 1: We're taking things that are, you know, genetically modified organisms, and we're injecting them in little kids' arms. We just shoot them right into the vein.
Speaker 0: A 2018 scientific study released in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health concluded that over 490,000 children in India developed paralysis as a result of the gate supported oral polio vaccine that was administered between the years of 2,000 and 2017. Using all the usual slight of hand, US based media and fact checkers rushed to bury the story. But thanks to the meticulous work of a team of Indian researchers and doctors, the inconvenient truth lives on the NIH dot gov website. It's my honor to introduce Bill and Melinda Gates. Without any medical training, Bill and Melinda Gates founded the Global Alliance For Vaccines and Immunization through which they fulfill their agenda to vaccinate the world.
The foundation has been sued by the governments of some of the poorest and most vulnerable nations for causing serious harm through experimental vaccine programs.
Speaker 17: If you just look at health care workers around the world, they deserve to get the vaccine first. You know, here in the United States, really, it's going to be black people. You know, here in the United States, really, it's going to be black people who really should get it first and many indigenous people. Vaccines were always taught to us that it was safe. It was it was healthy.
Speaker 18: This is things that we had to do. But given the position that I am in now as a state legislator and looking at these studies and reviewing a lot of these studies, it's very scary, and I want the African American community to open up their eyes.
Speaker 7: Of all the places that mister Gates could have gone in the world, why did he settle on Africa? It's not because he cares about people that look like me. He cares about an agenda.
Speaker 15: African bodies have been used as lab rats for many years for big pharma. They are using us for trials. They are using us for testing. But as an African, I say no more.
Speaker 19: Africans, they're tired of becoming the guinea pigs of the world. Their antennas are raised, and they are telling each other all over social media. They're on high alert right now.
Speaker 10: There is a policy of the American government. It's called the Kissinger report, which was produced in the mid seventies. And it explicitly states that, the purpose of the foreign policy in Africa was to, reduce the the population because they have a great mineral resources there. And the time, Kissinger and those involved with the Carter administration wanted to shrink the population, make sure that the Africans do not develop and do not use the resources for themselves. Because we in the states, we need them.
There is a a concerted effort of foreign powers to control the population of Africa.
Speaker 12: Some children did survive the botched vaccinations last month and will recover, but 15 all under the age
Speaker 20: of 5 died from fever, vomiting, and diarrhea.
Speaker 10: Human errors contributed to the unfortunate deaths of the children.
Speaker 19: How can you believe big pharma but not believe these parents when they tell you that their children have been injured by big pharma? I don't care how big this corporate machine looks. As a parent, I can tell you these people will never stop fighting for their kids.
Speaker 0: It would take hours to list all of the questionable initiatives that Bill Gates is involved in. Here's a few of the highlights. Gates is one of the key funders in the Stratosphere Controlled Perturbation Experiment designed to block out the sun in an effort to control global warming by releasing massive amounts of calcium carbonate and other materials into the upper atmosphere. Critics, including environmental scientists, have called the project a global genocide experiment. Gates has invested over $1,000,000,000 in Earth Now's global surveillance project.
The project will launch hundreds of satellites into space, which will allow for the 247 monitoring of all people everywhere. In partnership with MIT, Bill Gates has developed a new technology that allows vaccines to be injected under your skin along with your medical records. The quantum dot tattoo will implant an invisible certificate that can be scanned by authorities using a cell phone app and infrared light.
Speaker 1: Eventually, what will have to have is certificates of who's a recovered person, who's a vaccinated person. So eventually, there will be this digital immunity
Speaker 4: proof.
Speaker 0: The EPA recently approved an experimental use permit to Oxitec, a biotech company funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. In an effort to fight malaria, Oxitec will soon release millions of genetically modified mosquitoes in various US states. According to the NIH website, programs are being developed to allow human immunization via mosquito bite. It was Science Magazine that coined the phrase flying syringes.
Speaker 4: Could you raise A shocking new report from The New York Times sheds light on the connection between Microsoft founder Bill Gates and the late Jeffrey Epstein. You report these 2 men met at least 6 times.
Speaker 21: Well, I believe that there were more. This included visits to the mansion, seeing each other in Seattle, flying on Epstein's plane.
Speaker 0: When flight logs revealed that Gates had been a passenger on the Lolita Express, he claimed that he didn't know that the private jet belonged to Epstein. He also denied that he and mister Epstein were involved in any business deals. However, an expose by the New York Times revealed that not only the Bill Gates initiate a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein well after he was convicted of sex crimes, but the 2 were also involved in the process of co founding a multibillion dollar charitable fund.
Speaker 4: Why would they ever set up a charitable trust benefiting Jeffrey Epstein?
Speaker 21: That it was all about philanthropy. That Bill Gates just wanted to find new sources of money.
Speaker 0: Why would one of the richest men in the world choose to partner with the world's most notorious pedophile? A deeper dive into Epstein's world revealed that the 2 men had more in common than meets the eye. Like Gates, Epstein was a billionaire philanthropist with a passion for science, health, education, and children. The Jeffrey Epstein Foundation donated 1,000,000 of dollars to top universities, science institutes, medical schools, early education programs, youth initiatives, and international peace accords. Bill Gates is either the most misunderstood man alive, or one of the most convincing con men to ever live.
Is he a benevolent hero? Or a malevolent opportunist?
Speaker 6: Bill Gates.
Speaker 0: Personally, I would love to believe that one of the richest men in the world is giving away his fortune for the betterment of humanity. I wanna believe that endearing smile. I wanna believe that his heart is as soft and warm as his sweaters. At the very least, I wanna believe that he's unaware of the damage he's done.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Coming on the show live in 3 mins: 3pm EST - please retweet, we're gonna properly explain the #MassMigration madness !
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Wow - nice! "Singer Morrissey calls out Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab and Dr Fauci. During a performance in Las Vegas, the English singer sang about ‘criminals’ as he pointed to images of Klaus Schwab on the screen alongside images of Gates and Fauci." https://t.co/9m4gMxjCuq
reSee.it AI Summary
The Flu D'Etat has been exposed with the release of German Govt documents through Freedom of Information. Lockdowns and other measures were not based on science but were demanded by external political actors. This pattern is seen across the Western world.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
The Flu D'Etat proven. The cat's completely out of the bag. Freedom of Information has resulted in the release of German Govt documents The lockdowns and other nonsense were NEVER driven by science - they were DEMANDED by external political actors. Same all across Western world
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Source (use translate) https://multipolar-magazin.de/artikel/rki-protokolle-1
„Es soll hochskaliert werden“
Multipolar hat die Protokolle des Corona-Krisenstabs des Robert Koch-Instituts freigeklagt.
multipolar-magazin.de
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Covid was an utter scam, and anyone who still believes otherwise is a propagandized moron. Explained simply in 4 minutes flat:
Video Transcript AI Summary
In China, a doctor discovers a case of atypical pneumonia, which is unusual. Within 11 days, the first PCR test kits are shipped and gene sequences are published. The World Health Organization accepts a PCR protocol as the gold standard for testing. Clinical symptoms and asymptomatic transmission are also studied and published. However, the speaker believes that all these steps were premeditated and false.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The first thing that happens is we we have a very strange phenomenon in China, and eye doctor spots a a case of supposedly atypical pneumonia. Now
Speaker 1: that event is a very strange event to start with. There's there's lots of pneumonia all the time in China. Okay? This is this one's very strange. Okay?
So that's 30th December. It's just before the beginning of January.
Speaker 0: And then, supposedly, we have the emergence of according
Speaker 1: to the World Health Organization already, on January 5th, They're telling
Speaker 0: us that they have they have identified 44 cases out of a population of 8,000,000 people of atypical pneumonia of unknown etiology, unknown cause.
Speaker 1: So that's it's taken them 5 days from the
Speaker 0: time that the first doctor said he'd seen something strange. Then 2 days later, they had declared that a new SARS like virus was the cause of these pneumonia cases. 2 days after they decided that they'd identified 65 unusual cases. Just 3 days later, we have a situation where, the firm manufacturing the 1st PCR kits to test for this thing is already shipping them. So let's just recap.
Speaker 1: Unbelievable. We've gone from the identification of the 1st patient to the shipping of
Speaker 0: the 1st kits in 11 days. K. And on that same day, when
Speaker 1: they shipped the kids kids Are the lights too bright? Can we do that again? All good.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: On on the on the same
Speaker 0: day when they shipped the kits, the 1st gene sequences published on, virological.org. 2 days after that, the World Health Organization has already accepted Drosten's piece Christian Drosten's PCR protocol
Speaker 1: as what they call the gold standard for testing
Speaker 0: for this new disease. And a few more gene sequences are published in that time. Just 12 days 9 no. Sorry. 9 days after that, the the famous Corman Drosnin protocol is published, is submitted for review, and 27 hours later, it's peer reviewed and published.
Speaker 1: What the hell? In a mag in a in a journal that That takes months. That Thorsten is an editor of.
Speaker 0: 2 days after that, there's a Chinese study about the specific clinical symptoms that relate supposedly relate to COVID, and that's published in the New England Journal of Medicine. We're still only 25 days from the beginning of this whole thing. And then 5 days after that, The 1st study is published also in the NEJM about asymptomatic transmission.
Speaker 1: So what have we done there? We've established in in the course in a compressed time frame of just 26 days,
Speaker 0: there's a new clinical manifestation. It's caused by this virus. This virus has the following sequence. Here's a test, which is the gold standard in identifying that sequence, and the peer the research identifying the primers that we're gonna use all over the world has been submitted for peer review and published, and we've described the clinical features of this so called new disease. I would submit to you that every single one of those steps was, a, complete and utter bullshit, and, b, premeditated.
@NickHudsonCT - Nick Hudson
A reminder that the entire Covid narrative is bullshit of the highest order. In 4 minutes you have to decide whether you’re a sensible person or prepared to divorce yourself from reality. https://rumble.com/v3wxjzm-covid-origins-the-timeline-of-bullshit-and-pre-meditation.html
Covid origins, the timeline of bullshit and pre-meditation
Please check out the full podcast on my channel, conversation with Nick Hudson episode 88
rumble.com
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
UNMISSABLE short clip from Prof Denis Rancourt - pure gold!
Video Transcript AI Summary
I am a scientist with expertise in various fields, including quantum mechanics and environmental science. I have analyzed all cause mortality data and concluded that there was no pandemic and no particularly virulent pathogen. The virus does not spread across borders, as evidenced by the absence of excess mortality in some countries. I have also studied global warming and determined that it is not occurring. Moving on to vaccines, my research shows that they are toxic and associated with peaks in all cause mortality. The risk of dying per injection increases with age, doubling every 4 or 5 years. We have observed these patterns in multiple countries. Our work will continue, challenging the establishment scientists who propagate lies and serve the propaganda industry.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yeah, I'm a scientist. I have spent decades learning science and math, statistics, everything from quantum mechanics all the way to environmental science, biogeochemistry, I'm interdisciplinary. I was a tenured full professor at the University of Ottawa, and I always spoke my mind, and that got me fired. This was before COVID, so I knew what it was like to fight the establishment. And when I heard the COVID propaganda, I knew immediately that it was intense propaganda and that it couldn't possibly be true because they were yelling that we were all going to die, and I couldn't see any dead bodies out in the street.
And I did, I went out in the street and I looked around, I couldn't see any dead people no matter what they said. And as a scientist, what I decided to do was to look at all cause mortality data. So our nations collect very good data about the number of deaths. That's something you cannot be biased about. The person either died or they didn't.
You know that they died, you know their age, you know where they died, and you collect that data. Countries collect very good data about deaths and births. So that is unbiased, hard data. We can analyze the number of deaths as a function of time by age group, by sex and by region, by jurisdiction, by province, state down to municipalities and so on. And that is the data that I've been using since the very beginning of this so called pandemic.
And we my research group, we were the first to say back in an article that was published in June of 2020 that when we look at all cause mortality data, there is no pandemic. There was a peak of deaths at the beginning in certain hot spots that was directly due to how people were treated in hospitals and care homes. It was quantitatively due to that. There is no so I can tell you, after 3 years of intense study that we are continuing, I can tell you the following thing. And this is hard scientific conclusions from looking at the data.
There was no pandemic. There was no particularly virulent pathogen whatsoever. There's no evidence for it. There is nothing that is spreading that causes death. The mortality doesn't cross borders.
The virus has a passport. It refuses to cross borders. You can make a map of Europe. You can see countries where there's absolutely no excess all cause mortality right beside hotspots where there's intense all cause mortality. So those are firm conclusions from our I have written more than 30 scientific reports about all cause mortality and COVID related science.
And I can tell you these things with certainty. So when Eva says there is no global warming, I also study global warming. I did the calculations, the radiation transfer, I can tell you Eva is right. As a scientist, I can tell you, there's no global warming, there was no pandemic, Nothing is spreading. Nitrogen is not a problem.
Cow farts are not a problem. I can tell you these things with certainty. I'm not joking. I'm a scientist. Cole, about, radiation transfer and so called global warming that I wrote in 2010, Parts of it were read in the U.
S. Senate. It was very impactful. Scientists have said this is rigorous. This is hard.
What we showed what I showed in that calculation was you can double the amount of CO2, and it will not have a noticeable effect on the earth's mean surface temperature, period. That's a hard calculation. So I've been doing this for many years. Every time there is a problem in society where science can be of some help, I get right in there, and I do it. And so we have done this for COVID.
We were the 1st to establish the points that I just told you about, and then we moved on to the vaccines. And what we found was that the vaccines are a toxic substance. They should be interpreted and thought of as a toxic substance that they inject into your arm. The best way to understand the effect of the vaccine is to study toxicology. So we showed that as soon as a booster is rolled out to a particular age group, very rapidly within weeks, immediately there follows a peak in all cause mortality.
And we see this repeatedly in country after country. We have studied more than 100 countries now, and the vaccines are clearly temporally associated with, peaks in all cause mortality. And we were able to calculate the toxicity of that vaccine. And we find that the risk of dying per injection increases with age, and it increases exponentially with age, and your risk of dying per injection doubles every 4 or 5 years of age. We were the first to demonstrate that.
We have demonstrated it repeatedly for many countries, Australia, Israel, Peru, many, many countries. And so in this study, one of the things we found, and this should convince anybody the following thing. We can quantify excess mortality, whether or not there's mortality beyond the historic trend as a function of time. And what we find is that in more than half of the countries around the world, there is absolutely no excess mortality in the entire period from the time the pandemic was declared in March of 2020, all the way to until mortality starts to increase when the vaccines are rolled out. In more than half the countries in the world, there is no excess mortality until the vaccines are rolled out.
And then there was a significant shift to a domain of higher mortality. And this is clear in the data itself. And the countries that do have excess mortality before you roll out the vaccines, it can be directly associated to what how people were being assaulted. And there are many ways in different jurisdictions that people were assaulted. Some of the assaults were very vicious.
Like in Peru, they actually called in 10,000 military reservists to go and test people in their homes, in the villages, everywhere and pull them out and isolate them if they tested positive. They actually had a huge peak of mortality related to that policy. So when you assault people by refusing to treat them, in the U. S, they refuse to treat poor people for bacterial pneumonia by not prescribing antibiotics. This was a huge problem, a big killer in the U.
S, And it created a peak of all cause mortality in the summer, which is unheard of. Normally, mortality is lower in the summer. So we just kept seeing these features, and we kept explaining them quantitatively in terms of how populations were assaulted. So this was a mega campaign. Obviously, you know, it was planned by the CIA, the military.
It was executed. They were going to They were going to do it no matter what. And it killed people by how they treated people. And then the vaccines themselves are toxic. So the experiment's been done globally.
We know this now. We know that death, increases exponentially with age. Many elderly people died. It's hard to complain because they were elderly, but still, they died. So just to give you one quantitative figure to leave you with, in most countries, people over 80, the chance, the risk of dying per injection is 1 death in between 5 20 injections depending on the country.
That's the level of toxicity of the vaccine for elderly people. And this is not to mention all the serious harms that are done to young people and young adults, including myocarditis, heart conditions, you name it. So this has been the nature of our scientific work. We're continuing this full time. We'll be publishing papers in the coming months that are even more revolutionary, I would say.
And so we're not going to stop, and we're embarrassing the establishment scientists who are not doing this work and who are lying through their teeth and who are part of the propaganda industry. That's our job. Thanks.
@denisrancourt - Denis Rancourt
It's out. Let a scientist speak. Here is the 10-minute presentation I gave at the Christine Anderson @AndersonAfDMdEP and Eva Vlaardingerbroek @EvaVlaar "Make It Your Business" event in Ottawa on November 29, 2023. @StaceyKauder Source: https://www.bitchute.com/video/MdCixSHVlWd9/
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker, a scientist, claims to have extensive knowledge in various scientific fields. They express skepticism towards the COVID-19 pandemic, stating that there is no evidence of a particularly virulent pathogen causing death. They argue that all-cause mortality data does not support the existence of a pandemic. The speaker also discusses their research on global warming, asserting that there is no global warming and that CO2 levels do not significantly affect the Earth's temperature. They then shift their focus to vaccines, claiming that they are toxic and associated with increased mortality rates, particularly among the elderly. The speaker concludes by stating their intention to continue their research and challenge the establishment scientists who they believe are spreading propaganda.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yeah, I'm a scientist. I have spent decades learning science and math, statistics, everything from quantum mechanics all the way to environmental science, biogeochemistry, I'm interdisciplinary. I was a tenured full professor at the University of Ottawa, and I always spoke my mind, and that got me fired. This was before COVID, so I knew what it was like to fight the establishment. And when I heard the COVID propaganda, I knew immediately that it was intense propaganda and that it couldn't possibly be true because they were yelling that we were all going to die, and I couldn't see any dead bodies out in the street.
And I did. I went out in the street, and I looked around. I couldn't see any dead people no matter what they said. And as a scientist, what I decided to do was to look at all cause mortality data. So our nations collect very good data about the number of deaths.
That's something you cannot be biased about. The person either died or they didn't. You know that they died. You know their age. You know where they died, and you collect that data.
Countries collect very good data about deaths and births. So that is unbiased, hard data. We can analyze the number of deaths as a function of time by age group, by sex and by region, by jurisdiction, by province state down to municipalities and so on. And that is the data that I've been using since the very beginning of this so called pandemic. And, we my research group, we were the first to say back in an article that was published in June of 2020 that when we look at all cause mortality data, there is no pandemic.
There was a peak of deaths at the beginning in certain hotspots that was directly due to how people were treated in hospitals and care homes. It was quantitatively due to that. There is no, so I can tell you after 3 years of intense study that we are continuing, I can tell you the following thing. And this is hard scientific conclusions from looking at the data. There was no pandemic.
There was no particularly virulent pathogen whatsoever. There's no evidence for it. There is nothing that is spreading that causes death. The mortality doesn't cross borders. The virus has a passport.
It refuses to cross borders. You can make a map of Europe. You can see countries where there's absolutely no assess all cause mortality right beside hotspots where there's intense all cause mortality. So those are firm conclusions from our I have written more than 30 scientific reports about all cause mortality and COVID related science, and I can tell you these things with certainty. So when Eva says there's no global warming, I also study global warming.
I did the calculations, the radiation transfer, I can tell you, Eva is right. As a scientist, I can tell you, there's no global warming, there was no pandemic, Nothing is spreading. Nitrogen is not a problem. Cow farts are not a problem. I can tell you these things with certainty.
I'm not joking. I'm a scientist. The article about, radiation transfer and so called global warming that I wrote in 2010, parts of it were read in the US Senate. It was very impactful. Scientists have said this is rigorous, this is hard.
What we showed what I showed in that calculation was you can double the amount of CO2, and it will not have a noticeable effect on the earth's mean surface temperature, period. That's a hard calculation. So I've been doing this for many years. Every time there is a problem in society where science can be of some help, I get right in there and I do it. And so we have done this for COVID.
We were the 1st to establish the points that I just told you about, and then we moved on to the vaccines. And what we found was that the vaccines are a toxic substance. They should be interpreted and thought of as a toxic substance that they inject into your arm, the best way to understand the effect of the vaccine is to study toxicology. So we showed that as soon as a booster is rolled out to a particular age group, very rapidly within weeks, immediately there follows a peak in all cause mortality. And we see this repeatedly in country after country.
We have studied more than 100 countries now, and the vaccines are clearly temporally associated with, peaks in all cause mortality. And we were able to calculate the toxicity of that vaccine. And we find that the risk of dying per injection increases with age, and it increases exponentially with age. And your risk of dying per injection doubles every 4 or 5 years of age. We were the first to demonstrate that.
Have demonstrated it repeatedly for many countries, Australia, Israel, Peru, many, many countries. And so in this study, one of the things we found, and this should convince anybody the following thing. We can quantify excess mortality, whether or not there's mortality beyond the historic trend as a function of time. And what we find is that in more than half of the countries around the world, there is absolutely no excess mortality in the entire period from the time the pandemic was declared in March of 2020, all the way to until mortality starts to increase when the vaccines are rolled out. In more than half the countries in the world, there is no excess mortality until the vaccines are rolled out.
And then there is a significant shift to a domain of higher mortality. And this is clear in the data itself. And the countries that do have excess mortality before you roll out the vaccines, it can be directly associated to what how people were being assaulted. And there are many ways in different jurisdictions that people were assaulted. Some of the assaults were very vicious.
Like in Peru, they actually called in 10,000 military reservists to go and test people in their homes, in the villages, everywhere and pull them out and isolate them if they tested positive. They actually had a huge peak of mortality related to that policy. So when you assault people by refusing to treat them, in the US, they refuse to treat, poor people for bacterial pneumonia by not prescribing antibiotics. This was a huge problem, a big killer in the U. S, And it created a peak of all cause mortality in the summer, which is unheard of.
Normally, mortality is lower in the summer. So we just kept seeing these features, and we kept explaining them quantitatively in terms of how populations were assaulted. So this was a mega campaign. Obviously, you know, it was planned by the CIA, the military. It was executed.
They were going to do it no matter what. And it killed people by how they treated people. And then the vaccines themselves are toxic. So the experiment's been done globally. We know this now.
We know that death, increases exponentially with age. Many elderly people died. It's hard to complain because they were elderly, but still, they died. So just to give you one quantitative figure to leave you with, in most countries, people over 80, the chance, the risk of dying per injection is 1 death in between 5 20 injections depending on the country. That's the level of toxicity of the vaccine for elderly people.
And this is not to mention all the serious harms that are done to young people and young adults, including myocarditis, heart conditions, you name it. So this has been the nature of our scientific work. We're continuing this full time. We'll be publishing papers in the coming months that are even more revolutionary, I would say. And so we're not going to stop, and we're embarrassing the establishment scientists who are not doing this work and who are lying through their teeth and who are part of the propaganda industry.
That's our job. Thanks.
Dr. Denis Rancourt...there was no pandemic and there is no climate change
DISCLAIMER: Nowadays we can’t find the truth. Everyone is spinning, lying, giving disinfo, you name it, so all I can do is give you info I have found that is interesting and it’s up to you to decide if you want to believe it or not. We must take …
bitchute.com
reSee.it AI Summary
I was surprised to discover that the #WEF is openly promoting a society-undermining agenda. A short clip has been shared that sheds light on their intentions. Check it out and spread the word.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
WOW! 😯 I knew that #WEF were behind the society-undermining agenda of trans social contagion etc...but didn't realize they were openly boasting about it! 🧐 A must-watch and must-share short clip:
Video Transcript AI Summary
I am a proud member of WEF's Power of Media Task Force and GLAAD is a partner of the Partnership for Global LGBTQI Equality (PGLE). PGLE Ugly, launched in 2019, is a project of WEF and the UN office of the high commissioner for human rights. We collaborate with various sectors such as news, business, entertainment, faith leaders, sports, governments, and activists worldwide to educate the public and promote LGBTQ issues and policies. Recent studies show that over 20% of Gen Z in the US identify as LGBT. It's not surprising that the World Economic Forum has been involved in this.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Today, I'm really proud to sit on WEF's Power of Media Task Force, and GLAAD is a very proud partner of the Partnership for Global LGBTQI Equality, which is also known as PGLE. And PGLE Ugly was launched right here in 2019 and is a project of WES and the UN office of the high commissioner for human rights. We We work with the news, business, entertainment, faith leaders, sports, governments, and individual activists from around the globe both to ensure and educate public people on LGBTQ issues and move policy forward. In the US, the Gallup poll this year showed that over 20% of Gen Z are LGBT. We've been running studies ourselves that of Gen Zers identify as LGBTQ.
You know, we're really gonna sit here and pretend to be shocked that the World Economic Forum has been behind all of this. One of
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Link to their website: https://www.weforum.org/projects/accelerating-lgbti-inclusion-initiative/
Partnership for Global LGBTI Equality (PGLE)
Accelerating LGBTI Equality through the Power of Business LeadershipThe Partnership for Global LGBTI Equality (PGLE) is a coalition of organizations committed to leveraging their individual and collective advocacy to accelerate LGBTI equality and inclusion in the workplace and in the broader communities in which they operate. The Partnership is supported by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and is operated in collaboration with the World Economic Forum.The Challenge: Uneven Progress in LGBTI EqualityFifty years after the Stonewall riots in New York City and the birth of the gay liberation movement, discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people continues to affect millions of people worldwide every day. Despite recent landmark rulings advancing the protection of LGBTI rights, there remain at least 69 countries where homosexuality is criminalized, very few countries legally recognize the identity of trans people and only a handful protect the rights of intersex people. Looking at the workplace, only 77 countries have employment non-discrimination laws that protect the rights of LGBTI workers. Abuse, discrimination and persecution based on sexual orientation and gender identity not only violates universal basic human rights, it also adversely impacts the long-term economic prospects of individuals, businesses and countries. The estimated global cost of LGBTI discrimination is USD100 billion per year. The Objective: Accelerating Equality and Social and Economic Inclusion for LGBTI PeoplePGLE leverages the power of business to promote a culture of respect and equality and take wider responsibility not just for the impact they have on their employees lives but also on the broader communities in which they operate.PGLE partners work together to:Operationalize the five United Nations Standards of Conduct for Business Tackling Discrimination Against LGBTI People by providing tools and resources for companies to advance and implement LGBTI inclusion globally (see here)Support committed business leaders through the World Economic Forum in accelerating LGBTI workplace inclusion and promoting human rights for allShare best practices and benchmarks to assist companies in meeting their commitments and responsibilities to global LGBTI equalityThe UN LGBTIQ+ Standards Gap Analysis ToolThe UN LGBTIQ+ Standards Gap Analysis Tool is a self-assessment and learning platform to help companies of all sectors and sizes to operationalize the United Nations Standards of Conduct for Business: Tackling Discrimination Against Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Trans, and Intersex (LGBTI) People. Companies can identify their strengths, gaps and opportunities to improve their performance on LGBTIQ+ equality in the workplace. It was launched in September 2021 as a joint project by the United Nations Global Compact and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights with support from the Partnership for Global LGBTI Equality, in collaboration with the World Economic Forum and in consultations with over 15 LGBTIQ+ rights civil society organizations representing all global regions. While many companies have one-off policies and programs to advance LGBTIQ+ equality within their company, very few companies are taking advantage of the full spectrum of ways in which they can have positive impacts on LGBTIQ+ people and defend LGBTIQ+ rights. Completing the self-assessment will allow companies to learn best practices on advancing LGBTIQ+ equality from around the world, measure progress over time, benchmark against peers and industry standards, and leverage resources for continuous improvement. By completing the self-assessment, companies will also contribute to the collection of valuable data, which, used at the aggregate level, can inform future programmatic work on LGBTIQ+ rights, and help identify diverse opportunities and challenges in different countries of operation.To use the tool and complete the self-assessment, please create an account at lgbtiq.unglobalcompact.orgThe History of the PartnershipThe Partnership was announced at the Forum’s Annual Meeting on January 22, 2019. The founding members are leading multinational companies, notably Accenture, Boston Consulting Group, Cisco, Deloitte, Deutsche Bank, Edelman, EY, Mastercard, Microsoft, Procter & Gamble, PepsiCo, PwC, Salesforce, Scotiabank and The Coca-Cola Company.The United Nations Standards of Conduct for Business Tackling Discrimination Against Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Trans, and Intersex (LGBTI) People were issued by the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein, on September 26, 2017 in New York City:“The original idea for developing these Standards came from a panel discussion I was involved in at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos in 2016. It was a turning point in a long-overdue conversation among prominent business leaders and activists about what practical measures companies can and should take to tackle LGBTI discrimination - beyond the kind of internal diversity and inclusion policies already in place in large corporations, vital though these are.”A Holistic and Integrated Approach to Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Social JusticeThe initiative originates from the World Economic Forum’s New Economy and Society Platform, which is focused on building prosperous, inclusive and just economies and societies. In addition to its work on economic growth, revival and transformation, work, wages and job creation, and education, skills and learning, the Platform takes an integrated and holistic approach to diversity, equity, inclusion and social justice, and aims to tackle exclusion, bias and discrimination related to race, gender, ability, sexual orientation and all other forms of human diversity. It produces data, standards and insights, such as the Global Gender Gap Report and the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion 4.0 Toolkit, and drives or supports action initiatives, such as the Community of Chief Diversity & Inclusion Officers, Partnering for Racial Justice in Business, The Valuable 500 – Closing the Disability Inclusion Gap, Hardwiring Gender Parity in the Future of Work, Closing the Gender Gap Country Accelerators, or the Global Future Council on Equity and Social Justice.
weforum.org
reSee.it AI Summary
Dr. Martin Feeley, a respected medical professional, passed away. He was known for his courageous stance against what he believed to be excessive Covid restrictions. In an interview, Dr. Feeley expressed concerns about the impact of lockdowns and vaccines, emphasizing the importance of following scientific evidence.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Yesterday we lost an individual of exceptional medical and scientific acumen, a truly great man of real courage. His leadership in standing against the insane Covid response was exemplary. One of the most upstanding men I have had the honor to know. RIP Dr. Martin Feeley:
Video Transcript AI Summary
Vaccines have a place, but the population has been scared into accepting them. It's frustrating that vaccines are being promoted as gene therapy to children who are not at risk. It's ethically questionable to recommend something dangerous to a certain group to protect the elderly. Personally, as a 70-year-old, I don't want young people getting vaccinated for my sake. If something happened to them, I would feel guilty.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The place of vaccine is to be debased. There's no doubt there's a place for vaccine. I'm not anti vaccine. In one part of me sympathizes with with teachers because, effectively, the the this the population has been terrorised. Call it brainwashed, if you will, but they've been terrorised.
So you spend countless 1,000,000 terrorising with a propaganda campaign. And then you get annoyed because they they don't they're not deterorized in in a few minutes, and go back and walk into school and start teaching. And and I understand that. But that's the reason we're in the the the the this dilemma we're in at the moment. But that we should there there are 2 things that are really annoying.
The idea that someone should be promoting vaccines with, in form of gene therapy, untried, unproven, risks unknown to children who are at zero risk. To be that's bordering on criminal. To recommend something for a section of the population that is dangerous to them, for them to protect the elderly. I'm not sure if that's ethically acceptable or morally acceptable. I don't personally, I don't think it is.
From my point of view, I'm 70 years of age, I certainly do not want any 20 year old getting the vaccine to protect me. And if they did and something happened to them, I would feel bloody bad.
@griptmedia - gript
Dr Martin Feeley, who resigned after speaking out against "draconian" Covid restrictions, tells Gript he feels the population has been "terrorised" during the pandemic, and discusses the lockdown, vaccines and the need to follow science Full interview: https://buff.ly/2QzrJvH
Video Transcript AI Summary
Vaccines have a place, but the population has been terrorized with propaganda. It's frustrating that vaccines are being promoted as gene therapy with unknown risks for children who are at low risk. It's not ethically or morally acceptable to recommend something dangerous to them to protect the elderly. As a 70-year-old, I don't want young people getting vaccinated for my sake, and I would feel guilty if something happened to them.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The place of vaccine is to be debased. There's no doubt there's a place for vaccine. I'm not anti vaccine. In one part of me, sympathizes with with teachers because, effectively, the the this the population has been terrorized. Calls it brainwashed, if you will, but they've been terrorized.
So you spend countless 1,000,000 terrorizing with a propaganda campaign. And then you get annoyed because they they don't they're not deterorized in in a few minutes, and go back and walk into school and start teaching. And and I understand that. But that's the reason we're in the the the the this dilemma we're in at the moment. With that we should there there are 2 things that are really annoying.
The idea that someone should be promoting vaccines with, in the form of gene therapy, untried, unproven, risks unknown to children who are at zero risk. To me, that's borderline criminal. To recommend something for a section of the population that is dangerous to them, for them to protect the elderly. I'm not sure if that's ethically acceptable or morally acceptable. I don't personally, I don't think it is.
From my point of view, I'm 70 years of age, I certainly do not want any 20 year old getting the vaccine to protect me. And if they did, and something happened to them, I would feel bloody bad.
Bitly | Page Not Found | 404
buff.ly
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
If you missed this superb fact-stuffed and fascinating talk from Dr. Nordangard, you missed EVERYTHING of importance. Climate, Covid19, ESG, DEI, CBDC, Digital ID's... EVERYTHING important in our world. All explained here (after my short intro). Get educated folks - fast:
Video Transcript AI Summary
This video discusses the historical context and influence of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in shaping global politics and agendas. It highlights the origins of the WEF and its connection to powerful individuals and organizations, such as the Rockefeller family. The video explores how the WEF has been involved in promoting technocratic solutions and global governance, particularly through initiatives like the Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. It also touches on topics like climate change, pandemics, and digital transformation. The speaker emphasizes the need for awareness and critical thinking in the face of these global agendas. (144 words)
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Welcome back to the home of hard science. And today, I'm going to pivot into geopolitics and history because oftentimes, that's more important than many aspects of science in today's world. So this is 1, a 40 minute talk, with all the historical context from the fifties right through to today. And it's absolutely fascinating. And I genuinely believe that without internalizing, the content of a talk like this, you really can't have the proper context for what's been happening in the last few years and what will happen in the coming years.
So really important history to understand. I found it highly enjoyable, and I've shared it widely elsewhere. And now I'm gonna share it here for you. So sit back, relax, and enjoy getting educated in some of the most important stuff you can never actually learn. Here we go.
Speaker 1: Much honored to introduce the doctor Jacob Nordengard, And you will hold a presentation on the not so hidden conspiracy of the World Economic Forum.
Speaker 2: It's an open conspiracy, you could say. The conspiracy is out in the open. My name is Jakob Nungrangor, and I'm gonna do a presentation now called the shapers of the future, And this will cover the origin history and, how the World Economic Forum has become the major vehicle for a technocratic reshaping of humanity and the planet. I have a PhD in science and technology studies from Linkoping University. I'm a geographer, culture and media producer, and I'm also the founder of the Forest Foundation.
And, we work to highlight threats to democracy, freedom of thought as well as Against humanity itself. I'm also the CEO of publishing company, Forrester Media Productions. I've written 5 books about, global agenda and, power play, My doctoral thesis, the 1st ban order about, it's called, was about European Union energy politics And the goal to create a sustainable energy system less dependent on fossil fuels. It was out in 2012, and it's very topical now. I have also written a book about the Rockefeller philanthropists and their involvement in the climate issue.
And my latest book, The Global in Swedish, covers the background to the pandemic and how it became a trigger to implement a technocratic world order. This is a quote from the political scientist Samuel Huntington. The divorce class have little need for national loyalty, view national boundaries as obstacles, but are thankfully vanishing, and see national governments as residues from the past whose only useful function is to facilitate the elite's global operations. Huntington knew what he was talking about, himself professor from the Harvard University, a hotbed for the creation of World Economic Forum, hon Huntington, he was an, insider very involved with power politics, origins and history. In 1956, Special Studies Project was initiated by Nelson Rockefeller at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
It was an ambitious project that addressed the problems of its stay and how to solve them. Nelson, he had presidential ambitions. He had put together a brain trust to bring his aspirations to life. The young academia Henry Kissinger from Harvard was handpicked to, serve as the project's manager. Henry, He had previously been involved in a study group on nuclear weapons at the influential Think Tank Council on Foreign Relations together with, David Rockefeller, Nelson's brother, David, He was a banker at the Chase Manhattan Bank and, director at the council since 1949.
The Council on Foreign Relations was dominated by the Rockefellers at this time and promoted their business oriented form of internationalism. Henry Kissinger, he became a loyal partner to these Rockefeller interests and has served them ever since. The stated objective with this special studies project was to shape a new world order in all its dimensions, spiritual, economic, political, social. The challenge was, quote, to build a new structure which will make possible the fulfillment of the basic purposes of humanity. To achieve their goal, they identified science and technology as the key to further their internationalist course.
No other area required more cooperation than science, And they'd identified global health and climate change. This is as early as in the fifties, Especially interesting as these problems span across the borders of the globe. The panel that came up with this Proposal was shared by Milton Katz from Harvard Law School with David Rockefeller as a member, no? The Rockefeller and climate change, the oil man and climate change is an interesting combination. The Rockefeller, they had already been instrumental in establishing the United Nations as illustrated by this picture from their website of the Rockefeller Capital Management, you can see all these achievements that are more Rockefeller organizations.
But in the middle become United Nations, what they view as their own little club or organization. Henry Kissinger, he he was also the director of Harvard's International Seminar And started the Center For International Relations in 1958. This seminar had the purpose To establish better understanding among a select group of people who will be in top leadership roles in their countries in the years ahead. The seminar was funded by the Ford and Rockefeller Foundation and, as later revealed, the CIA, David Rockefeller himself, he was on the board of the overseers of Harvard and the precedent between 1966 and 1968, one leader of the future what that came under Kissinger's influence was Klaus Schwab, a young economist from Ravensbruck in Germany, but they come to USA to gain a master of public administration at Harvard. He was the right man for a new mission to further the internationalist agenda and shape a global business institution.
This is a clip with Klaus talking to his mentor 50 years later
Speaker 3: Doctor Kissinger, our time, our satellite time is running out. What wonderful opportunity to conclude our week here with such concrete proposals and ideas of how we can really create, I would say, a new world order. And, I feel, we should be very grateful to you, Henry, for taking some time at a very important, day in United States to be at least digitally with us. And on behalf of all those Sitting here in the room, I would like to thank you very much. I would like to thank you personally also for the 50 year long Mentorship and, all the advice you have given me, thank you, and we appreciate it very much.
Please join me.
Speaker 2: That was, Klaus Talking to his master, Kissinger. And, Kissinger, of of course, has his masters. In 1970, Klaus Pfaff founded the European Management Forum in Switzerland In order to arrange meetings and allow top managers of corporations to interact with all their stakeholders, That means shareholders, suppliers, governments, and civil society. This forum would also spread new management techniques to the Europeans. To the inaugural meeting, Klaus had invited 2 academians involved with Harvard's international seminar, Kenneth Galbraith and Hermann Kahn.
The notable guests who are from the Pan European Union. Anybody know about the Pawn European Union? And also Dame Barbara Ward from Columbia University in New York. The latter was a British economist but became an early promoter of sustainable development. This was to become an integral part of the forum's agenda.
Barbara wrote the book only one Earth, the care and maintenance of a small planet as a framework for the United Nations Conference on the Environment in Stockholm in 1972. She also Worked together with the secretary general for the conference, Morris Strong, to convince the developing nations to go along with the agenda. They were both members of environmental think tank Club of Rome and closely associated with the Rockefeller interests, Strong was mentoring Klaus Schwab and was, for many years, a member of the forum's board. At the meeting in 1973, the president of the Club of Rome, Aurelio Petche, was invited to talk about their report, Limits to Growth And the world problematic due to stress with a rising population and unsustainable use of resources. It was concluded that the planet was in need of a global management to take care of a planet.
The Club of Rome had been started with a grant from Petcheis Bose from Fiat. Giovanni Annelli, a close business associate and friend of David Rockefeller, at the same meeting, the divorce manifesto was drafted. It stated among others that the management has to Serve society. It must assume the role of a trustee of a material universe for future generation. It has to use the immaterial and material resources at its disposal in an optimal way.
It has to continuously expand the frontiers of knowledge in management and technology. The forum decided that the elites of the world would take the roles as stewards of the planet. This meeting was sponsored by the European Communities and Prince Bernard of the Netherlands. Anybody know about Prince Bernard? He was the founder of the Bilderberg Bilderberg Group.
In October 1973, the Arab countries started an oil embargo towards nations that had supported Israel during the Yom Kippur War, that meant that the price of oil increased with 300%. The oil crisis source of fact. This gave support to the warnings from the Club of Rome about resource scarcity. Later, the Saudi Arabian minister of petroleum, sheikh Ahmed Saki Yamani stated this, that, Henry Kissinger had been involved and used Some of his diplomatic skills to kind of incite this embargo. An eventual rise in the price had also been discussed at the Bilderberg Conference in Saltherborden, Sweden in my 1973, foresight.
They had a problem that needed to be solved. To further the aspirations for a global management of the planet, the elite think tank trilateral commission was Founded by David Rockefeller in 1973, they called for a new international economic order to better manage the world. The member US ambassador Richard Gardner wrote an article in the Council on Foreign Relations Magazine Foreign Affairs. But explain the plan as an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault. Gardner had been a consultant to the Rockefeller Special Studies project.
What we had in mind was a new system that was technocratic, a society built and run by scientists and engineers, a high-tech society managed like a big corporation, Technocracy Incorporated, that had started as a project at the Rockefeller CITEC Columbia University in the 90 forties had developed these ideas. As Paragana, a World Economic Forum disciple recently stated, if you want a better world for your children, don't hold your breath For global democratic deliberation, the worse climate scenarios get, the more decision makers will be forced into radical top down measures overseen by technocrats, not activists. And here we see Anthony Fauci, of course. In 1975, World Future Society arranged for conference, Crisis and Opportunity, the next 25 years, the wise president, but he was at the time, Nelson Rockefeller gave a opening address. They discussed the possibilities of creating a new technocratic world civilization and how to achieve this.
The futurist, Warren Wager, had his prescription. There is no better time to implement radical changes than after A worldwide catastrophe. It was World Club of Rome's mission to warn about such events, shaping the future agenda. In 19 9 1987, the forum changed its name to the World Economic Forum. The new agenda that was come after the Cold War was discussed.
Here we see Morris Strong with science writer, Joelle Derosne, strong but had served as head of the United Nations environmental program, talked about Sustainable development and global warming or the warm war, you could say. Whereas Rosne, special adviser to prime minister Mauritsius, is known for the concept soon beyond, a planetary superorganism or brain comprising of humans, nations, machines, ecosystems, and networks, a cybernetic organism that World Economic Forum wanted to bring to life. Strong was part of the United Nations' Commission together with Norwegian prime minister Gro Harlem Brundtland. Both were members of Trilateral Commission, they report, Our Common Future, defined the concept of sustainable development. The inclusion of climate change in the report was initiated and funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
I cover this in my book about the Rockefellers. The report was a part of a of summit in Rio de Janeiro that headed by Strong. The conference decided to implement the agenda for 21st century, agenda 21, And start the United Nations Climate Convention. The motto for the conference was in our hands. Whose hands?
I think you know the answer. This is some of the guys and girls. After this, Big environmental meeting. They wanted to start, develop a new ethical framework for the planet. The Erfshad Commission was born.
Queen Beatrix of Netherlands, that is the daughter of, prince Bernard, And her prime minister, Lubitsch, asked Maurice Strong and the former leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, to chair the commission. The West and East was bonded together. Nelson Rockefeller's son, Steven, became the Prodhist coordinator, and it's very interesting to to note that Royal Dutch Shell. You know, the royals in Netherlands, they have a lot of shares in Royal Dutch Shell, of course, and the Rockefellers with Exxon. These are the guys and girls that want to create our sustainable future.
Stephen also gave seed money to the global scenario group in order to create scenarios for how a plane planetary civilization could be created. This was led by Paul Raskins from the Earthshot Commission and a member of the Club of Rome. In 2002, they released the book, The Great Transition. The cover with a globe in pieces that are put together Tribes what it was all about. Build back better.
They assumed that a general crisis for the needed transformation could be triggered by an unprecedented pandemic. The end goal was to achieve a world union with a world court And the world regulatory authority, Klaus, had already started to educate Leaders for transformation. This is in Klaus Schwab's own words.
Speaker 3: And I have to say, When I mentioned our names like mrs. Merkel, even Vladimir Putin and so on, So all have been young global leaders of the World Economic Forum. But, what we are very proud of now It's a young generation like, prime minister Trudeau, president of of, Argentina and so on, So if we penetrate the cabinets so yesterday, I was on a at a reception for prime minister Trudeau and I would know that half of this cabinet or even more half of, half of this cabinet for our, actually, young global leaders of the world economy.
Speaker 2: In 1992, Schwab and, World Economic Forum had started the program global leaders of tomorrow with leaders like Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy, Jose Manuel Barroso for European Union, Gordon Brown, and Tony Blair. In 2004, this program was morphed into a more ambitious 5 year program called Young Global Leaders. More than 4000 leaders have been involved with these programs. Here's some examples. Santa Marin from Finland, Emmanuel Macron, France, New Zealand's prime minister, Shinda Alden, Leonardo DiCaprio, Alicja Garza from Black Lives Matters, and Sebastian Kurz, Chancellor of Austria.
We, my foundation, Forest Foundation, has in in, cooperation with the Malone Institute, Compile a list of all these leaders and all their occupation, what we are doing, and what we are doing now. That it can be downloaded from the Malone Institute's web page. They are everywhere, we can tell. And Here, of course, the dynamic duo. Bill Gates and Justin Trudeau, happy, smiling.
They all talked with 1 voice. In 2005, the Young Global Leaders started the 2020 initiative To use scenario and envision and exercises to understand current and future trends, risks, and opportunities, Formulate a shared vision of the world in 2020 and create task forces to advance their vision. This was later renamed the 2013 issue too. In 2006, World Economic Forum released their 1st global risks report. It stated that the risk of a pandemic flu was a dominant theme in the global conversation on risk, and that misinformation infodemics could lead to a breakdown of trust.
Both had to be counted. The same year So the release of a military think tank ran corporation's report, Global Technological Revolution 2020. It predicted that Or of ID ships would be used to track products and people by 2020. Big changes was on the horizon. Management of the commons.
In 2008, the global financial crisis hit the world. This became a trigger to reshape the system. In the middle of a crisis, World Economic Forum held its 1st summit on the global agenda in Dubai. The goal was to redesign the international system according to the needs of the 21st century. The world, as was, according to in need of a fundamental reboot, you gave birth to a global brain trust.
What have we heard this word before? The brain trust. Rockefeller Special Studies project going global. The World Economic Forum's more than 70 Global Agenda Council with 1,544 leaders and experts, think tanks that would shape the agenda for the coming years. One of those were the Global Agenda Council on Pandemics.
The annual meeting in 2009 was titled shaping the post crisis world and gave birth To the global redesign initiative consisting of a newly founded Global Agenda Councils. The Global Agenda Council on the Future of Governments concluded in their reports that the current order had 4 governance gaps. Lack of trust, lack of incentives, lack of institutions, and a lack of time, the governments were in danger on being irrelevant, and a new approach was needed. The solution was a digital Marshall Plan with egoverments to engage the citizens. It's stated that this would help develop better warning systems for disaster and crisis prevention and for preventing problems in the global economy, it would enable new forms of global cooperation and governance.
No one should be left behind. Henrik Eisenstein wrote in New York Times that the ultimate challenge is to shape the common concern of most countries regarding the economic crisis Together with a common fear of jihadists terrorists into a common strategy reinforced by the realization that new issues like proliferation, Energy and climate change permit no national or regional solution. Due to the crisis, g twenty, consisting of the world's 20 biggest economies, including Russia and China And the European Union became the premier political forum to discuss and manage global problems. As the president of European Council, Hermann von Rumpo, said, 2009 is also the 1st year of Global governance with the establishment of a g twenty in the middle of a financial crisis. World Economic Forum was closely aligned.
Several of the of the leaders had been part of Schwab's Young Global Leaders scheme. G twenty took over the position from the g seven, g eight, and is working to establish a new international economic order. They gather all central actors that shape the global agenda like United Nations, World Bank and the OECD. And you have probably seen this. In 2010, Rockefeller Foundation released the report, Scenarios for the future and the international development.
It contains scenarios that discussed how the technological development would be furthered or hindered in the future. Lockstep discussed the possibility of a severe pandemic, hack attack, cyber warfare and resource shortages and clever together, a united world, but work together to solve global problems. I will get back to these scenarios. The year after, World Economic Forum started the grassroots initiative. Grassroots World Economic Forum.
This, global shapers community consists of consisted of people under the age of 30. It has since grown to 479 hubs all over the world with over 14,000 members. The mission is to empower young people to play an active role in shaping local, regional, and global agendas. These young grassroots are led by Klaus Schwab and have to be endorsed by an existing shaper we're another member of the World Economic Forum community. In 2015, World Economic Forum transformed into an international organization for public private partnership and was ready for a new more active role in shaping the future.
The time had come for the great transformation. In 2015, United Nations agenda 2030 with 17 global goals was decided. Schwab and the forum was well prepared. At the annual meeting in 2016, Klaus Schwab declared the 4th industrial revolution. Very satisfied.
This is a plan to totally reshape the planet and humanity with digital technology, artificial intelligence, robots, neurotechnological brain enhancements and surveillance from space. What a plan. I hear no applause. I wonder why. Klaus seems very confident in this.
The forum was well prepared with its many working groups and communities, all intended to shape the future they wanted. The forum's shapers consists of the leading companies of the world. They engage in the forum's platforms. This is some of them that has paid the most to be on board and shape the global agenda. You can see some interesting companies and, also foundations like Bill Gates and Wellcome Trust and, Big Tech, of course, very involved, And centers for the 4th industrial revolution has since this started all over the globe.
This is from the web page of the Russian Federation. Their centers started as late as October last year. World Economic Forum's board of trustees consists of the most powerful interests of the world, especially the world of banking, Bank of England, Bank of America, European Central Bank, IMF, World Bank Group, Bank of China, Bank of International Settlements, and, as late as 2019, the Russian Sberbank, these are the trustees of a material universe for future generations. This is here some names. Ursa from the Leyen Was in the World Economic Forum's board of trustees in 2019 before she Became loyal to agenda in as a European, head of the commission.
Here we also find Larry Fink from BlackRock and David Rubinstein from Carlyle Group. These Boothman are members of the Council of Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. Rubinstein, he also sit on the board of the Harvard Corporation. The connections are still tight with the university where the ideas for the forum was initiated. In June 2019, the forum signed a formal partnership with the United Nations.
Nobody talked about this in the news. No newspaper, no television, no radio. Nobody said nothing about this. This has become a powerful alliance to execute the agenda. The corporation had, however, been going on for a couple of years.
The United Nations deputy secretary general Amina Mohammed has, for been on the board of a young global leader since 2017. The forum committed itself to finance Agenda 2030 and work areas like climate change, health, digital cooperation, gender, and education. The global goals would all be solved from the use of disruptive technologies of the 4th industrial revolution. The same year, g twenty in Japan introduced the society 5 point o concept connecting United Nations the 2030 with the World Economic Forum's 4th industrial revolution. United Nations, World Economic Forum, and g twenty forms the troika of global governance.
This is the top down management of the planet, the managers, executing the future agenda. In September 2019, United Nations initiated the decayed of action. The plan was about to be implemented. Climate activist Greta Thunberg arrived to New York with a sailing boat, Malizia, To give a speech at the Climate Action Summit, Malaysia. Do you know what it means?
Why do we choose that boat with a name, Malaysia? This trip was sponsored by Albert Prince Albert from Monaco, a member of the World Economic Forum. It was a race for billionaires of the world had to win. The motto, Unite Behind the Science, was an echo of a statement From the Rockefeller Brothers Fund Special Studies Project 60 years earlier. And that was also when they decided that climate change was something that would could be very useful At the same In meeting, the Club of Rome declared a planetary emergency facing climate, biodiversity, and health.
This was eerily similar to the scenario Fortress World from the great transition initiative from 2002. The forces of global order take action. International military, corporate, and governance bodies supported by the most powerful national governments form the self style alliance for global salvation. Using a revamped United Nations as their platform, a state of planetary emergency is declared. The alliance would then implement draconian measures.
In 2002, we said this, the scenarios tell a lot about the future agenda. Less than month month later, the exercise event 21 was held by Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security Incorporation with Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and World Economic Forum. It was stated that a severe pandemic which becomes event to one would require reliable cooperation among several industries, national governments, and key international institutions. They needed to prepare for the event that would become a pandemic. It was prophetic words On March 11, 2020, Theodos Adhanom Ghebreyesus from WHO declared a global health emergency.
It started a chain reaction that closely resembled Rockefeller Foundation's lockstep scenario from 2010. A while we tied it down, government control with citizens willingly surrender their freedoms. 3 months later, Klaus Schwab declared that the world was in need of a great reset.
Speaker 3: Now is a historical moment, a time, not only to fight severe virus, but to shape the system.
Speaker 2: It was echoed by United Nations secretary general Antonio Guterres.
Speaker 4: The great reset is a welcome recognition that this human tragedy must be a wake up call. It is imperative that we reimagine, rebuild, redesign, reinvigorate and rebalance our world. Rebalancing investments, harnessing science and technology and advancing the transition to net zero emissions, All elements of the great reset are fundamental to building the future we need.
Speaker 2: The future you need, not my future. The World Economic Forum and you United Nations had their prescription ready. The working group shaping the future of health had been in preparation since 2016. Here is some examples on their kind of solutions, Artificial organ bioengineering, gene editing, preventive medicine, and precision medicine. Do you like that?
No. The working group was also deeply involved in the immunization agenda to cocreate the future of vaccines. The Commerce Project was started by Young Global leader Paul Meyer and Rockefeller Foundation in 2019 to unlock The full full potential of technology and data for the common good. We have seen and paid for the consequences. And now WHO plan to build an even more efficient system to manage future pandemics and tackle the misinformation.
It is planned for implementation in 2024. The new global health architecture is one of the main goals for g twenty this year. The others are digital transformation and a sustainable energy transition, as the club of Rome wrote in 2020. If we don't change the system, more planetary crisis and future shocks are coming, but will eventually exceed the capacities of governments. This next planetary crisis arrived in late February with a war in Ukraine.
Now the new energy crisis has arrived and a food crisis looming. This resembles the hack attack scenario from the Rockefeller Foundation playbook that it describes proxy wars, global food and resource shortages, as well as cyberattacks. As Klaus Schwab said last year, in order to shape the future, you have to control the narrative.
Speaker 3: 2020 is a year that has really changed, able to join Cyber Polygon entirely remotely.
Speaker 5: This training is another step In creating a trusted digital environment and fostering open dialogue to discuss even the most challenging cybersecurity Issues.
Speaker 1: Nobody can fight these phenomena, which are only going to increase in the next couple of years, this dynamic Technological environment. As this world grows in in force and and this happens throughout the world, It's just a statement of the obvious. You need to protect people properly.
Speaker 2: It is a very close cooperation between the enemies, missus Klaus Schwab
Speaker 3: Dear Hermann Gaff, your excellency, prime minister Mikhail Mishustin, dear participants, It's such a privilege to address you all at a time when we so much rely on digital infrastructure, And, of course, it's underpinning cybersecurity. I wish to thank, in particular, my good friend And committed partner at World Economic Forum, mister Hermann Graf, the CEO and chairman of the executive board Sberbank and, of course, also a member of the board of trustees of the World Economic Forum. Sefom Has built an excellent relationship with the Russian Federation, both with the business community as well as with the government. I was Pleased to meet with president Putin last year, and I look forward to deepening his relationship with you, mister prime minister, and your government.
Speaker 2: Relation, has been very close. Vladimir Putin and Henrikistan has had quite long, warm relations according to Russian news agency toughs. World Economic Forum has already prepared a new meal, a food system transition that will change what we eat, synthetic food, insects, and a digitized food system. The energy system is also set to transform to shape a global smart grid and to create the Internet of everything where things and people are connected into 1 global net With data to be shared, monitored, and controlled just like the RAND report predicted in 2006. This comes with digital identities to rule us all.
The ID 2020 alliance was created in 2017 by Rockefeller Foundation, Gabi vacs the Vaccine Alliance, and Microsoft. This will introduce a system with carbon credits with allowances on how much or what we can purchase and eat without risking the planetary health. Do you think Henrik is in will have a card like this? Central bank digital cursor is now being introduced. This is also a major Theme for the g twenty.
It gives central control over every transaction. A social credit system is in line to be introduced in order to rate and influence our behavior. And on top of it all, a digital god that acts as judge an overseer, a cybernetic world organism. Call it the microscope, a tool to study, predict, and direct human activity. It also goes back to the science fiction writer HG Wells' vision of the world brain as well as all of the rises of a world sensorium, all for the care and maintenance of a small planet that that Barbara Ward called 4 in 1972.
And now the last slides, the future of a global commons. Last year, Antonio Guterres released our common agenda with 12 future commitments that will bring the new multilateral system to life. It follows the scenario clever together from the Rockefeller report. Centralized global oversight and governance structures sprang up not just for energy use, but also for disease and technology standards, nation states lost some of their power and importance as global architecture strengthened and regional governance structures emerge. International oversight entities like the UN took on new levels of authority.
In March 18 this year, the former Swedish prime minister Stefan Levin was chosen as co shared to the high level advisory board on effective militarism, But works to further this agenda. Nice choice? David Rockefeller said in 1991, it would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto dem termination practiced in past centuries.
This is a very old dream coming true. The New Atlantis by Francis Bacon about the scientists ruling the world. But in in this version with the bankers at the top. But the future isn't written in stone, And now these plans are out in the light. I say it is time that we, as humans come together and say no to these transhuman fantasies and scientific management of the planet and shape the future we want as humans.
Speaker 0: I hope you found that as illuminating as I did. It filled in a lot of gaps in my historical knowledge. I'm a World War 2 buff, and I'm quite interested in history, but I really didn't have a full grasp of a lot of that content there are going way back. So as always, huge thanks for my Patreon and PayPal supporters and anyone else who can jump on board and support a little, really appreciate that because we need to analyze what's going on in the world of science in the world of geopolitics, in the world of malign influence by corporations, which at this stage has gotten so out of hand, we've lost the legacy media, essentially. So very important, we ideally keep supporting, anyone who can get the message, the data, and the clarity out there and counter the corporate misinformation and disinformation.
So thanks so much, folks.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Most important short clip of the decade - beautifully illustrating our descent into Pharma/WEF tyranny - a must-share piece of shocking. evil history. Pure lies. Pure fraud. Pure evil: https://t.co/7cGgZebjja
Video Transcript AI Summary
When discussing the issue of vaccination, the speakers express frustration and blame towards the unvaccinated. They argue that the unvaccinated are causing problems and should be shamed, taxed, and held accountable for their choices. They emphasize the importance of getting vaccinated for the greater good of society and criticize those who spread misinformation. The speakers also highlight the impact of COVID-19 on hospitals and suggest that priority should be given to vaccinated individuals over the unvaccinated. They conclude by condemning those who oppose vaccinations and question their moral values.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: When the chips are down, these, these civilized people, they'll eat each other.
Speaker 1: You are the unvaccinated. You are the problem. It is the unvaccinated who are the problem, period. End of story.
Speaker 2: The only people that you can blame The only people you can blame this isn't shaming. This is the truth. Maybe they should be shamed by the unvaccinated.
Speaker 3: It's time to start Blaming the unvaccinated folks, not the regular folks.
Speaker 2: Anyone you came into contact with will blame you as will the rest of who have done the right thing by getting vaccinated.
Speaker 4: Because, frankly, we know that we can't trust the unvaccinated. I think
Speaker 5: it's time to get our moral house in order, Anderson. It's the unvaccinated who are the threat.
Speaker 1: All these vaccinated folks are gonna start wearing masks to protect the unvaccinated folks. It's called a Christian value. You're basically punishing the vaccinated, for the The sins of the unvaccinated.
Speaker 4: People are not behaving honorably. The unvaccinated are basically saying, well, it's open season for me. I can do whatever I want as well.
Speaker 5: The the unvaccinated are basically beating their breasts running around the country saying, we don't care. We're living free and so forth.
Speaker 6: We've been patient, but our patience is wearing thin.
Speaker 0: The unvaccinated, a group that includes children and people acting like children, And the rest of us are starting to get pissed off. The vaccinated feel the unvaccinated are making me upset or angry.
Speaker 6: This is not about freedom A personal choice.
Speaker 5: Well, my freedom is being kind of disturbed here. No. Screw your freedom.
Speaker 4: The other day, Howard Stern weighed in with a much different approach. Take a look.
Speaker 0: When are
Speaker 2: we gonna stop putting up with the idiots in this country and just say you now it's mandatory to get vaccinated? Their freedom.
Speaker 4: But you're treading on our freedom, and you're making other people sick. And, really, you're killing other people. The anti vaxxers, they seem to have a thing for death and Home remedies.
Speaker 7: The anti maskers turned anti vaxxers are not just putting their own lives at risk. If that was the key issue, we could just say that We can watch them compete to win place or show in the Darwin Awards. You have
Speaker 2: to start doing things for the greater good of society and not for idiots who think that they can do their own research. And don't get me started on the lunatics who won't take any of the COVID vaccines.
Speaker 3: Life is too short to be an ass. Life is way too short To be ignorant of the promise of something that is helping people worldwide.
Speaker 8: Maybe you're doing it because, you're you're disconnected or disorganized. Maybe you have some Sympathetic psychological reasons, but maybe you're just being antisocial.
Speaker 2: Oh, you can't shame them. You can't call them stupid. You can't call them silly. Yes. They are.
Speaker 6: Those who are not vaccinated will end up paying the price.
Speaker 0: The unvaccinated should be taxed. They should pay more for health care.
Speaker 4: We To start looking at the choice to remain unvaccinated the same as we look at driving while intoxicated.
Speaker 2: We're gonna see, and I've said, almost Mhmm. 2 types of America. Doctor Fauci said that if hospitals get any more overcrowded, they're gonna have to make some very tough choices about who gets an ICU bed. I don't that choice doesn't seem so tough to me. Vaccinated person having a heart attack, yes.
Come right on in. We'll take care of you. Unvaccinated guy who gobbled horse goo, rest in peace, Wheezy.
Speaker 1: Pointing back to the unvaccinated who are really creating a problem in this country. Every death that we are seeing from COVID could have Been prevented.
Speaker 0: Literally, the only people dying are the unvaccinated. And for those of you spreading misinformation, shame on you. Shame on you. I don't know how some of you sleep at night.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Chuffed to have been interviewed by the lovely Natali on Redacted Channel yesterday - the insane 1984-style Hate Speech Law in Ireland was the topic - close to my heart, and I didn't pull punches! @TheRedactedInc #WEF2030Agenda Censorship Complex #NoHateSpeechLaws https://t.co/jFEsLjBOcA
Video Transcript AI Summary
Ivor Cummings, a biochemical engineer and problem-solving expert, discusses the new hate speech laws in Ireland. He explains that these laws, which have been influenced by external forces, are concerning because they allow for the seizure of personal belongings and criminalize possession of certain materials. Cummings highlights the lack of logic and common sense in these laws and the erosion of free speech rights. He also mentions the influx of migrants into Ireland and the negative impact it has had on housing and resources. Cummings emphasizes the need for independent politicians and parties to challenge the current political landscape in Ireland.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So we have an expert here from Ireland to break it down. Ivor Cummings is joining us. He's a biochemical engineer and a corporate complex problem solving expert. He does a great job on his YouTube channel, on his Twitter channel. You can look for it yourself by just putting in his name.
A lot of times, you know, what I appreciate, just wanna say thank you for coming. One of the things I appreciate about the way you break down these problems is you're trying to address the fact that It seems crazy. People are talking about it as if it's crazy, but we're living it now. So can you just tell us What are these hate speech laws in Ireland? How did we get here?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Thanks a lot, Natalie. Well, it's an extraordinary story because we have hate speech laws that have served excellently well since the eighties. And they've been used, I don't know, maybe 50 or 60 times as my understanding. And they specifically, get you if you will, for inciting hatred, inciting violence against minorities, whatever.
And they work perfectly well. Well, recently, I've often said Ireland is kind of a subsidiary of, big pharma or nowadays the w e f. We're kind of a slave nation. So all of our politicians over many decades have increasingly run off to Brussels and the EU, the European union, And they're clearly taking their orders mostly from above. And that's where this is coming from.
Of course. So the new law is astonishing. Most people have not actually read the draft of the law and I have, and even I was stunned and it's Tired to be stunned after the last few years with the COVID madness clearly, but I must say I was stunned. So just in short, a couple of things. They actually now have around 8 to 10 kind of protected groups, if you will.
It's Just written down by the government. And it includes trans gender kind of stuff. And of course, racial stuff and the traveling community, kind of a gypsy type community in Ireland, etcetera. If you have anything in your possession, Anywhere computer, phone, written in your possession. It only takes 1 policeman.
Now not the commissioner. Like Before the commissioner had to get a warrant. Now 1 policeman, if he gets a report, doesn't like you, whatever, They can come to your house, demand all of your equipment, anything they want, search your house. On the word of 1 policeman, It's astonishing. If they have anything with a PIN code, it is also written as an offense to not supply the PIN code.
So this is guilty until proven innocent. It's Yes. Quite astonishing.
Speaker 0: And so could that include, let's say, the the little boy in Massachusetts who was in trouble for wearing a t shirt that said there are only 2 genders. So anything that you're laying outwardly would also be in a fence, do you think?
Speaker 1: Well, right now, they would claim that, oh, no, no, no. That's That's not, inciting, you know, potential harm, to someone particularly. But the whole thing about this is You do not need to actually share the material for it to be a crime. So it's literally minority report. It's thoughtcrime.
If you have any material in in your possession that could cause, you know, harm to a minority group. They only have to have a judge say that you would have probably or intended to share it and to incite, you know, anger or something. You don't need to actually share it. So that's the most shocking thing of all thought crime. But if you just had something saying there are 2 genders, I guess you could argue this law could not be used.
It's not offensive enough. It wouldn't be in the spirit of the nonsense law.
Speaker 0: Okay. Now recently, Green Party senator Pauline O'Reilly spoke. She said we are restricting freedoms, but for the common good, and I guess she thought that was an okay thing to say. This was from 2022, and it's now gone viral to explain what's happening there. So why did she think that was an acceptable thing to say?
Is that the appetite in Ireland?
Speaker 1: It's the appetite in the political and the elites and the NGOs and the Neo Marxist leftist movement. And I could go on all day. We have got a major problem. We've got a cancer throughout our leadership, essentially. I can't put it any other way.
So yes, there's a belief there. And I remember Hoover. I can't remember the exact quote, but he said that the whole safety and it's an emergency. A thing has been the tool of demagogues, forever, all the way back to the Roman Empire. And this is exactly what it is.
It's a chilling effect. It's The taking away of your constitutional right to express yourself, free speech, taking it all in the way away in the name of safety. Now in COVID, They took it away on the back of saving granny, which we knew was nonsense because the behaviors and responses, had no real effect On the actual mortalities that occurred. That's published widely. Here, it's the notional or purported safety Of a whole bunch of different groups who are not in any particular danger at all.
So there's no basis whatsoever. And even if there was a basis, The existing hate laws for incitement to hatred and violence are perfectly adequate to be used for this purpose. The one I've described is clearly insane. It's fundamentally unconstitutional in its writing, in its drafting all the way through. It it's It's quite insane.
Speaker 0: Now people may say, well, Ireland is just a crazy place right now. They'll vote them out. That won't spread to other countries. But Ireland was the one of the first to institute gender self ID laws, where you could just go and say you're a woman if you're not a woman, and get all your documents changed with little to no bureaucracy. And that absolutely did spread.
So are you saying then that Ireland is sort of a test bed for these, types of policies, and then we need to pay attention because they will and do spread?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Essentially, like like I said So at the start I used to joke many years before Covid because I worked to metabolic health and pharmaceutical kind of intrigues and controversies. And I used to always say we're a subsidiary of big pharma. And now the the modern day equivalent is we're a subsidiary of w e f u n, e u. So basically, the Irish, perhaps due to the 7 or 800 years under British rule, there's a tendency to kowtow and bow to the big guys.
So we had a lot of that over the centuries, in the leadership, and now we're seeing it again. Yes. We're effectively de facto a test case Because our guys running Ireland don't report to the electorate anymore, it appears. They report straight up to the UN, WFEU. It's all the same thing.
And as a result, they're running over each other to bring in fundamentally unconstitutional insanity On behalf of the paymasters, the lords, the new feudal lords. And as a result, we we effectively are becoming a test case. Yes. So it's really important that people wake up to the madness and you can get the legislation. I talked to a professor Actually, who agreed with me on COVID, an Irish professor.
And then when I told him about the hate speech lies, he said, come on now. The way you're describing that, that's Kind of conspiracy. And I said, okay, then. And I WhatsApp to my link. I said, you read it and you tell me.
And he came back, quite frankly, in shock. And he he just could not believe what he had read.
Speaker 0: Right. Well, now we see it being enforced with Conor McGregor, the MMA fighter or, yes. It's UFC fighter. Sorry. He's some kind of fighter.
Contact sport, who's being punished for, what he said about the riots this weekend. Can you tell that story quickly?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, I know he said he made a kind of intriguing comment without saying specific So he said Ireland is at war. And I guess the inference was you know against the the leaders up top. But he also made a few more comments. I'm not sure exactly what.
But he generally was kind of attacking the leftist or the political elite That have caused this problem. And that's very important for people to understand. I noticed many, many years ago that there was an Excessive migration policy that didn't make sense really for humanitarian reasons. When I was a kid, we had the Vietnam boat people during the Vietnam More we welcome them with open arms, but they were scattered around and accommodation was found and it all fitted beautifully. And it was a great thing to do, But the last few years and specifically in the last year or 2 with the Ukraine war, they've actually brought in, I think, nearly 200,000 people into a country of around 5,000,000.
We already have a massive housing problem for our own, current occupants, including migrants, And there's nowhere for them to stay. So recently in Ireland, they canceled the building of a nursing home, a care home, in a small community in the southeast of Ireland. And they've changed it to a place for a few 100 young male, unmarried migrants Who came over in the last year. So we were told, of course, to Ukraine women and children safety. Great stuff.
We're all behind us. What we got was a massive proportion of young male, not from Ukraine, from Georgia, Congo, All over the world, they sent out last year an invite basically saying you'll have a house within 4 months. You'll have great, you know, payments. And they put us in various African languages and Georgian and Ukrainian in fairness. But they put that out last year.
Crazy.
Speaker 0: Something you said in a speech recently was that the purpose of this is to flood borders in order to make a global government. So there is no longer any national ID in any one place. You know, my husband and I, we were talking about recently this unhelpful conversation online of who's the most oppressed group. Is it Jews? Is it Arabs?
Is it Black people, I hate this conversation, but my husband says, well, what about the Irish? Like, they're just left out of this conversation despite a really tough history. We don't treat them like that anymore because I don't know why. Because the skin's too light, or because they're part of UK, or or whatever. So it's almost as if the story of an oppressed group is no longer important when you're saying, we'd like to protect our borders.
Like, the conversation is not valid. Do you see what I mean, where I'm going with this?
Speaker 1: Oh, absolutely. So the destruction of common sense And logic is the 1st weapon of the Neo Marxists. And sadly we have a useful idiot army of these kinds of communist types, ideologues. Our society is riddled. Our university is riddled.
And therefore, they're corrupting the youth as well. My 5 children, and they report back to me the nonsense that's being taught That makes no sense. Oh, it's crazy. Yeah. But, yeah, it's it's a major problem.
So they've moved the Overton window To a to a place where you can't make salient, logical, coherent points to have a discussion. So last night on RTE, we had grit. Iegript.ie as the only news service in Ireland that actually Provides real news and their leader was on and he was attacked all around by the presenter on the panel about this recent riots problem. And he was amazing. But he basically said that we are no we are telling us we are no longer allowed to report the truth.
We are no longer allowed to have open, Frank discussions. And, quite frankly, it's insane.
Speaker 0: Right. Well, you know, throughout Europe now, there is an appetite to vote out leftist leaders. Ireland has plenty of normal thinkers or even brave thinkers, Mick Wallace, Claire Daly, but they don't. They're European MPs. They're not elected to run Ireland.
So do you think there will be an appetite for common sense, peace loving politicians. And there will be a come up in soon.
Speaker 1: There is a growing movement. But the only realistic one I see, and they've just launched is independent Ireland. And I think they're on Twitter, but they're only beginning. They have a couple of members of parliament, and I believe they have a couple of score of, counselors. So they're Are growing.
And I think they're gonna attract a lot of attention for the reasons you just said, Natalie. We also have the Farmers Alliance, But they're more to defend the farmers against the kind of climate madness. So this independent Ireland is trying to pull together independent members of Parliament and counselors and give people an alternative. The sad thing is Fine Gael, Fena foil, And indeed Sinn Fein, the kind of workers' party of the Irish struggle of decades ago. They're all banging from the same drum, hymn sheet.
They're all supporting COVID madness. They're all supporting this current madness we're discussing. So the 3 main parties, it appears forget about. So we need independence coming up, And we need people to go out there and start supporting them, and we need it ASAP.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I understand. We have the same situation in the United States. 2 separate parties ideologically opposed, but united about war. So thank you so much for joining me.
I really appreciate your channel. I hope we can Appreciate you being here. All of your insights, all of your comments, we appreciate you liking and sharing this video with your friends, Starting discussions, bringing us in on that discussion, all of that stuff we're here to learn together. So thank you for joining us. Remember, we have a redacted Or if you'd like to signal to other people the type of independent media that you're into, which is redacted, so head on over to redactedstore.com.
Check out our merchandise, see if you'd like to maybe give that to somebody for Christmas, like a mug or a non, What is it? Nonpacivists peace extremist. That's our slogan here at Redacted, the unofficial slogan if you'd like to get that for somebody else. Being a peace extremist, I think it's something that you'll be happy you did when your life is said and done. That's how I feel about it.
That's what keeps me going. So thank you so much, and we will see you tomorrow. Remember, we're here every Monday through Thursday, 4 PM EST, and we'll be here all the way up until the Christmas holiday. We're gonna be in it. We're gonna in it to the end.
So thank you for joining us. Thanks for being here. See you tomorrow, everybody.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Best ever video to explain the elemental evil of Bill Gates and his infernal foundation. No need to thank me: https://t.co/KRDBnLV7D7
Video Transcript AI Summary
Bill Gates, the co-founder of Microsoft, has declared vaccines to be the best investment he has ever made, citing a strong economic return. However, Gates has faced scrutiny for his involvement in anticompetitive practices and his transformation from a tech monopolizer to a philanthropist. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which he established, has been accused of profiting from companies responsible for social and health problems. Additionally, the foundation has faced criticism for its vaccine programs, including allegations of unethical testing in India. Gates' influence in global health and his push for COVID-19 vaccines have raised concerns about medical freedom and potential risks. Critics question his motives and partnerships, including his association with Jeffrey Epstein. The push for vaccines and the erosion of personal liberties have sparked debate and skepticism among the public.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Bill Gates declared vaccines the best investment I've ever made.
Speaker 1: There's been over a 20 to return, over a 20 to 1 return. So if you just look at the economic benefits, that's a pretty Strong number compared to anything else.
Speaker 0: Gates gave hours of videotape testimony.
Speaker 2: What were the non Microsoft browsers that you were concerned about in January of 1996? That month. Yes. Sorry. And what about it?
What non Microsoft browsers were you concerned about in January of 1996?
Speaker 3: I don't know. You mean concerned.
Speaker 2: What is it about the word concerned you don't understand.
Speaker 3: I'm not sure what you mean by it.
Speaker 4: The justice department has charged Microsoft with engaging in anticompetitive and exclusionary practices designed to maintain its monopoly and personal computer operating systems.
Speaker 0: In a move to overshadow the negative press, Gates invested $100,000,000 to set up the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Overnight, Bill Gates transformed his public image From ruthless tech monopolizer to the world's most generous philanthropist.
Speaker 1: I'm pleased to announce that we're pledging an additional $1,000,000,000,
Speaker 5: We had the chance to witness Bill Gates 2.0, the man you don't know.
Speaker 0: The rebranding campaign paid off. His net worth swiftly doubled earning Bill Gates the title of richest man in the world.
Speaker 6: You've invested $10,000,000,000 in vaccinations over the last 2 decades, And you figured out the return on investment for that, and it kind of stunned me. Can you walk us through the math?
Speaker 0: In a Wall Street essay, Bill Gates declared vaccines The best investment I've ever made.
Speaker 1: There's been over a 20 to 1 return. So if you just look at the economic benefits, that's a pretty strong number compared to anything else.
Speaker 0: The Gates Foundation expanded rapidly into a massive, vertically integrated multinational corporation
Speaker 7: is the world's largest private philanthropy Causing harm. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has made 1,000,000 of dollars each year from companies blamed for many of the Same social and health problems the foundation seeks to address. The Gates Foundation has investments in 69 of the worst polluting companies in the US and Canada. Other companies in the foundation's portfolio have been accused of transgressions, including forcing thousands of people to lose their homes, supporting child labor, defrauding and neglecting patients in need of medical care. The Gates Foundation has not provided detail.
Speaker 8: William h Gates the third and Melinda French Gates.
Speaker 0: As a top donor to both The WHO and the CDC, no one man has more power than Bill Gates To influence and control the health and medical freedom of all people.
Speaker 1: Normalcy only returns when we've largely vaccinated The entire global population. This will be the new normal until a vaccine is developed.
Speaker 9: Until we find a vaccine, going back to normal Means putting lives at risk.
Speaker 10: We need to produce it and to deploy it in every single corner of the world.
Speaker 1: Full vaccination
Speaker 11: We've Already bought the syringes. We already know where it's gonna happen. We're thinking about what that's going to be. It's all part of this plan.
Speaker 9: Our Military is now being mobilized, so at the end of the year, we're gonna be able to give it to a lot of people very, very rapidly.
Speaker 0: In 1986, President Ronald Reagan signed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Granting total immunity to vaccine manufacturers. After a decade of lawsuits related to vaccine injuries and death, vaccine companies threatened to stop making vaccines until they could be legally shielded from liability. To this day, when someone is injured or killed as the result of an adverse reaction, It is the US taxpayers that pay for the damages.
Speaker 12: Welcome back. Was several Indian tribal girls used as guinea pigs? The report alleges that 2 American farmer Giants untested vaccine was administered to thousands of tribal girls without proper study and paperwork.
Speaker 0: India was among the hardest hit after Bollywood celebrities were incentivized by the Gates Foundation to the public to submit to mass vaccinations. In 2009, tribal children were administered the HPV vaccine. Over 24,000 girls were told they were being given wellness shots, in many cases, without the informed consent of a parent or a guardian.
Speaker 13: The people that were administering these vaccines lied to the guardians of these girls And told the girls, oh, this is gonna cure cancer. You're never gonna have cancer. And these girls became severely injured. Some of them developed Seizures, some of them developed cancer, and 7 girls died. And there was no insurance.
There was no assistance for them, And the Gates Foundation denied that it had been clinical trials. And it was so bad that the parliament in India created a task They studied it, and they kicked out the Gates Foundation.
Speaker 14: But India is a barbaric country. Things happen here in a very barbaric way, But I was surprised to find an American organization operating in broad daylight, doing things in a very, very, Let's say Indian fashion. And so the route I took was, that I want the whole procedure To be investigated, the Indian Parliament formed a committee and it was to be a rather surprising move Because you generally don't often have such a high level inquiry into matters affecting poor people. And that was such an extraordinary report. I don't think Indian Parliament has ever come out It's such a scathing report.
And the government officials came up and said, we shouldn't have authorized this. We're sorry. We're not going to allow them again. And now they are back doing their same old tricks again.
Speaker 15: The good news is that human clinical trials can start as early as July 2020 for India's 1st COVID nineteen Indigenous vaccine that's been developed by Bharat Biotech.
Speaker 14: So you can imagine how the manipulation of the media by the media, The manipulation of public opinion by leaders of all political parties unanimously say we want a vaccine. And the worst thing is they are taken as philanthropists. Whereas what this actually is, is the Position of political and financial power. And I think the 2nd most populous country with 1,300,000,000 people It's going to be a good base for pharmaceutical companies to make a killing and also kill a lot of people in the process. Yes.
I just find it a pity that we haven't been able to get any benefit for the girls who Suffered, you know. It's so terrifying as to what they're actually doing with the world.
Speaker 1: We're taking things that are genetically modified organisms, and we're injecting them in little kids' arms. We just Soon right into the vein.
Speaker 0: A 2018 scientific study released in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health concluded that Over 490,000 children in India developed paralysis as a result of the gate supported oral polio vaccine that was administered between the years of 2000 and 2017. Using all the usual slight of hand, US based media and fact checkers rushed to bury the story. But thanks to the meticulous work of a team of Indian researchers and doctors, The inconvenient truth lives on the NIH .gov website.
Speaker 8: It's my honor to introduce Bill and Melinda Gates.
Speaker 0: Without any medical training, Bill and Melinda Gates founded the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, through which they fulfill their agenda to vaccinate the world. The foundation has been sued by the governments of some of the poorest and most vulnerable nations for causing serious harm through experimental vaccine programs.
Speaker 16: If you just look at health care workers around the world, they deserve to get the vaccine first. You know, here in the United States, really, it's going to be Black people who really should get it first and many Indigenous people.
Speaker 17: Vaccines were always Toward to us that it was safe. It was it was healthy. This is things that we had to do, but given the position that I am in now as a state legislator And looking at these studies and reviewing a lot of these studies is very scary, and I want the African American community to open up their eyes.
Speaker 18: Of All the places that mister Gates could have gone in the world, why did he settle on Africa? It's not because he cares about people that look like me. He cares about an agenda.
Speaker 19: African bodies have been used as As lab rats for many years for big pharma. They are using us for trials. They are using us for testing. But as an African, I say no more.
Speaker 20: Africans, they're tired of becoming the guinea pigs of the world. Their antennas are raised, and they're telling each other all over social media. They're on high alert right now.
Speaker 21: There is a policy of the American government. It's called the Kissinger report, Which was produced in the mid seventies, and it explicitly states that, the purpose of the foreign policy in Africa was to, reduce the, the population because they have great mineral resources there. At the time, Kissinger and those involved with the Carter administration wanted to shrink the population, make sure that the Africans do not develop And do not use the resources for themselves because we in this state, we need them. There is a a concerted Efforts of foreign powers to control the population of Africa.
Speaker 9: Some children did survive the botched vaccinations last month and will recover, but 15 all under the age of 5 died from fever, vomiting, and diarrhea.
Speaker 21: Human errors contributed to the unfortunate deaths of the children.
Speaker 20: How can you believe big pharma But not believe these parents when they tell you that their children have been injured by big pharma.
Speaker 16: I don't care
Speaker 20: how big this corporate machine looks. As a parent, I can tell you these people will never stop fighting for their kids.
Speaker 0: It would take hours to list all of the questionable initiatives that Bill Gates is involved in, here's a few of the highlights. Gates is one of the key funders in the stratospheric controlled a perturbation experiment designed to block out the sun in an effort to control global warming by releasing massive amounts of calcium carbonate and other materials into the upper Critics, including environmental scientists, have called the project a global genocide experiment. Gates has invested over 1,000,000,000 In Earth Now's global surveillance project, the project will launch hundreds of satellites into space, which will allow for the 20 fourseven monitoring of all people everywhere. In partnership with MIT, Bill Gates has developed a new technology that allows vaccines To be injected under your skin along with your medical records, the Quantum Dot tattoo will implant an invisible certificate that can be scanned by authorities using a cell phone app and infrared light.
Speaker 1: Eventually, what we'll have to have is certificates Who's a recovered person? Who's a vaccinated person? So eventually, there will be this digital immunity proof.
Speaker 0: The EPA recently approved an experimental use permit to Oxitec, a biotech company funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. In an effort to fight malaria, Octotech will soon release millions of genetically modified mosquitoes in US states, according to the NIH website, programs are being developed to allow human immunization via mosquito Bite. It was Science Magazine that coined the phrase flying syringes.
Speaker 22: Could you raise your
Speaker 23: A shocking new report from the New York Times sheds light on the connection Between Microsoft founder, Bill Gates, and the late Jeffrey Epstein. You report these 2 men met at least 6 Times.
Speaker 8: Well, I believe there were more. This included visits to the mansion, seeing each other in Seattle, flying on
Speaker 0: When flight logs revealed that Gates had been a passenger on the Lolita Express, he claimed that he didn't know that the private jet belonged to Epstein. He also denied that he and mister Epstein were involved in any business deals. However, an expose by the New York Times revealed that not only did Bill Gates initiate a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein well after he was convicted of sex crimes. But the 2 were also involved in the process Of co founding a multibillion dollar charitable fund.
Speaker 23: Why would they ever set up a charitable trust benefiting Jeffrey Epstein?
Speaker 8: That it was all about philanthropy, that Bill Gates just wanted to find new sources of money.
Speaker 0: Why would one of the richest men in the world Choose to partner with the world's most notorious pedophile. A deeper dive into Epstein's world revealed that 2 men had more in common than meets the eye. Like Gates, Epstein was a billionaire philanthropist with a passion for science, health, education and children. The Jeffrey Epstein Foundation donated 1,000,000 of dollars to top universities, science institutes, medical schools, early education programs, youth initiatives, and international peace accords. Bill Gates is either the most misunderstood man alive Or one of the most convincing con men to ever live?
Is he a benevolent hero or a malevolent opportunist? Personally, I would love to believe that one of the richest men in the world is giving away his fortune for the betterment of humanity. At the very least, I want to believe that he's unaware of the damage he's done.
Speaker 10: I'm happy to announce that we've discovered a vaccine. We no longer have to live in fear. Everyone can get back to their normal lives.
Speaker 24: It's the great hope galvanizing the world, a vaccine for COVID nineteen. But are we being sold aligned? After all, COVID nineteen is the 7th coronavirus to
Speaker 18: vaccine against any disease that I'm familiar with is about 7 years. The average time is 20. To be talking about a magic bullet coming in months, it borders on the absurd.
Speaker 1: People like myself and Tony Fauci are saying 18 months.
Speaker 9: A year to a year and a half.
Speaker 1: If everything went perfectly, we could do slightly better than that, but there will be a trade off. We'll have less safety testing than we typically would have. And so governments will have to decide, you know, do they indemnify the companies and really say, let's Let's go out with this.
Speaker 13: Something that people should know about COVID nineteen vaccines is they fall today under the PrEP Act, which came into being after 9/11 and after an anthrax scare. And this law gives virtually blanket liability protection. It's basically possible to get any kind of compensation if you're injured. So people need to understand that if you take COVID nineteen vaccines, you are absolutely on If you're permanently injured, if you lose your job, if your healthcare expenses go through the roof, tough luck.
Speaker 25: Volunteers all across Across the country began getting shots today as part of the final phase of testing for an experimental vaccine being developed We looked. After the 2nd dose, at least 80% of participants experienced a systemic side effect. So are these vaccines safe?
Speaker 1: Well, the, The FDA not being pressured will look hard at that. The FDA is the gold standard regulators, and their current guidance on this, if they stick with that, is is very, very appropriate. And, you know, the it the the the side effects were not super severe. That is it didn't cause permanent health problems For, the things that are they, you know, Moderna did have to go with a fairly high dose. And so, you know, to get the This isn't a vaccine story.
Speaker 5: This is a population management story. If your goal is to make this beautiful earth that we live on, an exclusive playground for the entitled few, then populations that get in the way are a problem. And it is the empirical impulses of individuals who have decided that by outranking the rest of humanity, they can dictate upon humanity the conditions of their
Speaker 26: Now we need to go and look in families to find those people who may be sick and remove them and isolate them.
Speaker 5: This bill
Speaker 19: in the house.
Speaker 5: If it's someone that
Speaker 1: is refusing, we will definitely consult with our health officer to look into the next steps.
Speaker 27: So the sheriff's department and the health department Showed up at her door with orders for her and her husband to wear ankle monitors. The couple says they never denied self quarantining.
Speaker 28: You will no longer be able to home, only 1 person will be able to go shopping once per day. Recreational activity is now no longer allowed. You will be allowed to have one hour of exercise no further than 5 kilometers from your home.
Speaker 1: Are you serious just for not having a mask? For no mask, are you
Speaker 22: We will shut you down. We will cite you. And if we need to, we will arrest you, and we will fake you to jail.
Speaker 9: You know the old expression about snitches. Well, in this case, snitches get rewards. Some people are ratting Their neighbors out, calling the police, but others are turning to the Internet where social distance shaming has gotten ugly.
Speaker 16: In a time of crisis, trying to force compliance upon a population by making neighbors and friends distrust one another is exactly the opposite
Speaker 29: When human societies lose their freedom, it's not usually because tyrants have taken it away. It's usually because Those people willingly surrender their freedom in return for protection against some external threat. That's what I fear we We are seen now.
Speaker 5: This is a cognitive dissonant moment which is being imprinted in your brain, Just like remember The Great Depression, remember 911.
Speaker 7: Oh my god.
Speaker 28: Weapons of mass destruction.
Speaker 5: We are being conditioned to have the excuse for unbelievable acts of tyranny, which will be justified by remember 2020. And your loved ones, those that die, those that are infected, they're being used as cannon fodder, which is the ultimate desecration of their honor and integrity. And this is also a test of humanity to see How much of our liberty we will let go before we finally draw the line under enough. Benjamin Russia, signer of the Declaration of Independence stated, unless we put medical freedom into the constitution, a time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship to restrict the art of healing to 1 class of men and And deny equal privileges to others. That time is now.
Speaker 1: Well, this won't be the last pandemic that we face. So we, you know, we'll have to prepare for the next one.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Best most accurate and insightful report on #DublinRiot that I have yet seen - definitely a keeper and one to share. Accurately points to WEF/UN instigators, accuracy is great to see: https://t.co/fHZImHXq66
Video Transcript AI Summary
Three innocent children and their teacher were viciously attacked in a horrific crime scene. The teacher and a 6-year-old girl are critically ill. The bravery of the teacher and a member of the public, Warren Donahue, who intervened, is commendable. Another man, Mr. Benicio, also joined in to subdue the attacker. The media and government are accused of deflecting attention from the attack by focusing on other incidents. The speaker condemns the anarchists who took advantage of the situation and criticizes the open borders policy. The speaker believes the attacker is a Nigerian man and questions the determination of the mainstream media and the Garda Commissioner. The speaker calls for proper border controls and the resignation of the Minister for Justice and the Garda Commissioner.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Fradgar's government is deliberately deflecting from what was a horrific crime scene behind me, where 3 innocent children under 6 years of age and their female teacher were viciously knifed yesterday in a disgusting, unprovoked attack. The teacher, and the little 6 year old, girl remain critically ill as I speak to you this evening. My thoughts and prayers are with them and their families. We must recognize and commend also the bravery of the school teacher whom fought the assailant to the best of her ability and shielded the children with her own body. She is now fighting for her life in hospital.
I would also like to highly commend the bravery and courage of Warren Donahue, whom was the 1st member of the public to intervene. When his wife and children were passing, she said, look, he is stabbing the children. Without concern for his own safety, Warren disarmed the assailant with heavy blows. Then when Warren forced the assailant to drop the knife, an unidentified woman kicked the knife away. I would also like to recognize the bravery of the Brazilian man, mister Benicio, the Deliveroo driver who joined in and lay down with blows onto the attacker's head with his helmet.
There is no doubt that without the intervention of these heroes, there can be no doubt that many more children could have been sin seriously injured or killed. However, today's RTE e radio stations, and the newspapers minimized the horrific attack on these young children and their teacher. Instead, they focused on several burnt vehicles and looted shops that can all be easily replaced. Then immediately and without one shred of evidence, the puppet minister for justice, McEntee, and her incompetent former RUC, no guard commissioner, Harris, blamed it all on the imaginary far right boogie men, all as a ploy to deflect from their failures. Let's get some facts straight.
Thousands of people, both Irish and foreign nationals, came out on the O'Connell Street Dublin here to express their mutual outrage, anger and contempt for the state's failure in their duty to protect the children of Ireland. Most of the people that showed up acted within the law. However, a few 100 of whom I believe are anarchists from the radical left seized upon this tragic situation and chose to attack the Garde when they were vulnerable, outnumbered, and trying to protect the integrity of a crime scene. I stand with the people that came out lawfully to express their anger. And I also wholeheartedly condemn the arsonists, vandals, thugs, and looters, who took advantage of us at our lowest ebb when we were in shock and heartbroken by this savage attack.
I believe the attacker is a Nigerian man in his fifties, whom I'm told has been living in Ireland since the year 2000, were permitted by the Fianna Fail, Berthi O'Hearn government. Now all of this clearly calls into question the present day wrecked this open borders policy of Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, and the Green Government. Furthermore, this reckless open border policy is openly and fully reported by the so called parties of opposition, being Marylou Sinn Fein, Labour, and People Before Profit. There was not a shred of evidence that the disturbing scenes in Dublin of last night were politically motivated, nor was there any evidence of the so called far right involvement. Which raises the question, what yardstick were the mainstream media or the Garda Commissioner are using to make this determination.
Culture conflict is very real. Not all cultures share the same level of empathy, have tolerance and respect for life as we do. This is why the majority of people of Ireland have serious concerns with reckless open borders, and we demand proper border controls are enforced as they should be. Let me say, Irish people do not have a problem with the majority of decent, hardworking migrants coming here, and we recognized are valuable contribution to our society. But letting in unchecked criminals, lunatics, rapists, and murderers is the problem.
The UNWEF agenda of open borders must be stopped. Minister for justice McEntee and Garda commissioner Harris blaming the riots on the imaginary far right bogeyman will not solve anything. It will only make matters worse, and, therefore, their positions are untenable, and they must resign now.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Another classic - this time Trainspotting one, featuring #WEF billionaire thug Sunek 😀 https://t.co/Xi6tjDN3Hf
Video Transcript AI Summary
Choose life, clean air, and a career. Choose ignoring climate experts and gaslighting. Choose pretending to understand ordinary people while deceiving them. Choose expensive rents and lack of housing. Choose corruption and nepotism. Choose deportation and neglecting care homes. Choose short-term populism over long-term solutions. Who needs rail links when you have a private jet?
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Choose life. Choose net 0. Choose clean air. Choose my career. Choose a big flip flopping lie.
Choose ignoring climate experts in in favor of the day you may all hack. Choose 7 bin gaslighting. Choose saying you understand the struggles ordinary people while keeping a straight face. Choose your friends, well, not working class friends. Choose this deceitful hunt.
Choose exorbitant rents and insufficient housing. Choose to put your penis in a death pig's cock. Choose the governmental shelf life of an iceberg lettuce with the financial savvy of a root vegetable. Choose sitting on a damp couch, breathing black mold in a mind numbing spirit crushing tory shit show. Choose nepotism, the advancing and barely conceal cronyism.
Choose Windrush. Choose deportation and wondering where the Pitt Care Home. Nothing more than an inconvenience to the small self entitled brats you put in power. Choose your future. Choose life.
But why would I do a thing like that? I chose not to choose life. I chose short term populism. And the rail links? So be no rail links.
Who needs railways when you've got the private jet.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
😂😂😂😂😂 "Medical Coincidence Clinic" https://t.co/P96WAlgs2s
Video Transcript AI Summary
At the Institute for Coincidence, we focus on treating symptoms rather than investigating causes. We understand the importance of avoiding legal issues for employers and doctors. Coincidence is now the leading cause of death, and at Kaufman, we specialize in addressing the effects while leaving the causes to conspiracy theorists. Our talented team of doctors focuses on various medical issues, such as myocarditis, blood clots, heart arrhythmia, stroke, and more. Schedule an appointment at kaufmancoincidence.com and receive a doctor's note with a scientific explanation to share with your anti-vaxx friends. Coincidences happen all the time, and we are the official medical coincidence partner of the NFL.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Are you or a loved one suffering from a medical coincidence? You want proper medical care, but you don't want people sniffing around asking a whole bunch of questions about what might be causing your problem. At the Institute for Coincidence, we won't look into the cause of your heart or other problem. We'll just fix it. That's right.
We promise to only look at your symptoms. We won't get all curious looking for causes because that could get your employer or your doctor into some legal hot water, and nobody wants that. At Kaufman, we understand that coincidence is now the leading cause of death. Hey. We've got another coincidence over here.
If we wanna operate at the speed of science, There's no time for looking for causes. No pesky questions about drugs or vaccines you may have been given. At Kaufman, we specialize in the effects and leave the causes to the conspiracy theorists. And let's be honest. We know the cause anyway.
It was a coincidence. Right? For each new patient, Kaufman's talented team of doctors strap on their blinders and look directly at the problem area, usually the heart, just like the CDC recommends. Our main campus now treats myocarditis, blood clots, heart arrhythmia, stroke, heart attack, magnetic Skin, difficulty breathing, full body blisters and burning, convulsions, kidney failure, memory loss, cancer, sudden death, and much, much more. Give your coincidence the attention it deserves, but not the wrong kind of attention at Kaufman.
Schedule your appointment today atkaufmancoincidence.com and receive a doctor's note with a real sciency sounding explanation to provide to your anti vaxx friends proving to them it was definitely not the vaccine caused your coincidence? Kaufman, because coincidences happen pretty much all the time. Official medical coincidence partner of the NFL.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Ever wonder what the full history of Schwab and the WEF sociopaths was - the big picture? All from published sources (important that)? Well here you go in 5 minutes flat! 😀
Video Transcript AI Summary
World War 3 is not a conventional war between nations, but rather a conflict between globalists and everyone else. The speaker is starting a side project to share their research on this topic. They discuss the influence of globalism and its key figure, referred to as KB, who had ties to influential individuals like Henry Kissinger. They delve into KB's mentors and his family history, including his father's involvement in the German nuclear program during World War 2. The speaker also mentions the Club of Rome and its ideology of reducing population. They emphasize the need to understand the bigger forces at play and invite viewers to follow their investigations on platforms like Rumble and YouTube.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: World War 3 isn't starting. It's been in the cold phase for more than a decade, and it's not the US versus Russia. World War 3 is globalists versus everyone else, and it sure looks like the globalists have started it. So I am starting a side project over on Rumble and YouTube and Locals, but we're gonna learn about this shit. Started building out a master web with all my research, my sources, my notes that tell the whole story, and I'm gonna share it all with you.
So right now, I'm gonna show you some of the progress we're making on the sheets. And in the next week or so, I'm gonna start producing horizontal content about it. So So if you're gonna understand the western powers in this war, you need to understand globalism, which is actually just a cute way of saying rich people running the world. And if you're gonna understand globalism, you gotta understand our boy, whose name I'm not gonna say out loud, lest it destroy this video. I'll call him KB.
Talk about how KB first got his start in a Harvard program run by Henry Kissinger, who you should know about in a program funded by that agency. True story. From very early in his career, Kissinger had ties to multiple agencies, And it's possible that Schwab actually met Justin Trudeau's father at this Harvard court. Not entirely clear on whether their paths acted at this time, but this report in the Harvard Crimson clearly states that Pierre Trudeau came to this program and spoke. This is the program that KB was a part of as a young man, shortly before founding the World Economic Forum.
In In my map, I've broken down this other article that goes into the 3 biggest influences on KB. Those being Henry Kissinger, John K. Galbraith, and Herman Kahn. I just realized I decided to call him KB, but those aren't his initial. I don't know what's going on.
I'm just in it. Couldn't help but notice our boy Donald Rumsfeld in the photo with Khan and president Gerald Ford. Everything's connected. Hence, why I'm making a crazy map of freaking conspiracies that are actually just history. Khan, one of KB's main primary mentors, laid critical foundation for adoption of explicitly educated decision makers such as Klaus, such as KB, that the leaders of tomorrow should be selected and groomed for such roles so as to more effectively control and shape the outcomes of long term socio What a cool goal.
Think the World Economic Forum's Young Global Leaders program. We'll also be digging into the Schwab's family history, going back to his dad and his granddad. All through World War 2, Schwab's dad was running this company that was instrumental to the German nuclear program. His son, Klaus, was born in 1938, so he was, you know, in his formative years of boyhood while watching his dad run a Nuclear program for that party using forced laborers at the Ravensburg facility, where they even had a special camp for They're forced laborers to live in, and I'm sure was great. I'm sure that it's still great values in the young Klaus, who later went on to be instrumental in orchestrating the sale of Nuclear arms technology to the apartheid South African regime in the sixties seventies will dissect the club of Rome and how That word that I definitely shouldn't say out loud and, you know, having less people in general is central to the ideology of This club and of the WEF.
This quote is from the book, The First Global Revolution, published in 1991 by the Club of Rome, and I quote, from 1991, mind you. In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that population, the threat of global warming, Water shortages, famine, and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions, these phenomena do constitute a common threat, which must be confronted by everyone together. In designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural process, and it is only through change attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then is humanity itself. Now, if that ain't twisted, I don't know what is. Absolutely. There are elements of truth in this. But do you want this guy who was raised by his dad to be in charge of implementing that doctrine?
And while we're on the Top of globalization will do research into all sorts of other figures involved in this thing. This one dedicated to that guy, that name, This one's already getting super expansive, and I'm just warming up. Here, I've been breaking down the opening chapter of 1 nation under blackmail, and I've only got, like, 3, 4, 5. See, I'm only, like, on page 20 or something, and already it's this deep. Not to mention other related news articles and sources.
We are just getting warmed up. And we also gotta create content that I can monetize and that I can put on YouTube so they won't take me down because they don't want any of that other crap. So We're also going to be diving into, like, you know, other conspiracy theories. Everything you see on this chart is fair game. We got we got all kinds of ideas in the work, and you might be surprised how much some of these things and these things might be connected to some of these things and some of these things.
So I know the whole world's looking in this direction right now and trying to deal with this issue, which is important and needs to be discussed. We must not turn away, but But there are a lot bigger forces at work, and this is a proxy, just a piece of a much bigger play that's happening in the world at large right now, and most people aren't seeing what's actually going on. So if you want to stay up to date with all that investigation, link in my bio, you got to follow me on the horizontal platforms like Rumble and t- and YouTube, And the real spot where we'll be going all the depth is on the locals. The more I can build those communities up, the more I can do these real deeper dives into like the big and important stuff that TikTok does not want us to be spreading. It's about to be an election year.
It's about to be World War 3. It's about to be a global currency See, reset. The economy is not done crashing. Banks have not seen the end of like, shit's about to get wild. We're done with the part where the Soft people make hard times, and we're about to be at the part where hard times make hard people.
Time to do some research and get learned. So go subscribe. I'll see you over there.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
BRILLIANT. BRILLIANT. BRILLIANT. REAL Science, for a change:
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Bloody hell and OMG to the power of 100 ! Sociopath Schwab admits on camera that he initiated the sinister Climate anti-science through the ultra-wealthy Club of Rome lunatics - way to go, elitist nutbar!
Video Transcript AI Summary
I have 25 years of experience working on climate change, starting in 1973. I was the one who gave the Club of Rome their first major platform. I share your concern and believe that the only way to address these issues is by fixing our global architecture and system.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I've worked on climate change for 25 years. I worked on climate change since 'seventy three. Just to tell you, because I was the person who gave the Club of Rome the 1st big platform. I share with you the concern, and I think we can solve those issues only if we repair our global architecture and our global system.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Utterly crucial short vid to FULLY understand Climate Change. I kid you not - this outweighs any other 'science' This is the last word on the matter:
Video Transcript AI Summary
The narrative prior to the focus on climate was centered around the Cold War, which served as a pretext for a powerful federal government. In 1991, the Club of Rome, including Mikhail Gorbachev and Al Gore, met and decided to use the environment as a new justification for an all-powerful state. A book called "The 1st Global Revolution" outlined this plan, stating that pollution, global warming, and other environmental threats would be used as a common enemy to unite humanity. However, some argue that this approach is dangerous and disregards other important aspects of society. The World Economic Forum and China have played significant roles in implementing the UN's Agenda 2030, with both capitalists and communists working together on sustainable development. Critics question whether the true motivation behind this agenda is environmental protection or the pursuit of power.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: At some point down the line, the narrative changed to be around climate. What was the narrative prior to that? What was the justification they were giving in order to push, you know, this kind of more control from the top down?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Immediately preceding climate and environment, actually, the Cold War was the pretext for having this incredibly large, incredibly powerful federal government? And in fact, you see a very clear break when the Club of Rome met in 1991 as The Soviet state and the Eastern European communist states were collapsing. The Club of Rome, very, very powerful Obviously, Mikhail Gorbachev was there. He had many prominent Americans, people like Al Gore.
They got together, and they came up with this incredible document where they actually said, we We need a new justification for this all powerful state. So the new excuse is going to be because the Environment is gonna be harmed and because climate is going to hurt us.
Speaker 0: Wait. What? I could not believe what I just heard. Did world leaders really lay out this globalist plan in plain English in a physical book way back in 1991? I went on Amazon, and there it was.
The 1st global revolution, which states, and I quote, in searching for a common enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. And therefore, the real enemy is humanity itself.
Speaker 2: The science It's clear. We are getting dangerously close to the point of no return. The science is very clear. This natural world is severely endangered to us. Co red for humanity.
It's not a group of political officials, elected officials. These are the scientists. There is a top Down quality to this policy, which is extremely forceful. And the firstfulness comes from scientism, which is the ideology that we understand the world Poorly because of science. We have to listen to the science so that we have a better future for tomorrow.
It's just ideological BS. And it's also quite dangerous. It's a dangerous way of looking at the world because then it means nothing matters apart from science. Culture doesn't matter. History doesn't matter.
Religion doesn't matter. Social interaction doesn't matter. Nothing matters but science. You don't need to be a theologian or philosopher to understand that that's complete nonsense, but also dangerous nonsense. If nothing matters than just science, And what kind of a world do we actually live in?
History is truly at a turning point. In times
Speaker 1: The World Economic Forum was actually a critical part of implementing this U. N. Agenda. Some years ago, they became a strategic the of the UN in the implementation of Agenda 2030? And then you start looking at the connections between the World Economic Forum and China.
Klaus Schwab and Xi Jinping? They're like old buddies. They put out press releases about how much they love each other. So you've got the super capitalists represented by the World Economic And then on the government side, you have the communist side that after Agenda 2030 was adopted, the Communist Party in China put out through all their propaganda organs. They said, Played a critical role in this Agenda 2030.
You had Javier Solana, the head of NATO, saying this was gonna be the next great leap forward, right? The last great leap forward in China killed millions of people? Why would we want another one of those? That's crazy. So you have communists and super capitalists all coming together and working on this one Sustainable development agenda.
And that should make us all pause and and say, wait a minute. That doesn't make sense on the surface. What's going here? China is a powerful example of what can be achieved when national governments make environmental protection a top priority?
Speaker 3: The motivations of those who are pushing this agenda, many of them tend to emulate countries like China, which have abysmal environmental It's a country that has massive pollution problems. They don't seem to care about rivers and lakes and streams. There's all sorts of toxins pouring into them. In actuality, I would Say their envy of China is more to do with their control over their population and control over politics That it has to do with the environment. In looking at this, it looks like the environment is a tool to achieve power more than it is an end goal of self to actually protect nature?
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
X Platform embedded short vid: This one is pure gold, equally horrifying and fascinating – it is simply NOT one to miss!" The title says it all, and yes – we answer the pivotal question!
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, the speakers discuss the loss of property rights to securities and the deliberate legal structures that have been put in place over the past 50 years. The process of dematerialization and the creation of the concept of entitlement have severed ownership rights to securities. The implementation of these changes began in the United States in 1994 and has since been imposed globally. The speakers highlight the case of Lehman Brothers as an example of how secured creditors can take client assets in an insolvency. They emphasize the need to expose this system and reach out to high net worth individuals to make them aware of the planned collapse and the loss of their assets.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It was still possible in other countries to have property rights to securities. That's what sent me to Sweden during the financial crisis because it was still possible to have property rights to securities in Sweden.
Speaker 1: Oh my God. Just got back from Sweden from a conference and got some fantastic interviews. And the first one I'm releasing is this, Met a guy, David Webb, a hedge fund manager and financial expert, and he has a book out that you simply must get hold of. It's a free book To get the message out, it's at thegreattaking.com, free download, and I got to interview him after his fantastic talk. And you know that you will own nothing and be happy?
Well, he has gone through the 50 year history of all the Legal constructs that have been put in place to technically enable that to happen. So fantastic conversation. Please do Go to thegreattaking.com, get the book and share it, particularly with high net worth individuals who think they're pretty much Safe from everything, but they're wrong. So enjoy. I'm here in beautiful Sweden at a fantastic conference Talking about all the challenges that I've covered many times for you guys in the past, but last night I met someone I was not aware of with some fascinating material and a fascinating new free PDF book.
David Webb, great to see you again. And last night you went through obviously a lot of detail over maybe an hour, went past midnight. I was transfixed, my wife was transfixed and a lot of the material is new to me and it's the legal structures over the last 20 years that have gone into place in terms of global finance. So we can't cover it all here, but I might ask the first question. At what point in the past did all the people in the Western world, their ownership of equities and pensions and what they own, Did they really own those things?
Speaker 0: They're called securities because they were secure. And that was the case for 4 centuries, from the beginning, from the invention of securities. And this, there was definitely a design to sever ownership rights to securities. And this was beginning in 1960s. So, people certainly had property rights to their securities through the 1960s.
And then, A process of dematerialization was begun to get rid of paper certificates as a first step. But then a new legal concept of an entitlement was created, which is really the legal concept that severs your property rights to the securities. And that was the beginnings of the implementation of that was in 1994 with the revision to the Uniform Commercial Code in the United States. So, this began in the United States. It took many years to implement that in all 50 states.
So, they were able to do this quietly. It didn't require any action at the federal level. It was done in state law. So it didn't draw attention. But it was so people in the U.
S. Had property rights for some time, even after the beginnings of this. So, it's been planned and executed literally over decades. But we know the first thing I saw that I became that really lit me up about this was in 2008. I was expecting a wave of insolvencies to begin.
And there was a small broker dealer in Florida that failed very early on in the financial crisis. And there was an article in Barron's, showing that all of the client's securities We're swept to the bankruptcy receiver. So prior to this point, if your broker had gone bust, you'd say, well, I'm sorry that happened. Here's where you can transfer my securities. So this was the first time that It actually happened that the securities were not returned to the clients.
So that was in 2008. So, I think, but it was still possible in other countries to have property rights to securities. That's what sent me to Sweden during the financial crisis because it was still possible to have property rights to securities in Sweden. So then over a period of 6 years, property rights in 2 securities in Sweden was subverted. So, it's been a long process over decades.
It depends on what country you're talking about as to when the rights to securities were lost.
Speaker 1: Yes. No, an excellent summary, David. And there's So much in this, and that's why the book, the link is below is just fascinating for the detail. But one thing that struck me, many things struck me last night, One thing that was struck me was initiated at the top level in the USA. So it's not coming from China, it's not coming from bad Russians.
So that's key. It's rolled out over many decades. And as you stated twice, the people who set this in motion are dead, but it still remortlessly continues. And the other thing that really hit me was Sweden and Finland had local laws that were problematic for this system where you lose your rights.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: And they specifically went to Sweden and Finland to hoover up, the last 2 countries, They should be irrelevant. But they made sure even those were in the system. That's stunning.
Speaker 0: Well, the intention is that there will be no pocket of resistance anywhere. This is a strategy to be implemented absolutely globally, and it has been.
Speaker 1: So Sweden and Finland, I think through the mechanisms we won't get into here, but the ICSA or the CSAs locally, Sweden and Finland, They've done workarounds in the legal structure that they're effectively now in the basket that they're in. So the reality is now that if there was a massive collapse of the derivatives, which I think you said is a quadrillion of assets, many times the world GDP Pete, there's this enormous nuclear financial nuclear bomb. If that blew and we had Contagion, Ultimately, all of the assets of people, your pension, your securities, your Apple shares, All of it that you think is yours with your broker legally now worldwide in the West will be collateral for a massive problem I will be taken by, I think you said the favorite or
Speaker 0: Well, in the Lehman Brothers was used to set the case law precedent for the secured creditors taking the client assets in an insolvency. And it was a shocking example because just prior to this, What had been done in the case of Lehman would have been fraud, constructively fraud. But there were legal changes made essentially on the eve of the financial crisis to assure that clients could not take back their assets out of the insolvency estate. So, in the case of Lehman Brothers, JPMorgan was both the custodian for the client assets. There used to be a fiduciary duty to the clients.
They're acting as the custodian, But, they were also the secured creditor that took the client assets out of Lehman Brothers. And So there was a very important decision made by the bankruptcy court in the Southern District of New York, which is Manhattan, finding in favor of JPMorgan that they absolutely had the power to take the client assets immediately, even though they were the custodian. This case rang every bell for this having been constructively fraudulent. But the court upheld this. And they but they said in the decision that they first had to determine if JPMorgan was eligible to take the client assets and stated that as a member of the protected class That's actually in the decision.
As a member of the protected class, JPMorgan certainly was empowered to take the client assets. So, the point of this is that it's not all secured creditors, it's only selected entities that will take the collateral. And that's essentially just the very largest banking entities. JPMorgan is certainly one that has been involved in setting up this infrastructure.
Speaker 1: Yes, exactly. And that is one of the terms I was trying to recall protected class. And there's a few terms like that, maybe run through some of the analogous terms for the special people, protected class, secured creditors.
Speaker 0: The secured creditors have the in this structure, secured creditors. The key is that The property right has been severed by this concept of an entitlement. And that is associated you may hear the term beneficial ownership, which Sounds nice. I like to be benefited. But what is meant by that, and you can find this in these documents, is that is distinct from legal ownership.
Beneficial ownership means that you have the benefit of receiving a proxy, being able to vote, which you know what ever does. You've got a claim
Speaker 1: on the asset that you think you own. And I know from the The Enform that I fill is a non American, the beneficial owner, blah, blah, blah, I've seen it. But what that means is, Well, you really kind of are the owner in principle both. It's an appearance
Speaker 0: of ownership. And the legal ownership is actually with the entity that controls it as collateral. That's what matters in the event of insolvency.
Speaker 1: That's exactly it. Well, I know your time is short this morning. I've got a couple more questions. One of them I think will be of interest to the audience as they're both of this new knowledge. Again, the PDF is below, you got to read this book.
The prologue alone is the fascinating story with your history. And you've been a hedge fund manager at a high level and so much more just so people know, you know all this stuff big time. But all of this work over 50 years, and I'm kind of almost making it a rhetorical question. This work has gone on with Huge effort from the top in the U. S.
It has been foisted on Europe and the European Commission and all have I put all the legal structures to do the same crazy system, etcetera. Is it directly with an intention when things go bang to Hoover up all the people's assets in the biggest takeover in history. Or is it kind of a hedge from these people Just in case things go wrong and the derivatives market implodes, mega bang, it'd be nice to have this in. So It's also our protected rather than the ordinary ants. Intentionality, it's a tough one.
Speaker 0: Yes. Well, I agree with you, there were for some period of time when I was studying this, I thought the latter perhaps that, well, it's kind of like the Monopoly game with all the pieces on the board and well, the game's over, we'll just take all the pieces back over here. Then we'll start another game. And so, It is there's a lot of truth in that. But, I have to say, there's an intelligent design behind this that has, I think was conceived of over 50 years ago and was set in motion at that time.
And the deliberateness of this, the persistence decade after decade of executing on this and then forcing it globally, which was literally led by the U. S. Department of State, which is the most powerful executive power globally. And it has worked because it has been imposed globally now. And as you're saying, any pocket of resistance, Little Sweden and Finland weren't allowed to keep their rights to securities.
So it's, And as it's laid out in the book, you can see that it is definitely on a timeline for a massive collapse, which is also being made to happen. Because this financialization bubble did not have to happen. It has been made to happen. There, it's an integral part of the strategy as will be the bust that happens after this, because As in the 1930s, it's the period of years of low price level in which people are not able to service their debts. So they're not able to maintain control their property.
And you go into a period of deprivation really. So ultimately, we are in a hybrid war. And it's a war of conquest. But it's to be done subtly, up to a point. It's to be done with low energy input, not kinetically.
It's to be done through these constructs, a subterfuge.
Speaker 1: Yes. And as we see as part of this great and secret show to use a title of a book I read once, You can have kinetic wars, but they're always quite managed, they're proxy wars, they're local Syria, Ukraine, Iraq, but not the big one, Because all the parties worldwide are not interested in a big kinetic war because people will be affected at a high level. And so it's managed exquisitely. I just thought they're never explained by malice, but maybe just stupidity. But I think in this case, There is no stupidity in a 50 year highly exotic legal infrastructure expansion.
Speaker 0: It's not stupid, but it may be in saying, because it is pursuing a certain logic that will ultimately lead to the destruction of the people who are behind this. And that's what we must help them to understand. The people that set this in motion are gone. So we have to reach the consciousness of the inheritors of this situation. They are in a sense as trapped in this as we are.
Speaker 1: Yes, and that would I love that point you stressed many times. It's not like big bad white cat guys. They are almost trapped in this program that's unstoppable. But the people at the high level could still do something to at least to negate its worst potential implications, which are quite horrific, because if there's a big grab as per the title of your book, The Great Taking, And it's going to get hyper messy and it's going to be dreadful for everyone.
Speaker 0: Yes. So, if we lay it all out and expose this, it's literally never been taken out, unpackaged and looked at. So if we all do this, especially up to the very wealthy on the planet that are not they're not going to be protected. They have to under they believe they will be protected because they benefited from the system. But if they read this book and they realize they are not aware that this is planned, They will realize that they must help to expose this as well and say, we're not going to allow this to happen.
Speaker 1: Yes, really important. And that's a final message. If you know someone of great net worth or even the financial and investment guys, hedge fund managers Don't actually know about what we're talking about. Let them know because they are not like JPMorgan or the BIS in the protected class. They are not.
Thank you so much, David. So there you have it folks, pretty fascinating and concerning. But in any case, please do share the greatetaking.com, share the book, especially with high net worth individuals, as David Pointed out. And of course, I'll just mention again, discussing things with David and Professor Werner and many more financial experts there, Actual gold, physical gold, preferably in your own possession, is a great hedge against a lot of the madness that we have been discussing lately. So, I have a link to Pure Gold Company in London.
They have vaults in New York and London and elsewhere, and of course, they will send Gold to yourself for your own physical possession, pensions or percentages of pension or other assets Can be converted into something really, really safe. And it's not a speculative asset. I have hedged with a considerable percentage in physical gold, But it's not to speculate or to make money. This is about preserving and guarding any wealth you have for your family's future and your Pension, etcetera. So, you got to make your own decisions based on financial advice from a financial advisor, ideally, But PUREGOLD, if you connect with them, will run through the realities around this whole space.
So the links are down below Should you wish to explore that option as I and many others in my network certainly have. So that's it folks. Thanks so much for listening, and please help David get that important message out there. Thank you.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
"Unvaccinated Hate Speech." NEVER FORGET...the Pharma Tyranny of 2021
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, the speakers express their frustration with the unvaccinated population. They argue that the unvaccinated are the problem and should be blamed for the spread of COVID-19. The speakers believe that the vaccinated should wear masks to protect the unvaccinated, but they also criticize the unvaccinated for their behavior and lack of concern for others. They suggest that the unvaccinated should be taxed and pay more for healthcare. Some speakers compare the choice to remain unvaccinated to driving while intoxicated. They also discuss the strain on hospitals and express their preference for treating vaccinated individuals over unvaccinated individuals. The speakers emphasize that every COVID-19 death could have been prevented through vaccination. They condemn those spreading misinformation about vaccines.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: When the chips are down, these, these civilized people, they'll eat each other.
Speaker 1: You are the unvaccinated. You are the problem. It is the unvaccinated who are the problem period end of story.
Speaker 0: The only people that you can blame, The only people you can blame this is the shaming. This is the truth. Maybe they should be shamed of the unvaccinated. Just have to start Blaming the unvaccinated folks, not the regular folks. Anyone you came into contact with will blame you as will the rest of us Who've done the right thing by getting vaccinated.
Speaker 2: Because frankly, we know that we can't trust the unvaccinated. I think
Speaker 0: it's time to get our moral house in order, Anderson. It's the unvaccinated who are the threat.
Speaker 1: All the vaccinated folks are gonna start wearing masks to protect The unvaccinated folks. It's called a Christian value.
Speaker 2: Basically punishing the vaccinated for the the sins of the unvaccinated. People are not behaving honorably. The unvaccinated are basically saying Well, it's open season for me. I can do whatever I want as well.
Speaker 0: The the unvaccinated are basically beating their breasts running around the country saying, We don't care. We're living free and so forth. We've been patient, but our patience is wearing thin. The unvaccinated, A group that includes children and people acting like children. And the rest of us are starting to get pissed off.
The vaccinated feel the unvaccinated are Making me upset or angry. This is not about freedom, a personal choice. Well, my freedom is being kind of disturbed here. No. Screw your freedom.
Speaker 2: The other day, Howard Stern weighed in with a much different approach. Take a look.
Speaker 3: When are we gonna stop putting up with the idiots in this country And just say you now it's mandatory to get vaccinated. Their freedom.
Speaker 2: But you're treading on our freedom and you're making other people sick and really you're killing other people. The anti vaxxers, they seem to have a thing for death and home remedies.
Speaker 0: The anti maskers turned anti vaxxers are Not just putting their own lives at risk. If that was the key issue, we could just say that we can watch them compete to win place or show in the Darwin Awards. You have to start doing things for the greater good of society and not for idiots who think that they can do their own research. And don't get me started on the lunatics Who won't take any of the COVID vaccines. Life is too short to be an ass.
Life is way too short to be ignorant of the promise of something that is Helping people worldwide. Maybe you're doing it because, you're you're disconnected or disorganized. Maybe you have some sympathetic psychological reasons, But maybe you're just being antisocial. Oh, you can't shame them. You can't call them stupid.
You can't call them silly. Yes. They are. Those who are not vaccinated We'll end up paying the price. The unvaccinated should be taxed.
They should pay more for healthcare.
Speaker 2: We need to start looking at the choice to remain unvaccinated, the same as we look at driving while intoxicated.
Speaker 0: We're gonna see, and I've said almost 2 types of America. Doctor Fauci said that if hospitals get any more overcrowded, they're gonna have to
Speaker 4: make some very tough choices about who gets an ICU bed.
Speaker 5: I know that choice doesn't seem so tough to me. Vaccinated person Having a heart attack, yes. Come right on in.
Speaker 6: We'll take care of you. Unvaccinated guy who gobbled horse goo, rest in peace, Wheezy.
Speaker 1: Pointing back to the unvaccinated who are really creating a problem in this country. Every death that we are seeing from COVID could have thin, prevented.
Speaker 0: Literally, the only people die are the unvaccinated. And for those of you spreading misinformation, shame on you. Shame on you. I don't know how some of you sleep at night.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
OMG they said ALL the quiet parts out loud! WATER. “…experimenting with the common good…” The World Economic Forum openly discuss the ways in which this wish to control the global population:
Video Transcript AI Summary
COVID has shown that our health is interconnected globally. However, we haven't managed to vaccinate everyone worldwide. Water is a global commons that requires collaboration and is linked to our health. Unlike climate change, water is easily understood by everyone, especially kids who know its importance when playing sports. Engaging citizens and striving for the common good is crucial. We need to learn from past failures and deliver on this issue, while also addressing other challenges.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Based on what you've just said, that's also of course, true with COVID, right? We are all only as healthy as our neighbor is on our street and our city and our region and our nation and globally. Did we solve that? Like, did we actually manage to vaccinate everyone in the world? No.
So highlighting water as a global commons and what it means to work together and see it both out of that kind of global commons perspective, but also this health interest perspective. Cause it is, It does have that parallel. It's not only important, but it's also important because we haven't managed to solve those problems, which had similar attributes. And water is something that people understand. You know, climate change is a bit abstract.
Some people understand it really well. Some understand it a bit. Some just don't understand it. Water, Every kid knows how important it is to have water. When you're playing football and you're thirsty, you need water.
So there's also something about really getting citizen engagement around this and really in some ways, experimenting with this notion of the common good. Can we actually deliver this time in ways that we have failed miserably other times. And hopefully we won't keep failing on the other things, but anyway.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Covid Skeptics from April 2020 on - take a bow, by God you earned it! An incredible compilation from my April-June 2020 Fact Vault, pulled for your pleasure - please retweet and tag your Covid heroes (and the media goons who lied to you most sinisterly!)
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, the speaker reflects on their PowerPoint slide pack from April-May 2020, which contained facts and data about the COVID-19 pandemic. They discuss various points, including the low death rate, the lack of difference between countries with and without lockdowns, the ineffectiveness of masks, and the correlation between flu shots and increased risk of respiratory infections. The speaker emphasizes the importance of not forgetting this information and encourages viewers to share the facts and data to counter mainstream bias. They also express gratitude to their supporters.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Happy Sunday, everyone, and those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it. That's an old one, but so true. So there's a lot of memory holding going on these days, so I thought I'd go back to a pack, a PowerPoint slide pack I had that I was filling in April May 2020 And, I was dumping all the facts and mainstream articles and government data back then into this big reservoir, And then I was taking from them and doing explanatory videos, but it's just amazing to go back and see how self evident all of this viral issue was, The truth of it, the reality, the facts, even back in April May 2020, it was kind of clear as day. So let's take a quick A trip down memory lane, if you will, I think you'll really enjoy just looking back and reminding yourself how smart you were if you got it at the time, and, here we go. I'm going to move fast, and it's a tour de force, I think, and just such a fascinating journey, and so appropriate to do it now years later and make sure it's all on the record.
Here we go. Right guys, here it is Just a selection from, I think, 190 slides, each of which had multiple facts pasted in, but we'll start with this. I did a survey on Twitter back in early May 2020 and I put 4 options. I showed the actual, PCR positive deaths and I Said where do you think the trajectory is going? So option A was maybe 20,000 sad passings, 0.2% population death rate, And I put option B, say 14,000, 0.14%, yeah okay, and I put C, which was lesser, 9,000, 0.09, and I put d which is quite provocative and that was 6,000 or 0.06% death rate in the big Epidemic and I got around 25% choosing each option, maybe around 35% chose D because they'd already been aware of where the data was going and I helpfully put in this red line which I just pulled from country curves and from prior flu seasons, just showing where D might possibly be the one.
Who would guess? What actually turned out was it wasn't even 6,000 from excess mortality, the only measure you can use, It was around 4,000 and that went right out a few months beyond this even, so that was it. So interesting survey This graph I shared again in early May and it was from Johan Hellstrom, government data, and you could see the April going into May maximum spike of this massive pandemic in Sweden, which had no lockdowns, no masks, and kids up 16 in school, and it's no different than prior bad flu seasons, obviously, and, of course, nothing compared to Spanish flu, which hit people in their thirties, not in their eighties, so it was massively worse. And I had this one from 9th April from Oxford University and they were already on the game and this was official from Oxford and they said look, to be honest guys, it's maybe between 0.1% and 0.36% infection fatality rate and turned out to be closer to 0.1 and they showed the studies including the German study which I featured at length at the time, and they also noted that below 70 younger people, You know, it's not really going to be there at all, and over 3 comorbidities are really the people to think about and people who are aged.
Exactly correct Oxford University, 9th April it's still on the web, and they also mentioned well I think I covered these and children near 0, unlike flu, which is reassuring and will drive down the IFR significantly, they were Certainly bang on the money! 9th April 2020 guys! And this one here was in early May I think 2020 or late May 28th May And RT, the Irish national station, made a mistake and put out some data which I'm not sure they really intended doing. Only 689 of the 1649 people who passed with a positive PCR were even hospitalised and just 80 people who died And the whole of Ireland over the whole pandemic had been admitted to intensive care. So in other words, the people who died never even got to see an ICU, but it wasn't a sudden death phenomenon, so how could that be?
Well, it's simple, 84 was the median age of those who died, this is from RTE, And, of course, they didn't get to an ICU because they were already so aged, so morbond, and so severely ill already that there is no point sending them to ICU because they got a positive PCR or they have COVID, and this basically told us everything In May 2020, there you go, and this came out from Justin Hart. I'm going to feature some guys on Twitter who were Absolute heroes with data and he just showed Washington Times May 28th and just pointing out, stop worrying, this is crazy. Some sad passings like a severe flu, that's it folks, nothing to see beyond that. This one here from, oh, Harold of World, he was Harold of Sweden, absolute The champion and the link to the tweet is there and I'll blow it up and it just shows the mortality in the COVID era versus the mortality 2010, 2019 per age group, and as you can see COVID led to a little more mortality in the age at age groups, Oops. But once you get down below 50 and certainly healthy people, but even in general, COVID doesn't add anything.
I mean, it's just infinitesimal And this was the reality and it was shared, let me check the date, May 23rd, I mean, this was so clear. And Oh Fraser Nelson in the Spectator' they were pretty good during Covid, 4th May 2020, and he made the point that Here from Oxford University, they said the lockdown they modeled that the lockdown would drop the or rate Write down. Yeah. So they did a lockdown just in time to pretend it did something, but at the same scale, if you put Sweden's R number With no lockdown, no masks, and kids up 16 in school, they had a similar precipitous collapse, a Gomparts type collapse, like we said, with no lockdown. So that completely disproved lockdown in one go, like, just like that in May 4th May 2020 and the mobility at the time was So shared by another guy and you can see that Sweden had dramatically different impact and all my people in Sweden said that.
A week or two everyone kind of got Scared, and then they kind of said okay, you know, it's a bad flu, and that was it, and that's UK Sweden. So I did this graph and I'm going to go through it real quickly, I made a simple Point in May 2020, Ireland with lockdown, hardest in Europe, Sweden with no lockdown, Ireland had 0.036% apparent Fatality rate with positive PCR, we know it's vastly lower but that's with PCR, 1700 deaths in the country of 5,000,000, 360 in a 1000000 people with a median age of 83 that was the impact, that's it, okay then, and that's what positive PCR of course The excess mortality, the real number, was much much lower. Sweden was 0.052% at the same time, so Ireland was a little lower because they have a young demographic, but anyway and Europe was 0.039% including lots of countries that did bugger all lockdown, but the point I made was Ireland no lockdown, Sweden no lockdown. What would have happened? Well, A scientific person might guess at the time, would Ireland have been a bit worse, more like Sweden?
Well, that's the most you could claim unless you're an anti scientist, but what did the modelling claim? Because it was released. The modelling claimed 28,000 deaths would occur with no lockdown. The modelling claimed that this It would have happened in Ireland without a lockdown. So we know since that there's no benefit from lockdown measurable, but at the time even it was Clear we were being lied to on an epidemic scale if you pardon the pun.
So that was not just bad science which I said at the time it It was bad science, it was utterly corrupt and sinister totalitarian quote science, and good science might have guessed at 0.06 Instead of 0.036, but we know actually it would have been around 0.036 anyway with Swedish lack of lockdown And that's become obvious in the intervening years, but this is remember material from my pack back in May 2020 before we had it all fully worked out. This from Frankfurt Zach, superb, he pointed out the only comparison between Sweden and the Nordics You could do was between like with like areas, same density, urbanization, etc, and there was one right beside them in Copenhagen, And, basically, you had the situation that Sweden with no lockdown versus Copenhagen and Denmark doing all the lockdown nonsense. There was no difference in a like with like comparison, a perfect comparison, and we saw this myriad times afterwards, but even back in, let me see, oh this was June actually, sorry, this is June 29th, but in June this was clear as crystal And you can see the stringency index was pointed out also by Frankfurt Zach, that the stringency index as measured, and I wouldn't believe this, but they were showing Sweden as more stringent by their stupid measures than some of the other Nordics, In any case, so the whole thing was a farce.
None of the data meant squat, and there you go, it was just insanity, but it's interesting to look back at the archives. Now this one here features on the splash screen and this is predictions of COVID nineteen patients in Swedish ICUs versus what actually happened. Here's all the predictions from Imperial College and others. Here's what actually happened. So remember that Sweden didn't just not See higher death from lack of lockdown and they actually achieved the lowest excess death pretty much in the whole of Europe with no lockdown, no masks The kids up to 16 in school, so they did all that.
But their ICU as well, you could say yes, but their ICU might have been worse. No. Their ICU only got to 60% in a bad flu season, so it's just incredible, and this was featured in The Spectator actually, so it's mainstream. It was in mainstream guys, For those of you who didn't get it, New York study shows workers no more likely to be hospitalised by COVID than those who stayed at home, and this was me as well, I believe, in the Telegraph, and that told you all you needed to know about lockdowns. And Cuomo came out scratching his Silly head saying, oh, 2 thirds of patients recently hospitalized have been staying home.
Stay at home order. Hardcore stay at home. So didn't make sense. What didn't make sense because staying home didn't do anything, you donkey. And we saw as well, this man who got a lot of abuse, He pointed out from a study in Spain that people who stopped working versus continue working etc, well the people who continued working in the health profession and Essential professions were less infected than those staying at home and they're probably getting more tested, so he basically pointed out this whole thing is a joke.
And this one was May as well in Ireland, and I don't think they realized what they were saying 'Supermarket staff evade the virus' scratch the head like Cuomo! How could this be? Well you donkeys, staying at home and all that stuff doesn't do anything and the supermarket people were exposed 8 hours a day On their shift indoors with no masks back in this period in the height of the pandemic and nothing happened to them they were no different than anyone else of the same age of weight and metabolic health. So, there was your answer. So, we had all the answers in May, so people said afterwards how did you know?
Well, I'm showing you how I knew and all my network because we had all this data pouring out. So, these 2 guys were heroes, like I said, Harold and Facts and effects. Great stuff. And this was something that came from either of them. I can't remember, but it's pointing out this crucial fact that Sweden had a 2019 with big valleys in mortality creating huge dry tinder effect of elderly frail who Didn't pass as normal.
As sad though that is, that's what happened. So they built up a massive store of elderly frail people and, of course, with a nasty virus and they got a spike, but they still got the lowest mortality in Europe over 2 years, that's it, but this was a massive point. Now, Czech Republic, I pointed out again, I believe, in May, that was mid May, here's the data I pulled from World and Data, and I noted that The lockdown was deployed back here politically, of course, all over Europe, so they put in the lockdown when there were around 30 cases seen per day and no deaths. What happened? Well, we went through the Gompertz curve, entirely natural, of course, but the lockdown was relaxed when there were around 120 cases per day and 7 deaths per day.
So if there's a lot more cases and a lot more action going on, how can you take out a lockdown and have everything go away anyway? That proves de facto that the lockdown did nothing because you can actually take it out and dump it when you've got more cases than when you started it. I mean, This was so obvious and again I'm sorry to be arrogant or cynical but it was so obvious and we had lots of people who were Verifying that when the lockdown came out everything was back to normal: pubs, 60 people having beer, Ireland, everything was shut down for months more because we're Pharma Inc In Europe, we have a lot of other problems. We're a WEF satellite nation essentially, but anyway Slovenia just showed the same thing. Lockdown implemented when nearly nothing was going on, right, to take credit for the gumpurts when it curled over naturally, but the key point again is the lockdown was relaxed when there were actually similar cases per day and more deaths, right, at the peak.
Politically, I think they had some constitutional issue or a case came in in law, a challenge, and they had to dump the lockdown, and then they declare the pandemic over a month later. I mean, this is just farcical, the idea that lockdown did something when it's just following a natural curve. So again, none of this is, dare I say it, misinformation. These are the facts and it was all the mainstream. I showed these graphs a lot from Euro Momo just showing that Sweden really had a Very minimal effect, much lower than heavily locked down countries, I mean, that became apparent later.
And, or the WHO, this is interesting, in late April they lauded lockdown ignoring Sweden as a model, so you had some good people in WHO speaking out the correct side of the mouth and then he had a lot of other denizens, who run the place, who answerable to the WEF and Rockefeller and UN, and they were saying the opposite. So there's a lot of doublespeak from, WHO, of course, of course, and I was showing at the time just pulling the data at the Exact day, yeah, there was nothing different in Sweden. They were middle of the pack. They turned out much better than the rest, but they were middle of the pack. So WHO, when they said this, we're correct, that's just more of the same Sweden, there's no difference, never any difference, Never any difference whether you lock down hard, you mask hard, you don't lock down, you do have kids in school, you have kids out of school, always always the same because we know, aerosol pathogen, it can make no difference.
This one here, what is it? Oh, someone pointed out, I forget who this was actually, oh this person here, you can look it up if you want, that the lockdown when put in in Sweden And Copenhagen, there's a minimum time period before that lockdown can affect the outcome of mortality, obviously, because when you lock down, you stop cases now purportedly, and in a few weeks you'll see the benefit, but Sweden already, a few weeks later, before the lockdown, could do anything, Right? That's certain. Before it could do anything, Sweden was already going way up mortality and Denmark was not. So already it was proven that it was nothing to do with lockdown.
I mean, we we shared this in May. I think that was around May 2020, might have been June, and, again, this other lady, fantastic work as Well, she's still there and she just showed, and I blow it up, lockdown magics, medieval magics. She just pointed out When lockdowns went in in the Nordics and when they would begin to affect the curve and she pointed out the same thing, That Sweden's lockdown and the others, by the time they could affect the curve, Sweden was already dramatically different than the Nordics, So lockdown had nothing to do with it, by definition, de facto. Right? So this is it.
This is all my pack from, May 2020. I won't go through these, but I was just showing the patterns were the same throughout, and then I showed that they matched the normal influenza season, Cold season problems, there was nothing new under the sun, and I took this one out and blew it up and I made the point that The peak week for extra deaths in this year, which was 2018 for influenza, and there's 4 weeks or so of rising and then there's around 10 weeks of falling off. No lockdowns, no distilling, no nothing, right, and around 3,000 deaths in 2018, and blow it up you can see there there's the GOM parts, always been the same back in 1918, same thing, and if you look through the curves there's various curves, but at the end of the day whether lockdown these countries or no lockdown like Iceland, Sweden, it It makes no difference. It's a graph solid, word solid, it's meaningless, there is no correlation. So that was it, it was all there.
Again, from Harald of Sweden, a great guy, he just showed the Asian flu and Hong Kong flu from the Swedish government database. Here were the mortalities at the time for those over the decades before, and April May 2020 compared to December, January or January, December of prior ones, there was no difference. We did nothing back here. Of course, we did nothing back here. Woodstock went ahead, Everyone lived, and we were careful with the elderly, washed our hands, and obviously did what we could, and that's the right thing to do, but that's it in a nutshell.
What do we got left? This one is fun because I didn't realize back then that I had any material relating to the future magical, wondrous, mass medications that Turned out we're going to be coerced and forced on on everyone, but this guy, Shakespearean, a randomized placebo controlled trial in children showed that flu shots increase Fivefold the risk of acute respiratory infections caused by a group of non influenza viruses including coronaviruses and that is 2012, very interesting, so you've got to be really careful with influenza kind of shots because they might increase problems with other viruses. Interesting. What was Boris doing? Oh, we're gonna ram out the flu jab to help with coronavirus, come on!
And someone else just Humorously observed that here is the corona impact against the percentage of flu shot uptake and it just happens to be a straight line. A lot of that has to do with age in the country confounding and other things and metabolic health, but it's interesting that The more flu shots, the more hard hit you were by corona or COVID, so it's an interesting thing to observe and raise an eyebrow. And this here, this was a classic I had way back in the day but, it is July 2020 in fairness But we had all of this stuff going on and the curve kept falling and it was comical. What did they do when it was all over and everyone was moving on and There was nothing going on, they brought in mandatory masks, so a single point proof that there was some real malice behind all the measures When you bring in masks in the middle of the summer when nothing is going on, that's to keep things going until the winter. You got to fill the gap with pandemia nonsense, so they picked masks because they weren't sure what else they could do, and sadly it worked.
I won't say any more about maths and I'm going to finish here right now, but there is a whirlwind tour through my May June 2020 in April, archives my massive powerpoint stuffed with facts like these and I've only showed you Just some I grabbed out just there, but masks this is also from the same slide pack and across the board all of the reputable Sources influenza and even coronaviruses no evidence for masks, so it just nicely illustrates the point I made in the last slide. They brought them in In the absence of evidence, and therefore it was nothing to do with being an effective measure, that is clear as crystal, and you can blame whoever you want for that. So guys, there you are. So important not to allow things to be memory hold, to go back and have everything recorded and on servers Around the world and safe and encrypted, etcetera, and to keep sharing all of the actual facts and data, as I say, no misinformation. Government and mainstream published data back in the period that pretty much answered the whole thing or most of the thing that mattered.
So, as always, thanks so much to my Patreon and PayPal supporters they allow me to continue to work on continuing to pull all the data and all the best experts Kind of ideas and analyses and do my own analyses and always get a clear picture of reality. I mean it's as simple as that a clear picture of actual reality that cuts through the mainstream nonsense and bias that we're awash with today. So getting the reality out and the facts is really important, and I thank you so much for supporting me in doing that, And anyone else who can help support this mission, please do consider giving a little donation or some support to my Patreon or PayPal or through any other means. So thank you guys.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
My short and super-shareable vid on "Top #CO2 / #Climate FACTS" - so clear and decoded Premiere is now here on X - not YT (X gets it due to X being the a scientifically honest outfit...!) Huge kudos to #CO2Coalition Org - slides and links in tweets below
Video Transcript AI Summary
This video discusses various facts about CO2 and climate change. The speaker, a chemical engineer, presents information from the CO2Coalition.org website, highlighting key points. These include the long-term trend of decreasing CO2 levels, the diminishing warming effect of CO2 as its concentration increases, the benefits of CO2 for plant growth, and the natural cycles of glacial advances and interglacial periods. The speaker also mentions that current warming trends are not unusual or unprecedented, and that models used by organizations like the IPCC may overstate the impact of CO2. The video concludes by emphasizing the importance of empirical data and real-world evidence in understanding climate change.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hey all. Welcome to the home of hard science as always, and every now and then I do a compilation of facts that illustrate a current issue of great importance to ourselves, the world, our children. And one of those is CO2 and climate and the current theories that are going around and laws being enacted, which have quite horrific, implications. So I have been looking into this area for the last few months and being a chemical engineer, I don't find it too difficult, in fairness, not being arrogant, but I also leverage experts in the field like Professor John Christie of Alabama and many many others and I've leveraged all the work they've done over 40 years in this to not have to do it all myself from the ground up. So I think I know where I am now pretty much and here I'm going to go through a whole bunch of facts, a top ten if you will, from the CO2Coalition dot org.
I'll put the website on the screen and they have put together a fantastic series of actual climate and CO2 facts, right, indisputable, and no one has countered them. And when you put them all together, and I'll explain a little context, I think you'll be able to form your own opinions and have much better conversations with others about this important topic. So please do subscribe and share this, and I'll put a link down below to all of the graphs which you will now understand after I've gone through them. You'll have them fully internalized. So here we go.
So here's the website co2coalition.org, and you can go to the about and see all the great and professionals involved and forward slash facts is what I'm going to go through today. It's an incredible resource. So the first fact, one, We have a 140,000,000 year trend of decreasing CO2, dangerously you could argue, because if we got down to 200 ppm then you'd have elimination of vegetative life on the planet. So this means no animals, no vegetation in extremes if you go well below 200. So we're heading to a dangerous place and luckily we got down to around 200 and something and we bump back up to around 400 based on fossil fuel being burnt, so we've slightly redressed the balance.
That's one way of looking at it. Fact 2. The warming effect of each molecule of CO2 declines as its concentration increases. This is really important. Any engineer seeing this and hopefully many laypeople will understand its massive import.
So the first 100 PPM of CO 2 in the atmosphere does have x warming effect. Right? But when you add another 100 PPM of c o two, you get much less extra warming effect than you did for the first 100. And When you get up to 300 or 400 of where we are now, adding 100 really adds very little warming effect. So happy physics.
Happy days for all of us. Anyone can see that going up a few more 100 adds booger all extra warming effect and it's already a tiny percentage of the warming effect on the planet in the first case. Remember, CO2 is at 400 bpm which is for 100 of 1% of the atmosphere and as you add more it has a diminishing vanishing effect on any warming. This is it' very important fact 2. Fact 3: first and foremost, CO2 is plant food and all the whiners say oh you're over emphasizing that', but it should be emphasized if you increase CO2 from 150 PPM in the greenhouse up to 300 and up to 450, which is where we are now in the world, with a greening world, you get much more plant growth.
So it's a huge benefit for plants and we depend on plants because plants feed the animals that we eat and we eat the plants. So this is all beneficial. Very important fact 3. Fact 4. In the last 4 glacial advances, the CO2 level was dangerously low and that's absolutely true.
So you can see over the last 400000 years, we've got a cycle that's repeatable of glacial events and it's based on a cycle that we'll explain in the lower fact down the list, but you can see this dramatic sawtooth pattern and, at the end of each glacial cycle, you head towards a very dangerous low in CO2 for plant life, but luckily, nature and physics steps in and it goes back up to a healthier level. So, yes, we've added more than normal, so this graph is true, we've added quite a bit, nearly 200 PPM in the last 50 years or so, but the big question is not this it's what relevance has that got? So this is a very important fact 4, and fact 5, CO2 emissions began accelerating in mid-twentieth century and that's just shown here on the graph, but the question is what's the relevance of that? Things change all the time, but what's the relevance? So we get into that.
Fact 6, our current geologic period, Quaternary, has the lowest average CO2 levels in the history of the earth, and here it is. Were down on the floor. So in the Tertiary, Cretaceous, and even in the Jurassic, where you had all the dinosaurs and super mammals going across the planet full of forests, and booming life, you know, that was up at 2,000 PPM, and the next century we're not going to get anywhere within a mile of that, but the whole planet was booming and way back in the Cambrian explosion where all the kind of animal and all the life exploded on the earth. It was up at around 6,000 and that's when life exploded. So, come on, don't be taking the mickey here, Don't be trying to come out with nonsense and tell us that this is catastrophic down here, it's absurd, so I really love fact 6.
Fact 7, current CO2 levels are near record lows. We are CO2 impoverished, and there's a bit of kind of redundancy here, but here shows again 600,000,000 years. You can see the Cambrian here in different data. It was actually up near 8,000. That's when life exploded out of the earth, and Steve got the Jurassic as well and it was up at 23000 when the planet was just bursting thing with foliage and, big dinosaurs and stuff, yeah, and here we are down here on the very floor of CO2.
So anyone even suggesting co2 going up and down in this tiny band is going to make a difference. They've got a lot of explaining to do and they should start by explaining their modeling, because it's modeling that's used, right? That might sound familiar to people who went through COVID, modeling was used, it's always used. Fact 8, more CO2 means more plant growth, and again this is a repeat but it's just and figures here showing the various plants, beans, tubers, etc, that get massive increase in growth, and this is commercial data, and you get a huge payback by increasing just a few 100 ppm of CO2. So this is great for everyone, right, especially with those who have a plant based diet, but animal eaters too.
Fact 9, more co2 helps to feed more people worldwide and this kind of follows on from the last one, and green production is breaking records. NASA have published that the earth is greening hugely because the co2 is rising a little, with what we're putting in there, so this is all a good news story in FACT nine. Where's the bad news? I'm not sure. I think we have to go and check the models of the UN, right, and the IPCC who are all funded from certain individuals, and we won't get into that.
Ten. Modern warming began more than 300 years ago. This is an important fact, so you can see here back in the 16, 1700, they had thermometers and it's been going along and rising, right, particularly you could say since the 1800s, but this trend broadly speaking any engineer who claimed that the CO2 going up was causing this would be laughed out of class, but unfortunately we don't have enough critics out there these days. FACT 11, melting glaciers confirm modern warming predated increases of CO2 and we know we're coming out of last ice age, so the glacier shortening begins around 1800s, and then it continues, and this has happened again and again over of the past tens and hundreds of thousands of years. We showed that graph earlier, so here you are well before the CO2, here's where the CO2 is increasing and the vector has not changed.
FACT 12, rising sea levels confirm modern warming predated increased CO2, and and here we can see back in the 1800s with natural cycles and there's geological movement of the plates as well, there's myriad factors, but they ain't CO2, so here it is rising from way back here, they're natural cycles. Fact 13, temperatures change dramatically during the past 10000 years even. Never mind 200,000 or 400. Right? Here's the temperature plot for the last 10,000 alone, and it's all over the shop because there's myriad different natural phenomena occurring, and CO2, it's the least of them, so this is only up to 200,007 by the way, and it, as we showed earlier, continues up.
As Professor John Christie in a recent interview I'll link below. Fantastic! He spent 40 to 50 years mapping data and he's published papers and developed a NASA satellite atmospheric temperature system and he said the last 50 years we've gone up 0.5 and also we've gone up 1.3 since the late 1800s and all we've got from that is more prosperity, hugely increased life expectancy, a ninety plus reduction in climate events and we've pulled out billions of people out of poverty and our GDP has gone up massively. So all the good stuff has happened with 1.3 degrees, and what we're saying another 0.5 or 1 degree in the coming 60, 70 years, it's suddenly gonna blow everything up, come on, pull the other one. FACT 14, interglacials usually the last 10000 to 15000 years.
Ours is 11000 years old, so we're at the tail end of an interglacial, and we can see here we're coming out of it, and we came out of it way back 150,000 years ago and we shot up out of it in temperature 250,000 years ago and 350,000 years ago, so this pattern is clear as crystal, and we'll go through the Milankovitch cycles which kind of largely drive this, but to say that our temperature here is to do it all, you'd better show us the model, the black box model that buried within us is the magic, You show us your magic, sons! So fact 15, the last interglacial was 8 degrees warmer than today, polar bears survived, Greenland didn't melt, and in Jurassic even more so, and again they just have the data here. Here's the moderating warming, right, starting around 10000 years ago primarily, we showed these graphs at many different scales, and here's the EMU warming back here, and it was higher temperature actually, and nothing bad happened. 16, the current warming trend is neither unusual nor unprecedented. Absolutely, and we've kind of showed this already.
So here's various kind of points in time, and we can see here that we're heading up now, but again we're following the chaotic cycle of nature, and this is a 10,000 year graph of course, and that was from the Greenland ice core data by the way. Some of these are from ice core data, some of them going back to 1600 I showed you earlier, are actually using thermometers. Fact 17, and don't worry we're nearly finished, the current warming trend is neither unusual nor unprecedented part 2, and here we have a thousand up to 2000 AD, and basically you can see little ice age here goes up again, you know, this is moving along its own natural cycles and and that's it, and it was warmer back here in the Medieval Warm Period, and this is from, I don't see the ref there, this from ice cores as well, also I would guess. FACT 18: Earth's orbit and tilt drive glacial interglacial changes, and these are the Milankovitch Cycles and these are crucial. So, the earth's orbit, the eccentricity, the precession and the tilt of the earth all interact together to influence how much energy comes from the sun to earth, and it's the sun that provides all the heat guys, right?
So, as we change orbits and tilts moving through the solar system and around the sun we get these huge changes and the CO2 is just trivial in the face of these massive cyclic shifts. FACT 19: We are living in one of the coldest periods in all of earth's history! Believe it or not, that's a fact, you know, and again I showed you the Jurassic earlier, tatious and tertiary, you know, we're down in the cold space, and even if we go up a bit more, as is naturally occurring now, the question is, the proof, the onus of proof is that that will be a problem, but all we've got are, begins with 'M', models, yes, models. FACT 20 for most Earth's history is around 10 degrees Celsius warmer than it was today, and again similar graph it's just making that point, you know, that's just the way it is. In fact, it shot up the temperature and then we had the Cambrian and life exploded, so here we are down here, come on, come on.
FACT 21 IPCC models have overstated warming up to 3 times too much, and yes, Professor John Christie, this may be his data, he shows multiple balloon satellite and other re analyses, and here's what actually happened, but since the 90s and the IPCC, which comes from UN, which kind of comes from Rockefeller, I told that story elsewhere, and the League of Nations and Club of Rome and all these groups. Since the funding of the scientists towards catastrophe came in, the models all show catastrophe, but we know the real world data says that the models are nonsense and the real world data shows this steadily warming trend and we'll see it continue up, but again no reason to expect a major problem, in fact probably benefits as I've pointed out. 22 for human advancement: warmer is better than colder, and there's no question about this. So, we have 90 something percent reduction in catastrophic weather impacts since 1930s. This is published, and one reason is technology.
We are in a nice warmer place now, we're happier and we have technology to not have floods, cause major damage, etc, but on the fires, the vast majority are set by humans and lack of proper forestation management has caused more of those to begin to come up, but they're human driven, not co2, they're driven directly by human policies and arson to be quite honest. So here we are at this temperature and another thing to point out, I don't think it's in the facts, but I would point out that around 10 times more people die from cold conditions than from too warm, so we're already stacked heavily towards wanting a little more warmth, not less. Fact 23 and we'll stop at 25, CO2 increases enhancing corn production a lot! So this is on the record 2016 published, so we're getting more food, and that again is, unfortunately for IPCC, a good thing, so they have to kind of dissemble and obfuscate even more in the light of this. FACT 24: An ideal temperature is not that of 150 years ago, and again We kind of touched this already, so crop failures, pestilence and all is what happened when temperatures were colder, so we're actually better broth now and better off even probably if we're a little higher like 0.5 or 1 degree more, I'll take it.
FACT 25: More CO2 means moister soil, moister plants, and better plant growth, so when plants get a little more CO2, that they actually use less moisture, that's why we're seeing deserts undesertifying if that's a word. NASA has validated this around the world, so again all these great effects until you go to the modeling that shows disaster, You can't find any disaster, you're gonna only find positives, so real life data it's all positive and the black box models it's a disaster' go figure! FACT 26 ideal temperature is not that of 150 years, yeah we've kind of been through that one, and I said I'd stop at 25, but I'll just have a quick look. Yeah, this is interesting, after World War 2, CO2, of course, rose massively, 'temperatures actually fell' depending on the data set, etc. You're talking fractions of a degree, so you could argue what's the difference, and anything else I want to show you, no, droughts are not increasing in the US from NOAA, so that's important, and also the 2021 IPCC official report clearly calls out around the page 160, that there is no credible evidence linking man made climate change to any natural occurrences like floods and droughts etc, so the IPCC themselves quietly say that but the head of the UN Guterres says now that the planet is boiling, not warming anymore, it's boiling, the seas are boiling, so again political, geopolitical, nothing to do with science, and theirs for droughts from NOAA, they're not increasing, and globally droughts are actually kind of in decline as I think I mentioned earlier.
So that's it, that's the summary of the data. I'm going to finish and show you again the website, and I'll link it below, and I gather these graphs together in an easy format in powerpoint for you co2coalition.org/facts and do take the climate quiz as well, and if you answer according to the way I've been interpreting this, you'll probably get a high score I would guess, and rightly based on hard science and empirical real world data. Well, there we have it folks. So the facts, as always, tend to speak for themselves, I would suggest. And, again, we We leverage experts all the way and the co2coalition.org headed up by a Princeton professor in the appropriate fields, physics, and molecular interactions, transmission of energy, etcetera.
So it's perfect and huge, quantity of other professors, doctors in the field, who are also with them in the CO2 Alliance. So I think it's a great resource. The link's down below. And also, I've gathered together the graphs I've just gone through. As always, thanks so much to my Patreon and PayPal supporters who enabled me to get the facts in front of the people and hopefully help enable discussion around these important things and anyone else who can hop on board and support.
It keeps my investigative and scientific journalism alive and getting the content out there to help the people. So thanks so much.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
A stunning 5 minutes, I challenge you to declare otherwise. Anyone who doesn't understand how obviously fraudulent this was...deserves everything these sociopaths have in store for them H/T to @wideawake_media for this one:
Video Transcript AI Summary
In 2010, the Rockefeller Foundation published a document called "Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development." One scenario, called "lockstep," predicted a pandemic hitting in 2012. It described how even prepared nations were overwhelmed, economies suffered, and global supply chains broke. China, however, fared better due to its quick imposition of quarantine measures. The document also mentioned that other countries imposed strict rules and restrictions, leading to increased oversight and control. The video then discusses a pandemic simulation called Event 201, held in October 2019, which predicted the coronavirus outbreak. It raises questions about the coincidence and the ability to control information. The video suggests that everything was planned and in place before 2020.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This document was published in 2010. It's called Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development. This was put out by the Rockefeller Foundation. This first scenario is called lockstep. In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit.
Even the most pandemic prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20% of the global population and killing 8,000,000 in just 7 months. The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies. International mobility of both people and goods breached to a halt, breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers. Even in developed countries, containment was a challenge.
However, a few countries did fare better, China in particular. The Chinese government's quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near hermetic sealing off of its borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post pandemic recovery. It's a plan, folk. It's all a plan. This is all according to plan.
Speaker 1: Highly intrusive real time tracking of a largely compliant population. That was the key to the eventual lifting of the lockdown in Wuhan.
Speaker 2: China did a lot of things right. Southern countries Did respond very quickly and get their testing in place, and they avoided the incredible economic pain.
Speaker 0: This document continues from 2010. I remind you, China's government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure during the pandemic. National leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body temperature checks of the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets even after the pandemic faded. This more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. By citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty and their privacy to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability.
Here. Citizens were more tolerant and even eager for top down direction and oversight. In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms. Biometric IDs for all since, for example, in many developed countries enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily stored both order and more importantly, economic growth. Isn't that uncanny?
Isn't this incredible that in 2010. They were predicting that this exact thing would happen. I mean, sure, you can go back to event two zero one. Now let's talk about a little thing called event two zero one. The John Hopkins Center For Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted events 201, a high level pandemic exercise on October 18, 2019 in New York, New York.
Speaker 3: On behalf of our center and our partners, the world economic forum and the bill and Melinda Gates foundation. The goal of the event to a one exercise is to illustrate the potential consequences of a pandemic and the kinds of societal and economic challenges they would pose.
Speaker 0: They're running a simulation of what they think would happen and what their response to a pandemic outbreak would be. Again, this simulation that they're running happened in October of 2019 and was about the coronavirus. When they say caps, in this video they're talking about the coronavirus. They knew what the outbreak would be 3 months before it actually happened. Are they just that good at guessing?
I'll leave it up to you to decide.
Speaker 4: GAPS is a serious respiratory disease. More than half of the recognized Cases have required hospital care creating a huge strain on health care systems. Some people only exhibit mild flu like symptoms, not requiring treatment and in the hospital. Alarmingly, those people are able to walk around and spread the virus, not realizing they are doing so. Global health experts have highlighted that this and misinformation are wreaking havoc on the CAPS response.
Speaker 2: How can governments, international businesses, international organizations ensure that reliable information is getting to the public and prevent highly damaging and false information to the extent that's possible about the pandemic from spreading and causing deepening crisis around the world.
Speaker 3: Twitter and Facebook are reporting they've identified and deleted a disturbing number of accounts dedicated to spreading disinformation about the Outbreak. To me, it is clear countries need
Speaker 1: to make strong efforts to manage both myths and disinformation. This is The huge problem that's going to keep us from ending the pandemic and might even lead to the fall of government. If the solution means rolling and reducing access to information.
Speaker 0: I think it's the right choice. Is anyone else feeling a little bit incredulous? It's just a rather odd coincidence, is it not? That you would know exactly which virus it was and exactly what you needed to do to prevent disinformation and misinformation. If you come out and say, hey, it looks like this was awful planned.
What do you think they're gonna do? They're gonna come in and go, this is the type of disinformation we were talking about. This is the type of misinformation we need protect against these all plans. They have the rollout planned out perfectly. And the hubris, the confidence that they have in their ability to control humanity, that they think that they can just do it completely openly.
Speaker 5: The issues we will be dealing with over the next hours may be tabletop exercises today, but they address real and critical threats. Those are exercises today, but they address real and critical threats, which we at WHO take very seriously. I fully expect that we will be confronted by a fast moving, highly lethal pandemic of respiratory pathogen. Many countries will be affected at the same time. This is particularly true with the respiratory pathogen as they are often transmitted by asymptomatic persons.
Speaker 2: I think, an epidemic either naturally caused or intentionally caused is the most likely thing to cause say 10,000,000 excess deaths. There is no question that there will be a surprise outbreak today. The greatest risk A global catastrophe doesn't look like this. Instead, it looks like this. If anything Kills over 10,000,000 people in the next few decades.
It's most likely to be a highly infectious virus.
Speaker 6: You gave this This chilling warning that the world was in danger at some point of a major pandemic. People watching that talk now, you know, the hass turns up in the back
Speaker 7: of their neck. It is it is exactly what we're living through. This is not a case of random events that's going on now. This is the culmination of a vast amount of time and preparation to reach this point. Everything was in place before they press the button on 2020.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Utter brilliance and profound insight from Nick Hudson - again. Please retweet so that people can grasp the basic rule - of how to deal with today's elite-funded feudal scam system:
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes that if a problem is presented as a global crisis, it is likely a scam. They argue that global crises are often fabricated, using non-existent or local problems to create a sense of urgency. The speaker cites the COVID policy response and the climate change crisis as examples. They claim that these crises are used to push for global authority and control. The speaker also notes that dissenting voices are often silenced, and science is presented as static knowledge rather than an evolving activity. They conclude that these patterns are proof of a scam, and people should be aware of them.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What do you see? Do you think there is a parallel because between both, COVID and climate? Yes. Let's take a step back. The general rule of thumb that I believe everybody should adopt is that if any problem is being presented as a global crisis, Then it is a scam.
And the pattern that we are confronted with is really the fabrication of global crises. The presentation either of non existent problems or small local problems as being General global crises, that fabrication followed by the assertion that the only solutions that are permissible Our global ones that require a global authority, global control. That is the general pattern that we are up against. The COVID policy response was one of those. Look at what happened to countries like Sweden or Tanzania who tried to push back against the orthodoxy, the new orthodoxy.
And The the climate crisis, the climate change crisis is another example where we are told that the biggest threat to the world It's this molecule, CO 2, and that an increase in the level of this molecule will cause an increase in temperature, and that that temperature increase will be bad for us, And that the only thing we can do is consume fewer fossil fuels fuels and less energy. That's fitting the pattern exactly. The other the other things you can observe is instead of presenting science as an ongoing evolving activity, it is presented in terms of Static knowledge, consensus. And you see the cancellation and censorship of dissident voices rather than engagement with them. These patterns are proof of a scam.
That is what people need to understand. Whenever something is presented as the science, As a consensus, it is a scam. You do not have to go and get engaged in all of the minutiae of the scientific principles and the models and The measurements at all. You can know with absolute certainty that you are dealing with a scam when the scent is suppressed.
@BAM_PRESS - BAM!
. ⚠️ @NickHudsonCT / @PanData19 nous alerte ⚠️ CLIMATE AND COVID, SAME GLOBALIST SCAM ? CLIMAT ET COVID, MÊME ESCROQUERIE MONDIALISTE ? complete INTERVIEW complète here/ici 👉 https://bam.news/interviews-tv-2/itw-nick-hudson-pandemies-donnees-et-analyses-panda or/ou 👉 https://odysee.com/@BAM!:3/ITW-Nick-Hudson-pandemie-donnees-analyse:f @peter_castleden @bell00david…
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker suggests that both COVID and climate change are presented as global crises to manipulate people. They claim that these crises are fabricated and used to push for global control and authority. The speaker points out that countries like Sweden and Tanzania faced backlash for questioning the mainstream narrative on COVID. Similarly, they argue that the climate change crisis is based on the idea that CO2 is the biggest threat and that consuming fewer fossil fuels is the only solution. The speaker also highlights the suppression of dissenting voices and the presentation of science as static knowledge rather than an evolving activity. They conclude that these patterns are proof of a scam.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What do you see? Do you think there is a parallel because of be between both COVID and and climate? Yes. Let's let's take a step back. The general rule of thumb that I believe everybody should adopt is that if any problem is being presented as a global crisis, Then it is a scam.
And the pattern that we are confronted with is really the fabrication of global crises, the presentation either of non existent problems or small local problems as being general global crises. That fabrication followed by the assertion that the only solutions that are permissible Our global ones that require a global authority, global control. That is the general pattern that we are up against. The COVID policy response was one of those. Look at what happened to countries like Sweden or Tanzania who tried to push back against The orthodoxy the new orthodoxy.
And the the climate crisis, the climate change crisis is another example where we are told that the biggest threat to the world is this molecule, CO 2, and that an increase in the level of this molecule will cause an increase in temperature and that that temperature increase will be bad for us and that the only thing we can do is consume fewer fossil fuels fuels and less energy. That's Fitting the pattern exactly. The other the other things you can observe is instead of presenting science as an ongoing evolving Tivity, it is presented in terms of static knowledge, consensus. And you see the cancellation and censorship of dissident voices rather than engagement with them. These patterns are proof of a scam.
That is what people need to understand. Whenever Something is presented as the science, as a consensus. It is a scam. You do not have to go and get engaged in all of the minutiae of the scientific principles and the models and the measurements at all. You can know with absolute certainty that you are dealing with a scam when the scent is suppressed.
BAM! News - ITW Nick Hudson : Pandémies - Données et analyses (PANDA)
Nick Hudson - International Covid Summit III, cofondateur de Pandemics Data and Analytics (PANDA)
bam.news
ITW Nick Hudson : Pandémies - Données et analyses (PANDA)
Lors du "International Covid Summit III" qui s'est déroulé au Parlement européen, Nick Hudson, cofondateur de Pandemics Data and Analytics (PANDA), s'est entretenu avec BAM!
Au cours de cet entretien...
odysee.com
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Listen carefully, very carefully. This is the most important climate change clip you will ever watch - and only 4mins long. Watch and judge yourself. ABSORB the graph shown. THINK on it. USE your brain. Everything else I will explain over the coming months.
Video Transcript AI Summary
This video discusses the Greenland ice core project, which has provided valuable data on the climate history of the region. By drilling through the ice sheet and analyzing the temperature variations, scientists have reconstructed temperatures from the past 10,000 years. The findings show that around 4,000 years ago, temperatures were 2.5 degrees warmer than today. The temperatures then gradually decreased until the Roman age, after which they increased again during the medieval warm period. The lowest point in the last 10,000 years occurred around 1650 AD. The Little Ice Age ended about 140 years ago, and various sources, including carbon dating and cave measurements, confirm the pattern of alternating warm and cold periods. The video concludes by highlighting the challenge of determining whether the temperature increase in the 20th century is due to natural variation or human influence.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This ice is from the Viking Age, around year 1000, also called the Medieval Warm Period. We believe that in Greenland, the medieval warm period was about 1 and a half degrees warmer on average than than today.
Speaker 1: Nordgrip, The Greenland ice core project is being reopened to drill the last few meters through the ice sheet to the rock beneath the research station. The ice core, over 3 kilometers in length, has been hauled up to the surface piece by piece and contains important data on the history of the climate of the It bears the fingerprints of climatic conditions Over more than 120,000 years.
Speaker 0: When we remove or drill the ice core, we leave a hole and we insert a thermometer in the hole, we are able to map out the temperature through the 3 kilometer ice sheet. Now that temperature, if we do it precisely enough, a thousandth of a degree accuracy, then The ice has not forgotten how cold or warm it was on the surface at the time the snow fell. So using those temperatures, We have been able to reconstruct the temperatures of the last 10000 years. Here we have our picture of The temperature reconstructions that we have from Greenland in the graphical form. And if we go back along this axis, it's going back in time.
This is the last 8000 years we have plotted here. On this axis, we have the temperatures at the sites in in Greenland and we can see that if we Go back from now about 4000 years ago, we would have temperatures up here for about 4000 years that were 2 and a half degrees warmer on average than today. Now as we go approach our time, we can see that In the period between 4000 years ago and back to the period 2000 years ago, which is actually the Roman age, The temperatures have been decreasing in Greenland by 2a half degrees. Then the temperatures increased gradually up to a Maximum point around the medieval warm period, we call it a 1000 years ago and then temperatures declined and Goes down to minimum around 1650 AD, comes back up a little in the 18th century and then around 18 Seventy five, we have the lowest point in the last 10, 8000 years right here, and that matches exactly the time when meteorological observations
Speaker 1: started. Other core samples from elsewhere in Greenland confirm that the Little Ice Age ended about a 140 years ago, At the coldest point in the last 10000 years, the natural pronounced alteration of warm and cold periods Back in time, has also been confirmed elsewhere in the Northern Hemisphere. Carbon 14 dating of organic matter from peat bogs and tree rings confirms the pattern. So do data from site type caves in China and measurements From North Africa.
Speaker 0: The problem is that we I agreed completely that we have had a global temperature increase in the 20th century. Yes. But an increase from what? Probably an increase from the lowest point we've had for the last 10000 years. And this means that it will be very hard indeed to prove whether the increase of temperature in the 20th century was Man made or it's a natural variation.
That will be very hard because we made ourselves an extremely poor experiment. We started to observe meteorology at the coldest spot in the last 10000
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1mjG_F8ppw
Video Not Available
youtube.com
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
It's like Covid all over again...open discussion is suppressed at the expense of ideology. Shocking madness, well explained here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kV9exFwEXc
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
The masks were the single most absurd thing that happened during the Covid anti-science era Lockdowns caused more damage though, and were pretty much as absurd. Everything else was absurd too. It was all an epic fraud. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11982039/Face-masks-raise-risk-stillbirths-testicular-issues-cognitive-decline-study-says.html
Face masks may raise risk of stillbirths, study warns
The German academics who carried out the research believe masks create a pocket of dead space between the mouth and mask, which traps the toxic gas.
dailymail.co.uk
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
The post that got me banned off LinkedIn for the past couple of years - watch and see! 🤨 Original caption: "The absolute, ultimate Tony Blair video - only 2 minutes to explain the full context of the 'medical permits to live your life'..."
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker suggests distinguishing between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Another person questions this, arguing that it infringes on human rights and that new variants have little impact. They present data from the UK to support their point. The first speaker emphasizes the importance of maximizing freedom for vaccinated individuals, especially for travel, as an incentive to get vaccinated. The second person accuses the first speaker of having ulterior motives, mentioning their connections to the pharmaceutical industry and past controversies. They strongly oppose the first speaker's involvement in public health and the protection of rights. The first speaker concludes by stating that vaccination is the path to freedom.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The paper we're putting out today is is to say we should really distinguish between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.
Speaker 1: Boy, you sinister orange man. You mean takeaway our inalienable human rights based on a bad flu equivalent?
Speaker 0: If we if we do have to adjust some of the freedoms because of the rising pressure from new variants
Speaker 1: Adjust some of our freedoms, You mean take away our inalienable human rights. And based on the variance, the variance that the science has shown make Very little difference in any case. Look at the data. Here's UK. You can see the collapsed deaths per million down to practically zero.
This is the scary scariance zone. The last few weeks, UK has gone up to around 60 plus percent of the scary scariance, but nothing has happened. So with the empirical data, de facto proving that the scariants are not a major problem, What on earth are you talking about? And in terms of case fatality rate, here's the scary end zone, But nothing's really happened and that's what the science has already said.
Speaker 0: Then it's important at least to ensure that those people who are vaccinated have the maximum freedom they can. And I think that could also be done for travel as well. I think that's why it's important to give people a real incentive To get vaccinated.
Speaker 1: Oh, there's incentives going on here alright, but not what you're saying. You and your institute, right, who are you connected to? What drives your zeal in this matter? It's not health, that's for sure. I see you got quite a lot of money from the pharma quarter, and so do a lot of other people causing a lot of problems with freedoms.
And you're in with the usual suspects. Right? Yeah. Altogether. We're all together in this, and you've been in the papers Ostensibly, a while back with the Iraq war as a de facto war criminal.
Loads of articles and everyone knows about this, The deceit. Even a movie was made about it. Very popular, but sometimes censored, I believe. So someone like you should never be left within a 1000000000 miles of public health and certainly nowhere near our inalienable freedoms and rights. Let's finish with 1 last clip from this sinister, Sinister man.
Speaker 0: People have got to understand vaccination is going to be in the end, your route to liberty.
@FatEmperor - Ivor Cummins
Enjoy the Tony Blair movie! https://odysee.com/@IvorCummins:f/War-Criminal-Blair-Short-Horror-Comp:0
"The Killings of Tony Blair" Movie - Explains the Coronapsychosis Too!
Sample this stunner of a documentary - then PLEASE support the makers by paying a few dollars for it HERE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZChV7mo9E0
odysee.com