TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @VanEmmerickKris
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
De klimaatveranderingshoax‼️ Randall Carlson, een onderzoeker met meer dan 40 jaar ervaring, legt uit hoe de hoax is ontstaan‼️ https://t.co/LQHmTOj0wF
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker argues that the current climate is not warmer than it has been many times in history, noting that our baseline is now at the lowest carbon dioxide level in six hundred million years. They assert that, in terms of temperature change, the IPCC’s first report of 1992 showed the middle medieval warm period was warmer than the present. The speaker claims this did not fit the narrative, so by the time the 1996 report appeared, a “completely contrived graph” called the Hochist was used.
According to the speaker, the Hochist graph involved removing the medieval warm period and the Little Ice Age. Instead of a graph that rose and fell with historical variability, they say the graph was flattened and then an instrumental record was added at the end that appears to indicate a rapid rise. The speaker emphasizes that those who challenge or call out this manipulation are not receiving media coverage.
The speaker also points to substantial financial influence, stating that billions of dollars are going into the entire climate change narrative. In summary, the claims center on a belief that historical climate fluctuations were downplayed or erased in influential graphs, replaced with a narrative supported by instrumental records that show a sharp rise, and that critics of this portrayal are marginalized in the media while large sums are invested in promoting the climate change narrative.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The climate right now is no warmer than it's been many times throughout history. Our our baseline is now the lowest that carbon dioxide has been in six hundred million years. As far as, temperature change, the IPCC's first report of 1992 showed that the middle medieval warm period was warmer than the present. Well, this didn't fit the narrative. So by the time the 1996 report came out, it was a a completely contrived graph called the Hochist.
So what they did was they got rid of the medieval warm period and the little ice age. And so when the instead of the graph doing this, they flatten it out and then they add instrumental record on the end that looks like it's going way up. The point is is that the people that are calling them out on it are not getting the the media coverage. You know? Because look, at this point, there's billions of dollars going into the whole climate change narrative.
reSee.it AI Summary
Generaal Wesley Clark onthult het plan dat na 11 september werd gepresenteerd, waarin zeven landen, waaronder Iran als laatste, moesten worden uitgeschakeld. Dit sluit aan bij het Groot-Israël-project. De details volgen in de volgende delen.
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
Generaal Wesley Clark bespreekt het plan dat hem direct na 11 september werd getoond om zeven landen uit te schakelen, eindigend met Iran. Iran is nummer zeven. Het Groot-Israël-project. 👇🏻🇮🇷👇🏻🇺🇸👇🏻🇮🇱👇🏻🇮🇷👇🏻🇺🇸👇🏻🇮🇱👇🏻 https://t.co/83EHXfe3t9
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
Deel 2…👇🏻🇮🇷👇🏻🇺🇸👇🏻🇮🇱👇🏻 https://t.co/TbucAOWvFF
Video Transcript AI Summary
Iran viewed the U.S. presence in Iraq as both a blessing and a threat. While the U.S. removed Saddam Hussein, Iran believed it was next on the "hit list."
Iran was deeply involved inside Iraq due to its vital interests, given the million lives lost in the war with Iraq and its long, unsecurable border. They tolerated attacks on the Baathists and Saddam Hussein's capture, but built their own network of influence, providing military assistance and training to insurgents and militias.
Iran's engagement has been continuous, with some actions legitimate, like offering medical assistance, and others aimed at gaining influence. The U.S. administration has refused to discuss Iran's perceptions, fearing backlash from its right-wing base and legitimizing a government it seeks to overthrow. Iran likely believes it is already at war with the U.S., given the U.S. has asserted the need for regime change, appropriated $75,000,000 for it, and is allegedly supporting terrorist groups.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: When you look at Iran, you say is it a replay? It's not exactly a replay, but here's the truth. That Iran from the beginning has seen that the presence of the United States in Iraq was a threat. A blessing because we took out Saddam Hussein and the Baathists. They couldn't handle them.
We could took care of it for them, but also a threat because they knew that they were next on the hit list. And so, of course, they got engaged. They lost a 1000000 people during the war with Iraq. And they've got a long and unprotectable unsecurable border. So it was in their vital interest to be deeply involved inside Iraq.
They tolerated our attacks on the Baathist. They were happy we captured Saddam Hussein, but they're building up their own network of influence and to cement it, they occasionally give some military assistance and training and advice either directly or indirectly to both the insurgents and to the militias. And in that sense, it's not exactly parallel because there has been, I believe, continuous Iranian engagement. Some of it legitimate, some of it illegitimate. I mean, you can hardly fault Iran because they're offering to do eye operations for Iraqis who need medical attention.
That's not an offense that you can go to war over perhaps, but it is an effort to gain influence. And the administration has stubbornly refused to talk with Iran about their perception. In part because they don't want to pay the price with their domestic our US domestic political base, the right right wing base, but also because they don't want to legitimate a government that they've been trying to overthrow. If you were Iran, you'd probably believe that you were mostly already at war with the United States anyway since we've asserted that their government needs regime change. So, and we've asked Congress to appropriate $75,000,000 to do it.
And we are supporting terrorist groups apparently who are infiltrating and blowing up thing.
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
Deel 3…👇🏻🇮🇷👇🏻🇺🇸👇🏻🇮🇱👇🏻 https://t.co/O0RU8X51hN
Video Transcript AI Summary
The US government has requested $75 million from Congress for regime change in Iran and is allegedly supporting terrorist groups operating within Iran. While Iran is not viewed favorably, military force should be a last resort.
Seymour Hersh reported that the Pentagon has a special planning group for a bombing attack on Iran. The Bush administration and Saudi Arabia are reportedly funding covert operations in the Middle East to strengthen Sunni groups and weaken Iranian-backed Shias, with some funds going to jihadist groups in Lebanon with ties to Al Qaeda.
Saudi Arabia recognizes its stake in Iraq and distrusts the US's judgment, leading them to take matters into their own hands.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That their government needs regime change. So, and we've asked congress to appropriate $75,000,000 to do it, and we are supporting terrorist groups apparently who are infiltrating and blowing up things inside Iraq Iran. And if we're not doing it, let's put it this way, we're probably cognizant of it and encouraging it. So it's not surprising that we're moving to a point of confrontation crisis with Iran. My point on this is not that the Iranians are good guys.
They're not. But that you shouldn't use force except as a last, last, last resort. There is a military option, but it's a bad one.
Speaker 1: I wanted to get your response to Seymour Hersh's piece in the New Yorker to 2 key points, this week. Reporting the Pentagon's established a special planning group within the office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to plan a bombing attack on Iran. That this is coming as the Bush administration and Saudi Arabia are pumping money for covert operations into many areas of the Middle East, including Lebanon, Syria, and Iran in an effort to strengthen Saudi supported Sunni Islam groups and weaken Iranian backed Shias. Some of the covert money has been given to jihadist groups in Lebanon with ties to Al Qaeda. Fighting the Shias by funding with Prince Bandar, and then with US money not approved by Congress funding the Sunnis connected to Al Qaeda.
Speaker 0: Well, I don't have any direct information to confirm it or deny it. It's certainly plausible. The Saudis have taken a more active role. You know, the the Saudis,
Speaker 1: you were just then Saudi Arabia. You just came back from Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, the Saudis have basically recognized that they have an enormous stake in the outcome in Iraq and they don't particularly trust the judgment of the United States in this area. We haven't exactly proved our competence in Iraq. So, they're trying to take matters into their own hands. The real danger is and one of the reasons this is so complicated is because let's say we did follow the the desires of some people who say, just pull out and pull
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
Deel 4…👇🏻🇮🇷👇🏻🇺🇸👇🏻🇮🇱👇🏻 https://t.co/rbfOJ5uDdh
Video Transcript AI Summary
A rapid U.S. withdrawal from Iraq is mechanically possible within 3-4 months, entailing a military-style extraction. However, this would leave the Saudis seeking a force to combat the Shia, potentially leading them to fund Al Qaeda-linked Sunni extremists. An early exit could thus intensify the threat from a powerful Sunni extremist group, legitimized by Saudi funding, aiming to retain a foothold in Iraq and counter Iranian expansionism.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The the desires of some people say, just pull out and pull out now. Well, yeah. We we could mechanically do that. It would be ugly, and it might take 3 or 4 months, but you could line up the battalions on the road 1 by 1 and you could put the gunners in the Humvees and cock load and cock their weapons and shoot their way out of Iraq. You'd have a few roadside bombs, but if you line everybody up, there won't be any roadside bombs, maybe some sniping.
You can fly helicopters over, do your air cover. You probably get safely out of there. But when you leave, the Saudis have got to find someone to fight the Shias. Who they gonna find? Al Qaeda.
Because the groups of Sunnis who would be extremist and willing to fight would probably be the groups connected to Al Qaeda. So one of the weird inconsistencies in this is that were we to get out early, we'd be intensifying the threat against us of a super powerful Sunni extremist group, which was now legitimated by overt Saudi funding in an effort to hang on to a a toehold inside Iraq and block Iranian expansionism.
reSee.it AI Summary
A rare video from 1994 shows David Rockefeller campaigning for depopulation, with a disturbing reference to the year 2020. The negative impact of population growth on Earth's ecosystems becomes alarmingly clear. The UN can and should play a crucial role in helping the world and finding a way to stabilize population growth, although there are concerns about advocating for depopulation and sterilization. Recent trends show an increase in deaths and a decline in birth rates.
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
Een zeldzame video uit 1994 toont hoe David Rockefeller campagne voert voor d ontvolking vd aarde: De clip wordt nog verontrustender als hij verwijst naar h jaar 2020 De negatieve impact vd bevolkingsgroei op alle ecosystemen op aarde wordt angstaanjagend duidelijk https://t.co/9mYGSUbiDL
Video Transcript AI Summary
Improved public health has led to a 60% decline in infant mortality and increased average life expectancy from 46 to 63 years. However, this has resulted in a rapid population growth, reaching almost 6 billion people and potentially exceeding 6 billion by 2020. The negative impact of this growth on ecosystems is evident, with increased exploitation of energy and water resources and dangerous levels of pollution. To ensure a decent life on our planet, nations must work together to address population growth, overconsumption, and environmental degradation. The recent UN meeting in Cairo focused on these issues, but controversies arose due to their divisive nature and moral implications. The United Nations can play a crucial role in stabilizing world population and promoting economic development.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And herein lies the dilemma that we all face. Let me illustrate. Improved public health has caused the world's infant mortality rate to decline by 60% over the last 40 years. In the same period, the world's average life expectancy has increased from 46 years in 1950s to 63 years today. This is a development which as individuals we can only applaud.
However, the result of these positive measures is a world population that has risen during the same short period of time, geometrically, to almost 6,000,000,000 people and could easily exceed 6,000,000,000 by the year 2020. The negative impact of population growth on all of our planetary ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident. In particular, the rapid growing exploitation of the world's supply of energy and water is a matter of deep concern, and the toxic byproducts of widespread industrialization have increased as atmospheric pollution to dangerous levels. Unless nations will agree to work together to to these cross border challenges posed by population growth, overconsumption of resources, and environmental degradation, the prospects for a decent life on our planet will be threatened. The recent UN meeting in Cairo is appropriately focused on one of these key issues, population growth.
But the controversies which have erupted at the conference illustrate the problem of coming to grips with issues that are deeply divisive and which have a profound moral dimension. The United Nations can and should play an essential role in helping the world find a satisfactory way of stabilizing world population and stimulating economic development in a manner
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
De VN kan & moet een cruciale rol spelen bij h helpen vd wereld & vinden v een manier om d bevolkingsgroei te stabiliseren Vertaling:VN moet een manier vinden om d bevolking te ontvolken & steriliseren.En wat zien we?Het teveel aan sterfgevallen stijgt & h geboortecijfer keldert https://t.co/ptppVXn1Z0
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the need to balance population growth and economic development while considering religious and moral values. They highlight the importance of coordinating economic growth to improve living standards, but caution against the environmental threats posed by unchecked growth. The conference in Rio de Janeiro emphasized the concept of sustainable growth and global development. The private sector plays a key role in managing growth, but national governments and international bodies, including the United Nations, should also be involved. International trade is crucial for stimulating economic growth, and entities like the European Economic Community, NAFTA, APEC, and the World Trade Organization can contribute to ensuring sustainable development.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In helping the world find a satisfactory way of stabilizing world population and stimulating economic development in a manner that is sensitive to religious and moral considerations. Economic growth is, of course, an inevitable corollary of a growing population and is essential to improve standards of living. But without careful coordination, unrestrained economic growth poses further threats to our environment. This was a major subject of discussion at the conference in Rio de Janeiro on the environment 2 years ago. The focus then was on sustainable growth and global development.
It was pointed out at The conference that growth is most efficiently managed by the private sector, but elation of the process by national governments and international bodies is also needed. And once again, United Nations should certainly be among the catalysts and coordinators of this process. But in addition, given the importance of unencumbered international trade in stimulating and facilitating economic growth, some of the newer economic entities such as the European Economic Community, NAFTA, APEC, and most importantly, now known as the World Trade Organization are probably best suited to play a major role in ensuring sustainable development.
reSee.it AI Summary
Stanley Plotkin, known as the 'Godfather of Vaccines,' admits to using orphaned children, female prisoners, and their babies as vaccine test subjects. He served as an advisor to various vaccine manufacturers, including Sanofi Pasteur, as well as biotech firms, non-profits, and governments.
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
De ‘Godfather of Vaccines’, Stanley Plotkin,beantwoordt vragen over wie d industrie gebruikt voor experimenten Hij geeft toe d hij weeskinderen, vrouwelijke gevangenen & hun baby's als vaccinproefkonijnen gebruikt Hij werkte als adviseur voor vaccinfabrikanten, https://t.co/TMp4i6H3qM
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 if they have ever used orphans, mentally handicapped individuals, babies of mothers in prison, or individuals under colonial rule to study experimental vaccines. Speaker 1 admits that in the 1960s, it was not uncommon to use mentally handicapped individuals and babies of mothers in prison for such studies. They also confirm conducting experiments on individuals under colonial rule, specifically in the Belgian Congo. The transcript ends without further details about the experiment in the Belgian Congo.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Have you ever used orphans to study an experimental vaccine?
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: Have you ever used the mentally handicapped to study an experimental vaccine?
Speaker 1: I don't recollect ever doing studies in mentally handicapped interviews. At the time in the 19 sixties, it was not an uncommon, practice.
Speaker 0: So, you're saying I'm not clear on your answer. I'm sorry. Did you did you have you ever used the mentally handicapped to study an experimental vaccine?
Speaker 1: What I'm saying is I don't Recall specifically having done that, but that, in the 1960s, It was not unusual to do that, and I I wouldn't deny that, I may have done so.
Speaker 0: Okay. Have you ever used babies of mothers in prison to study an experimental vaccine? Yes. Have you ever used individuals under colonial rule to study an experimental vaccine? Yes.
Did you do so in the Belgian Congo? Yes. Did that experiment involve
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
zoals Sanofi Pasteur, maar ook voor biotechnologiebedrijven, non-profitorganisaties en overheden. 🤬🤬🤬
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
🔥 Nieuws over Nieuw-Zeeland 🇳🇿 03-12-23 Een Klokkenluider van de Nieuw-Zeelandse regering, heeft zojuist gegevens vrijgegeven, waaruit blijkt, dat 20% van de mensen die het COVID-vacin kregen toegediend, uiteindelijk zijn overleden. Zie video 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 https://t.co/TSxuAzguYb
Video Transcript AI Summary
Whistleblowers from within are exposing the globalist biomedical plan for depopulation. The New Zealand news confirms a whistleblower's claims that the government knows at least 17% of people who take the Pfizer or Moderna shots die within a year. Similar reports have been made in the US and Europe. The whistleblower, who has a master's degree in science, noticed discrepancies in death dates after vaccination. Around 1 in 4 people who died were vaccinated with Pfizer in New Zealand. The data reveals the highest number of deaths in New Zealand's history, with an annual increase of 6-8% in the death rate. This information is crucial in bringing down the globalist agenda.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It's going to be whistle blowers from the inside that bring down the globalist and their biomedical plan for global depopulation. You are about to see the whistle blower of whistle blowers. This is confirmed. The New Zealand news is admitting that this guy's real. The head administrator has come out with print documents that the government knows that at least 17% of people that take the Pfizer or Moderna shot are dead within 1 year, and we have matching numbers, and we've already put out our own previous reports with top statisticians with insurance companies documenting this in the US, Europe, and other areas that took the shots.
None of this is happening in other countries that didn't take the shots. This, ladies and gentlemen, will bring down the globalist. Not just this report, but it inspiring other whistleblowers to go public. So stay with us and share this everywhere you can because literally our lives, our freedom, our children's future is in the balance right now.
Speaker 1: As soon as the system went live, we noticed that, people were dying almost straight away after being injected. Nobody but me in New Zealand has seen this data. Now I'm giving it to the world. I've got a master's degree in science. I noticed some Discrepancies with the dates, of death.
People getting people dying within a week of being vaccinated. Nearly 1 in 4 got that person vaccinated. Mostly, it's Pfizer in New Zealand. What I did with the data was, look at the top ten, batches that were had a high death count, high mortality rate, and I put them on a chart. These are the the biggest Number of deaths we've seen in history of New Zealand, the death rate has gone up 6% 8% year on year.
@VanEmmerickKris - Van Emmerick Kris
Over Chemtrails... Voor alle sceptici:je kunt in deze clip precies zien wanneer ze d chemtrail uitschakelen. U kunt contrails niet uitschakelen,dit zou betekenen dd motor is gestopt. Maar je kunt chemtrails zeker aan & uit zetten.