TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @iluminatibot
reSee.it AI Summary
I’ve learned that the UK Met Office published temperatures from non-existent weather stations, with numbers coming from a model inventing data from phantom neighbouring stations. This is the foundation of the UK's climate record.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
A freedom of information request has revealed that, once again, the UK Met Office has been publishing temperatures from weather stations that don't even exist. "The numbers were actually coming from a model that was inventing data from phantom neighbouring stations." "This is the foundation of the UK's climate record."
Video Transcript AI Summary
The UK Met Office has again been caught publishing temperatures from weather stations that don't exist. An FOI revealed Lowestoft closed in 2010, yet the Met Office kept issuing official temperatures for it. The office said they were using well correlated neighboring stations, but the FOI revealed that this was a lie. The numbers were actually coming from a model that was inventing data from phantom neighboring stations. When exposed, they quietly deleted years of readings for Lower Stoft, as well as a number of other stations and added a disclaimer saying their data is for general interest only.
FOIs also show over one third of Met Office stations never existed and that real high quality sites like Cowood are ignored. Also, more than 80% of the network is low grade class four or five by WMO standards giving two to five c uncertainty. This is the foundation of The UK's climate record. Closed stations, imaginary stations, and synthetic data underpin the published time series and analyses. The disclosure underscores a pattern of relying on non-existent or non-operational stations to generate climate trends, rather than solely on active, recognized sites.
The revelations point to a significant discrepancy between the official temperature records and the on-the-ground reality of station operation. The claimed use of well correlated neighboring stations is contradicted by evidence that the numbers were produced by a modeling approach using phantom stations. The subsequent removal of readings from certain stations after exposure indicates a corrective action that still leaves the underlying practice visible. The disclaimer added indicates that the data are for general interest only, rather than a definitive, fully validated record.
In summary, the FOIs allege that a substantial portion of the Met Office station network is either non-existent or of questionable quality, with the majority of the network categorized as low grade, resulting in uncertainties in the reported temperatures. The result is described as the foundation of The UK's climate record, built on closed, imaginary, and synthetic stations. The transcript frames this as a systemic issue affecting the integrity of temperature reporting and the credibility of the climate data presented to the public.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The UK Met Office has again been caught publishing temperatures from weather stations that don't exist. An FOI revealed Lowestoft closed in 2010, yet the Met Office kept issuing official temperatures for it. The office said they were using well correlated neighboring stations, but the FOI revealed that this was a lie. The numbers were actually coming from a model that was inventing data from phantom neighboring stations. When exposed, they quietly deleted years of readings for Lower Stoft, as well as a number of other stations and added a disclaimer saying their data is for general interest only.
FOIs also show over one third of Met office stations never existed and that real high quality sites like Cowood are ignored. Also, more than 80% of the network is low grade class four or five by WMO standards giving two to five c uncertainty. This is the foundation of The UK's climate record. Closed stations, imaginary stations, and synthetic
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
“Tommy Matola is a Devil” “I owe Sony one more album - they can’t get away with it” Michael Jackson’s timely demise seems more convenient for the Global Elite the more you see clips like this. https://t.co/Xliq9sWHYq
Video Transcript AI Summary
Michael Jackson speaks about his frustrations with Sony and Tomy Mottola, describing Mottola as a devil and alleging Sony exploits artists. He claims to have generated several billion dollars for Sony and says they believed his focus would always be on music and dancing, but he asserts that he’s outsmarted them as a free agent.
He describes leaving Sony after one more album, a box set containing two new songs he wrote long ago, and explains that he writes at least 120 songs per album. He says he can complete the box set and give Sony the two songs, thereby leaving Sony as a free agent while claiming to own half of Sony. He notes that Sony is very angry about this move but maintains he did good business.
He adds that the way Sony seeks revenge is by trying to destroy his album, but he believes that “art good art never dies” and expresses affection for his work on Unbreakable.
Michael references Diana and Waldo and thanks them, stating his love for them and others present, and mentions turning off or taping something, with an aside that he doesn’t mind and to tape it.
In a separate recounting, he says Mariah Carey came to him crying after a divorce, describing her distress and saying that “this is an evil man” who taps her phones and is “very, very evil,” and that they must continue their drive until he is terminated.
Overall, the statements portray allegations of exploitation by Sony and Tomy Mottola, a plan to leave Sony while claiming ownership of half the company, a claim about an intent to destroy his album as retaliation, strong feelings about Mariah Carey’s claims of harassment, and appreciation for Diana and Waldo.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And Tommy Mottola is a devil. I'm not supposed to say what I'm gonna say right now, but I I have to let you in on a secret. Please don't videotape what I'm gonna say. Okay? Because the companies take advantage of them.
They really do. And Sony Sony be being a you know, being the artist that I am at Sony, I I've I've generated several billion dollars for Sony, several billion. And they they really thought that my mind is always on music and dancing and and I and it usually is, but they never thought that this performer myself would out think
Speaker 1: them. Yeah.
Speaker 0: So we can't let them get away with what what they're trying to do because now I'm a free agent. I just owe Sony one more album. It's just a box set, really. It's with two new songs, which I've written ages ago. Because every album that I record, I write, like, literally, I'm telling you the truth.
I like I write at least a 120 songs every album I do. So I can do the box set and just give them any two songs. So so I'm leaving Sony a free agent of owning half of Sony. So I own half of Sony's, and I'm leaving them, and they they're very angry at me because of it. But I just I just did good business.
You know?
Speaker 1: Tell him. Tell him, Michael. Tell a story.
Speaker 0: But This is unreal. So Oh my god. The way they get revenge is to try and destroy my album. But but I've I've always said, you know, art art good art never dies. Thank you.
I love Unbreakable. You know? Turn that off, please. You know what? You know what?
I don't mind. Tape it.
Speaker 1: Baku is getting gangster today. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 0: Mariah Carey, after divorce and time, came to me crying. Crying. She was crying so bad I had to hold her. And she said to me that this is an evil man. And Michael, this man follows me, she said.
He taps her phones, and he's very, very evil, and she doesn't trust him. And he is a horrible human being, and we we have to continue our drive until he's terminated. Yes.
Speaker 1: There you go.
Speaker 0: We can't allow him to do this to great artistry. We just can't. I just want you to know I appreciate everything you've done. You've been amazing. You're so loyal, Diana.
Everybody, Waldo, all the people here, I love you all. You've been amazing.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: I love you.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
“It’s laughable that anyone would describe Davos as protecting Liberal Democracy” Not sure how he got away with this speech at The WEF https://t.co/hb4cS0KxyA
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 argues that describing Davos as protecting liberal democracy is laughable, and similarly calling Trump a dictator is absurd. He then provides substantive points in response to a question, focusing on the power of elites and the gap between elite messaging and the reality experienced by ordinary people.
Key claims and points:
- The very reason he is at Davos is to explain to many people in the room—and those watching—that political elites tell the average people on three or four or five issues that reality is x, when in fact reality is y.
- Immigration: elites tell us open borders and even illegal immigration are okay, but the average American says these policies rob them of the American way of life; President Trump will take that on behalf of the average American.
- Public safety: elites claim public safety isn’t a problem in big American cities; the average person experiences lack of public safety as damaging to their life, and President Trump will address that.
- Climate change: the claim is that there is an existential crisis and climate alarmism is a major driver of mental health crises; the average person believes the proposed solutions are far worse and more harmful, costing more human lives, especially in Europe where heating is needed.
- China: China is identified as the number one adversary—not just to the United States but to free people globally; Davos is criticized for giving the Chinese Communist Party a platform, and President Trump would end that.
- World Health Organization: the organization is discussed as attempting to foist gender ideology upon the global South; Northern European countries are reviewing or rejecting these practices.
- A return to science and biology: the new president, Trump, will “trust the science,” understand the basic biological reality of manhood and womanhood, not due to retribution or dictatorship, but because he has the power of the American people behind him.
- Legislative trajectory: the popular will should inform both the House and Senate in 2025 to pass laws on these issues and more, as noted by Senator Portman.
- Inspirational leadership view: President Trump, if elected, will be inspired by the words of Javier Milei, who said that he was in power not to guide sheep, but to awaken lions; this sentiment reflects what the average American and the average free person on Earth want from leaders.
Additional context:
- The speaker reiterates that the popular will and the vitality of the American people should guide policy, asserting that the next conservative president will confront elite narratives on immigration, public safety, climate policy, China, and global institutions.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It's laughable that you would or anyone would describe Davos as protecting liberal democracy. It's equally up for it. It's it's it's equally laughable to use the word dictatorship at Davos and and aim that at president Trump. In fact, I think that's absurd. But I'm a step aside from that constructive criticism and instead answer your question.
Yep. And and I'm gonna be substantive here. President Trump, if he's the next president, for that matter, I think whoever the next conservative president is going to take on the power of the elites, which I've mentioned earlier. But there the the thing that I wanna drive home here, the very reason that I'm here at Davos is to explain to many people in this room and who are watching, with all due respect, nothing personal, but that's your part of the problem. Political elites tell the average people on three or four or five issues that the reality is x when in fact reality is y.
Take immigration. Elites tell us that open borders and even illegal immigration are okay. The average person tells us in The United States that both rob them of the American way of life. They're right. President Trump will take that on on behalf of the average American.
Elites also tell us that public safety isn't a problem in big American cities. Just travel to New York or Washington or Dallas, Texas. The average person will tell you that the lack of public safety damages not just the American way of life, but their life. President Trump will take that on. Thirdly, I guess the favorite at the World Economic Forum is climate change.
Elites tell us that we we have this existential crisis with so called climate change, so much so that climate alarmism is probably the greatest cause for mental health crisis in the world. The solutions, the average person know, based on climate change are far worse and more harmful and cost more human lives, especially in Europe during the time that you need heating than do the problem and the problems themselves. Fourth, two more here, Robin. Okay. The fourth, China, the number one adversary, not just to The United States, but to free people on planet Earth.
Not only do we at Davos not say that, we give the Chinese Communist Party a platform. Count on president Trump ending that nonsense. And fifth, as we sit here, another supranational organization, the World Health Organization, is discussing foisting gender ideology upon the global South. These are practices that are under review, if not being rejected, by countries in Northern Europe. The new president, the special of its president Trump, will, as you like to say, trust the science.
He will understand the basic biological reality of manhood and womanhood. And do you know why? Not because of retribution, not because he's a dictator, but because he has the power of the American people behind him. And it's connected to senator Portman's excellent point that in addition to needing a vigorous executive, we look forward to having the popular will inform both the house and senate in 2025 to pass laws on all of those issues and many others. Ultimately, Robin, I think president Trump, if in fact he wins a second term, is going to be inspired by the wise words of Javier Mille, who said that he was in power not to guide sheep, but to awaken lions.
That's what the average American and the average free person on planet Earth wants out of leaders.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
TUCKER CARLSON: I think OpenAI Whistleblower was definitely murdered "You had complaints from your programmer who said you guys were stealing people's stuff & not paying them & then he wound up murdered." https://t.co/b8vAk1O2kH
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Pfizer stopped testing their COVID vaccine on animals because all of the animals died... the same experimental vaccine then went directly to the public. https://t.co/9ozbVAO5Jp
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Pfizer stopped testing their COVID vaccine on animals because all of the animals died... the same experimental vaccine then went directly to the public. https://t.co/9ozbVAO5Jp
reSee.it AI Summary
4 years ago, Bill Gates claimed the vaccinated wouldn’t transmit and the unvaccinated would endanger grandparents; every claim proved false, and he walked away without consequences.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
4 years ago Bill Gates told the world that people had no chance avoiding the clot shot, claiming the vaccinated wouldn’t transmit and the unvaccinated would "endanger their grandparents." Every single claim turned out to be false and he walked away without a single consequence. https://t.co/6xmerC1MV3
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker argues that people don’t feel like going to the stadium due to infection risk and that you don’t have a choice; it’s not the government telling them to ignore the disease. People are deeply affected by seeing these deaths and by knowing they could be part of the transmission chain, with old people, their parents, and grandparents potentially affected. There will be the ability, particularly in rich countries, to open up if things are done well over the next few months. But for the world at large, normalcy only returns when we've largely vaccinated the entire global population.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But you don't have a choice. People act like you have a choice. People don't feel like going to the stadium, when they might get infected. You know? It it's not the government who's saying, okay.
Just ignore this disease and, you know, people are deeply affected by seeing these deaths, by knowing they could be part of the transmission chain and, you know, old people, their parents, their grandparents could be affected by this. And so you don't, know, you you don't get to say, ignore, what's going on here. There are there will be the ability, particularly in rich countries, to open up if things are done well over the next few months. But for the world at large, normalcy only returns when we've largely vaccinated the entire global population. And and so
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
The Whistleblower exposing the project Blue Beam technology.️ In a nutshell, their plan is to essentially create these holographic spacecrafts in all major cities, make them look like the Aliens are attacking our planet. https://t.co/n0LlBKMmZ6
Video Transcript AI Summary
In 1986, while stationed at an underground installation near Boulder, Colorado, Speaker 0 was introduced to project SkyBeam by lieutenant general Andrew Garris. He was led down a corridor into a large hangar where a stealth bomber hovered only 20 feet above him. He stood there confused, and Garris smiled and asked if he was certain of what he was seeing. He replied, “of course, what else could it be?” He was shocked to find out that this wasn’t a real craft; it was a projected hologram. Since the early fifties, scientists have been developing holographic technology and, over the years, improved it to a state that we can only imagine. He stood there staring at the bomber, which looked so absolutely real and solid that he could reach up and touch it. He contemplated the possibilities, asking how anyone would know that the projection wasn’t real if it appeared a thousand feet up in the sky.
The narrator asserts that the Phoenix Lights craft witnessed by 10,000 people was the first grand-scale sky-beam test upon the public, and that it succeeded beyond expectations. He recalls that in October 1938, Orson Welles released his War of the Worlds radio broadcast to the American public, and that large portions of the population went into panic because of how realistically portrayed it was. He claims that America, along with all countries on the planet, has been easily fooled by very simple means. To amplify this response, those who are truly in power—described as the true purveyors of the deep population process—are said to have formulated the final stage of their sinister plan.
The plan centers on the year 2024, when a global event will alter the course of mankind’s future. The world will witness a massive alien invasion, with thousands of projected holographic alien warships blanketing the skies, inducing a global panic. Real military crafts within the holograms will inflict actual damage to surrounding areas to sell the gimmick. As a result of the ensuing human chaos, a one-world government will immediately form without any resistance from the people, becoming the new world order. The speaker concludes that, once this happens, “we as a people will be too.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: 1986, while stationed at an underground installation near Boulder, Colorado, I was introduced to project SkyBeam by lieutenant general Andrew Garris. I was then led down a corridor and into a large hangar where a stealth bomber hovered only 20 feet above me. I stood there confused, and Garris looked over me and smiled and asked if I was certain of what I was seeing. I replied, of course, what else could it be? I was then shocked to find out that this wasn't a real craft.
It was a projected hologram. Since the early nineteen fifties, scientists have been developing holographic technology and over the years improved it to a state that we can only imagine. So I stood there staring at the bomber, which looked so absolutely real and solid that I could reach up and touch it. I contemplated the possibilities. What if this projection was a thousand feet up in the sky?
How would anyone know that that was an illusion? The Phoenix Lights craft witnessed by 10,000 people was the first grand scale sky beam test upon the public. It succeeded beyond expectations. In October 1938, Orson Welles unleashed his War of the World's radio broadcast to the American public. We're so realistically portrayed, vast portions of the population went into panic.
Terrified citizens scrambled to evacuate their cities in droves. America had been easily tricked by very simple means. To amplify this response, those who are truly in power, not only our country, but all the countries on the planet, and who are the true purveyors of the deep population process have formulated the final stage of their sinister plan. In the year 2024, a global event will alter the course of mankind's future. The world will stand witness to a massive alien invasion.
Thousands of projected holographic alien warships will blanket the skies, sending people into a global panic. Real military crafts within the holograms will inflict actual damage to the surrounding areas to sell the gimmick. And as a result of the ensuing human chaos, a one world government will immediately form without any resistance from the people. They will be the new world order. Once this happens, we as a people will be too.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Tucker Carlson horrified as geoengineering expert Dane Wigington identifies what’s really being sprayed in the skies. Dane Wigington named seven troubling substances: 1.) Aluminum 2.) Barium 3.) Strontium 4.) Manganese 5.) Surfactants 6.) Polymer fibers 7.) Graphene https://t.co/HzA2Te3LUV
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: We have aluminum, barium, strontium, manganese, surfactants, polymer fibers, graphene, all of this coming down in our breathable air call, Tucker. That's horrifying. So who's doing this specifically? Ultimately, all roads lead to those who print the money, but we know as far as the coordinating entities, certainly DOD, DARPA, and we have documents to prove the existence of these programs going back decades, documents hundreds of pages long. We have an 800 page US senate document from 1978 outlining the scope and scale of these programs then, specifically calling for intergovernmental cooperation, between quote otherwise adversarial nations because of the cross border ramifications of these programs.
You can't just geo engineer of your own country. Who's the biggest player? Obviously The United States Of America, because the size of our military. We have the US military has three times more aerial tankers, which are the primary aircraft used in these operations, three times more than all other militaries in the world combined. And if I could back up to the whole condensation trail narrative again, which is perhaps one of the greatest lies ever perpetrated on populations all over the world, all military tankers and all commercial aircraft are equipped with what's known as a high bypass turbofan jet engine.
That's a jet powered fan. 90% of the air that moves through that engine is not combusted. So by design, that engine is nearly incapable of producing any condensation material except under rare and extreme circumstances, which are diminishing by the day because of the warming that's occurring in the troposphere. So much warming. We've had two former military pilots that fly private aircraft, important people have contacted us at geongwatch dot org.
In both cases, they were off the coast of the Pacific Northwest and their aircraft were forced into emergency auto descents because the air outside that aircraft was 45 to 50 degrees above what it should have been. The air was not dense enough to carry those aircraft. These people are very, very alarmed, but very afraid to speak out.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We have aluminum, barium, strontium, manganese, surfactants, polymer fibers, graphene, all of this coming down in our breathable air call, Tucker. That's horrifying. So who's doing this specifically? Ultimately, all roads lead to those who print the money, but we know as far as the coordinating entities, certainly DOD, DARPA, and we have documents to prove the existence of these programs going back decades, documents hundreds of pages long. We have an 800 page US senate document from 1978 outlining the scope and scale of these programs then, specifically calling for intergovernmental cooperation, between quote otherwise adversarial nations because of the cross border ramifications of these programs.
You can't just geo engineer of your own country. Who's the biggest player? Obviously The United States Of America, because the size of our military. We have the US military has three times more aerial tankers, which are the primary aircraft used in these operations, three times more than all other militaries in the world combined. And if I could back up to the whole condensation trail narrative again, which is perhaps one of the greatest lies ever perpetrated on populations all over the world, all military tankers and all commercial aircraft are equipped with what's known as a high bypass turbofan jet engine.
That's a jet powered fan. 90% of the air that moves through that engine is not combusted. So by design, that engine is nearly incapable of producing any condensation material except under rare and extreme circumstances, which are diminishing by the day because of the warming that's occurring in the troposphere. So much warming. We've had two former military pilots that fly private aircraft, important people have contacted us at geongwatch dot org.
In both cases, they were off the coast of the Pacific Northwest and their aircraft were forced into emergency auto descents because the air outside that aircraft was 45 to 50 degrees above what it should have been. The air was not dense enough to carry those aircraft. These people are very, very alarmed, but very afraid to speak out.
reSee.it AI Summary
I read about Windows updates that silently enable OneDrive, turning your files into the primary copy on Microsoft’s servers. Your computer becomes a temporary access point, and data can be wiped locally or moved, not backed up. Turning OneDrive off or deleting files to free space may erase everything everywhere. The only exit is a buried menu or a YouTube tutorial. Millions clicked Update unaware, sparking cries of malware and jail.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
BILL GATES’ MICROSOFT CAN ERASE YOUR ENTIRE COMPUTER A man is going viral after exposing what millions of Windows users are just now realizing about Bill Gates’ Microsoft. Windows updates quietly turn on OneDrive without a plain English warning. Your files don’t get “backed up.” They get moved. Your computer becomes a temporary access point. Microsoft’s servers become the primary copy. Then the trap snaps shut. People report: • Family photos gone • Work files wiped • Years of data erased • Clean desktops with no warning • A little icon asking: “Where are my files?” Many thought it was ransomware. It wasn’t. Turning OneDrive off can delete everything locally. Deleting files to “free up space” deletes them everywhere. The only way out? A buried menu… or a YouTube tutorial. Nowhere does it clearly say: “We are transferring your entire computer to our servers.” Millions clicked “Update” without knowing this was included. If a company can silently take control of your files and delete them with one wrong click - how is this not malware? "I think they should have to go to jail for this."
Video Transcript AI Summary
One speaker claims that Windows includes a piece of malware called OneDrive that will spontaneously delete all files on your local computer without warning. The process, they say, starts when Windows updates to begin using OneDrive, but there is no plain-language opt-out warning. Gradually, it begins uploading everything on the computer to Microsoft servers, potentially tens of gigabytes, which may be noticed only if the connection is slow or metered.
If you later search for how to stop it, you’ll find options to turn off OneDrive backup, but upon returning the next day you’ll find everything has been deleted from your local machine. The desktop is left with a single icon reading, “Where are my files?” When you click it, it tells you that all of your life’s work is now on Microsoft’s machine and was deleted from your machine without asking.
The process continues: you’re forced to download all your files back to your machine, which can be a disaster on slow or metered connections due to the large volume of data. When you then try to delete the files from OneDrive, they delete from Microsoft servers and still remove the local copies, leaving you with nothing on your computer. The only way to delete files from Microsoft’s machine without also removing them locally is to follow a YouTube tutorial with detailed steps.
To make OneDrive stop this behavior requires looking up the exact steps; there is no intuitive, plain-English option to opt out. The speaker asserts there is no explicit notice like, “Hey, do you want us to take everything on your computer and put it on our computer instead?” If such an option existed in plain language, they claim, people would say no.
The speaker argues that many people equate cloud storage with a backup, but OneDrive allegedly does not function as a back-up; instead, it secretly transfers the user’s files to their machine so that Microsoft’s machine becomes primary, and the user’s local machine is treated as temporary access. This allegedly slows down the computer because data is uploaded and downloaded to the cloud rather than read from or written to the local hard drive. In practice, if anything happens to a file on OneDrive’s machine, the file is deleted everywhere, because there is only the copy on their machine.
Throughout, the speaker emphasizes that this behavior is not explained in plain language, is highly unintuitive, and could lead to accidental, widespread data loss. They conclude that it’s hard to believe this was allowed to go out the door or that nobody intervened.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I think they should have to go to jail for this. I'm only barely joking here. If you're unaware, for the last few years, Windows has come with a piece of malware called OneDrive, and OneDrive, if you're not careful, will spontaneously delete all of the files off of your computer. Not on their computer on OneDrive, I mean off of your machine, the one that's in your house. If you have been fortunate enough to not have your life ruined by OneDrive, just Google that word and you will find a torrent of people saying, It took everything.
All of my photos and videos of my family, all of my work files, everything is gone. OneDrive will not give you any warning whatsoever that it is about to do this. It will not give you a confirmation button to hit. It will not give you a pop up or anything. Here's how it happens.
At some point, your Windows computer will update to start using OneDrive. At no point in the process will you be given any kind of a plain language warning to opt out of it. It will just start doing it. Then at some point, you will notice that it is quietly uploading everything on your computer to Microsoft servers. Some of you will only notice this because you're on a slow or metered Internet connection and it's trying to upload 40 gigabytes of video and work files and private records.
Or you may have only found out when OneDrive gave you a warning that it was running out of space. So you will look up how do I make it stop doing that and you will find the option to turn off OneDrive backup. Then you will get onto your computer the next day to find everything is gone. Everything on your computer was deleted by Microsoft. And on your desktop, completely clean of icons, will be one cheeky little icon that says, Where are my files?
Many, many people who saw this assumed they had been hit by a ransomware attack or a virus where some hacker has stolen all of their data and is now holding it hostage. So you click on that icon and it says, Don't worry, all of your life's work is now on our machine. We helpfully deleted it from your machine without ever asking you. But we're still not at the worst part because at this point you'll be forced to download all of your stuff back to your machine. Again, God help you if you're on a slow or metered internet connection because you now have to grab the many gigabytes of work and slowly bring it back.
At which point you will say, Okay, Microsoft, I don't want you to have my files. I want to delete them off of OneDrive. So on your local computer, you will have all of the files on your local machine now, then it will show where those files are also on OneDrive. So you will go into OneDrive and you will delete them, only to find that when you delete them off of Microsoft servers, they go in and delete them off your computer again with no warning, with no pop up, without anything. The only way to delete the files off their machine without also deleting them off of your machine is to go find a YouTube tutorial walking through the detailed steps on how to do it.
To be absolutely clear, to make OneDrive not do this requires looking it up. There is no intuitive way to do it. They intentionally buried those options in the menus and none of those options say in plain English what they do. At no point in any of this does it come out and say in plain English, Hey, do you want us to take everything on your computer and put it on our computer instead? If it did say that, everyone would say no.
They realize this. The issue is that by now everybody is familiar with the concept of storing files on the cloud. Lots of machines offer the cloud as a backup if you want. You would assume that that's what OneDrive is. It's a chance to back up your files in case something happens to your local machine, but that is not what it is.
OneDrive secretly transfers your machine to their machine so that their machine is the primary. Those files are the copy of the files. When you work on your local machine, they treat it as you temporarily accessing those files. This, of course, massively slows down your machine because instead of writing and reading data to your hard drive, you're having to upload and download it to the cloud. What this means in practice is if anything happens to the file on their machine, it's deleted everywhere because you no longer have it.
It's only on their machine. You're just allowed to temporarily access it. And at no point anywhere do they explain in plain language that this is what they're doing. It is so unintuitive that it is very easy to accidentally delete everything you have everywhere. Do you understand when OneDrive says that it's full and you go in to delete some things to free up space, it deletes it from your machine, too?
I genuinely cannot believe that this was allowed to go out the door like this or that nobody else stepped in to stop them.
reSee.it AI Summary
I was trafficked and tortured from birth in an underground Rome facility with tunnels to the Vatican used by European elites. I witnessed child sacrifice inside the Vatican, including the drinking of children’s blood. I allege that religion, the military, media, medicine, intelligence agencies, and governments are all under their control. Our world is controlled and run by satanic pedophile psychopaths.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
A survivor of satanic ritual abuse says she was trafficked and tortured from the day she was born in an underground facility in Rome, with tunnels connecting to the Vatican and used by European elites. She claims she witnessed child sacrifice being carried out inside the Vatican, including the drinking of children’s blood. She alleges that religion, the military, media, medicine, intelligence agencies, and governments are all under their control. “Our world is controlled and run by satanic pedophile psychopaths.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 describes being subjected to satanic ritual abuse, child sex trafficking, and torture from birth in 1964 until leaving in 1982, moving to the United States and changing her name. She says she was involved through her Italian family line and tortured in an underground facility in Rome with tunnels connecting to subterranean levels of the Vatican. She witnessed child sacrifice there and was trafficked from there and within the European elite. She states that satanic rituals occurred in the Vatican as well as in elite mansions, underground tunnels, and private outdoor areas.
Most common forms of abuse she details include rape and gang rape; being forced to watch the torture and murder of animals and humans ranging from babies to adults; electric shock; waterboarding; being buried alive with dead bodies; being put in coffins; being defecated and urinated on; watching people be disemboweled and having their entrails placed on her; various forms of mind control; horrific experiments on herself and witnessing them on others; being locked in a freezer; being kept in cages and isolation boxes for long periods of time; and watching satanic rituals below the Vatican, including the brutalization and sacrifice of babies and children, the ritualized drinking of their blood and organs, and the summoning of demonic entities via these rituals.
Her personal message for humanity asserts that the world is controlled and run by satanic pedophiles and psychopaths in the highest positions of authority and power globally. She claims all systems—media, medicine, religious institutions, education, intelligence agencies, military, global agencies, governments—have been infiltrated at the top layers by this global cult. She states that pedophilia undergirds their system and is used as blackmail and control, and that children are still being ritually abused, trafficked, and murdered in the millions today. She explains that she is sharing her testimony to stop the abuse of children and humanity, noting that these people have used trauma-based mind control and succeeded with secrecy and deception, so exposing them is paramount. They have poisoned food, water, air, bodies with pharmaceuticals and vaccines, minds with media and miseducation, and have convinced people they have authority over humanity.
She contends they traumatize society with wars, terrorism, violence, weather warfare, poverty, scarcity, and engineered diseases, with an end game of genocide of most and complete enslavement of the remainder. They supposedly want open worship of Lucifer and normalization of pedophilia, and they can only succeed with compliance, consent, and cooperation. She emphasizes the need to know the truth, say no more, do inner work, heal, and restore ourselves so we can come together and co-create a better way forward.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I was subjected to satanic ritual abuse, child sex trafficking, and torture from my birth in 1964 to age 18 in 1982 when I left, moved to The United States, and changed my name. I was involved through my Italian family line. I was tortured in an underground facility in Rome that had tunnels connecting it to the subterranean levels of the Vatican. I witnessed child sacrifice there and was trafficked from there and within the European elite. The satanic rituals occurred in the Vatican as well as in elite mansions in underground tunnels and in private outdoor areas.
What were the most common forms of abuse you were subjected to? The kinds of abuse I was subjected to include rape, gang rape, being forced to watch the torture and murder of animals and humans ranging from babies to adults, electric shock, waterboarding, being buried alive with dead bodies, being put in coffins, being defecated and urinated on, watching people be disemboweled and having their entrails placed on me, various forms of mind control, horrific experiments on myself and witnessing them on others, being locked in a freezer, being kept in cages and isolation boxes for long periods of time, and watching satanic rituals below the Vatican, including the brutalization and sacrifice of babies and children, the ritualized drinking of their blood and organs, and the summoning of demonic entities via this ritual. What is your personal message for humanity? My message to humanity is that our world is controlled and run by satanic pedophiles, psychopaths who are in the highest positions of authority and power globally. All our systems, be it media, medicine, religious institutions, education, intelligence agencies, military, global agencies, governments have been infiltrated at the top layers by this global cult.
Pedophilia undergirds their system and is used as a mechanism of blackmail and control, as well as being part of the satanic religion. Children are still being ritually abused, trafficked, and murdered in the millions today. I am sharing my testimony because it is up to us to stop the abuse of children and indeed the abuse of all of humanity. These people have used trauma based mind control and succeeded with secrecy and deception, so exposing them is of paramount importance. They have poisoned our food, water, air, our bodies with pharmaceuticals and vaccines, our minds with media and miseducation, and they have convinced us they have authority over humanity.
They have traumatized us with wars, terrorism, violence, weather warfare, poverty, scarcity, and engineered diseases. Their end game is genocide of most and complete enslavement of remaining. They want us to openly worship Lucifer and normalize pedophilia, and we can see this happening today. They can only succeed with our compliance, consent, and cooperation. We need to know the truth so we can say no more.
And we need to do our inner work, heal and restore ourselves because when we do this, we step into our power, We can come together despite their many attempts to divide us and together co create a better way forward. Thank you.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
They were talking about COVID-19 back in 2015 and 2017 COVID-19 WAS A MASS SACRIFICE https://t.co/mT8JwgJ2rY
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
DARPA, Palantir, Boeing, foreign countries, even Google have programs and technology that can read & write, manipulate, induce, project, and affect things and people in ways you never thought to be possible. https://t.co/TQX3SdGdzp
Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion covers neuroscience as a potential weapon and the emerging technologies that enable reading from and writing to the brain. Key points include nanoparticulate aerosolizable nanomaterials that could disrupt blood flow or neural activity, and the use of nanomaterials to place electrodes in a head to create large arrays of implantable sensors and transmitters that can read from and write to the brain remotely, as in DARPA’s N3D program (next generation non-invasive neuromodulation).
Advances in artificial intelligence are enabling medical breakthroughs once thought impossible, including devices that can read minds and alter brains to treat conditions like anxiety and Alzheimer's. These developments raise privacy concerns, leading Colorado to pass a first-of-its-kind law to protect private thoughts. Ear pods can pick up brainwave activity and indicate whether a person is paying attention or their mind is wandering, and there is debate about whether one can know what they are paying attention to.
It is claimed that brain-reading technologies are accessible to the public and that technologies from companies like Elon Musk, Apple, Meta, and OpenAI can change, enhance, and control thoughts, emotions, and memories. Brain waves can be decoded to identify specific words or thoughts, and brain signals are described as encrypted, with AI able to identify frequencies for specific words. Data from brain activity is described as extremely sensitive, with concerns about data insurance discrimination, law enforcement interrogation, and advertiser manipulation, and with governments potentially altering thoughts, emotions, and memories as technology advances.
Private companies collecting brain data are said to be largely unregulated about storage, access, duration, and breach responses, with two-thirds reportedly sharing or selling data with third parties. This context motivated Pazowski of the Neuro Rights Foundation to help pass Colorado’s privacy act inclusion of biological or brain data as identifiable information, akin to fingerprints. While medical facilities are regulated, private firms may not be, prompting calls for stronger privacy protections.
There is evidence that devices have controlled or influenced the thoughts of mice in labs, and questions arise about whether at-home devices could influence human thoughts or attention. The discussion also notes the potential for brainwave-based attention monitoring in workplaces (early mentions of “bossware”) and the possibility that attention discrimination could extend to differentiating tasks like programming versus writing or browsing.
There is skepticism about whether all passwords could be cracked by brain or quantum computing, and concerns about security risks: devices often communicate over Bluetooth, which is not highly secure, and some technologies attempt to write signals to the brain, raising fears about hacking. Experts emphasize the need to address these issues proactively given rapid progress and substantial investment, including a claim of one billion dollars per year spent by China on neurotech research for military purposes.
The conversation touches on the potential use of AI voice in the head to reduce the ego and control individuals, and on cases where individuals report hearing voices or “demons” in their heads, linking to broader concerns about manipulation, “Manchurian candidates,” and covert weapons. Public figures discuss investigations, classified information, and the possibility that information about these weapons might be suppressed or tightly controlled, with ongoing debates about how to anticipate and counter these developments.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is why it becomes so important to understand the novelty and the viability of neuroscience as being leveraged as weapons. We then have the use of nanoparticulate agents, aerosolizable nanomaterials that can be breathed in and disrupt blood flow or neurological network activity, activity that can be used as an enclosed weapon or perhaps that can be used as a more broad weapon of disruption and or destruction. We also have the capability to utilize nanomaterials to get electrodes into a head and to create a vast array of viable sensors and transmitters. This is DARPA's N3D program, next generation non invasive neuromodulation, utilizing these techniques and technologies to create vast arrays of implantable electrodes that need not be put into the brain surgically that are then able to read from the brain and write into the brain remotely in real time.
Speaker 1: Advances in artificial intelligence are leading to medical breakthroughs once thought impossible, including devices that can actually read minds and alter our brains to help treat conditions like anxiety, Alzheimer's.
Speaker 2: But that technology raises privacy concerns. That's why Colorado passed a first of its kind law aimed at ensuring our private thoughts remain private. Our ear pods that can pick up brainwave activity and tell whether or not a person is paying attention or their mind is wandering. Okay. Well, you might think, fine.
But even if we can tell whether a person is paying attention or their mind is wandering, you can't tell what they're paying attention to. You would be wrong.
Speaker 1: Who has access to this technology?
Speaker 3: You know, Karen, everyone, believe it or not. You can buy devices on the Internet right now that can, to varying degrees, de code your brain waves. And the technology being developed by the likes of Elon Musk, Apple, Meta, and OpenAI can change, enhance, and control your thoughts, emotions, even your memories. It's the dawn of a new era filled with promise and peril. If the at home devices are impressive, those being used in the lab are even more so.
Our brain waves are like encrypted signals and using artificial intelligence, researchers have cracked the code, identifying frequencies for specific words to turn thought to text. That I just think it and AI knows what I'm thinking because of the pattern of my brain wave. But with the benefits come risks.
Speaker 4: It is some of the most sensitive data that you could possibly share with anyone.
Speaker 3: Data insurance companies could use to discriminate, law enforcement to interrogate, and advertisers to manipulate. Government too could get into our heads and potentially alter our thoughts, emotions, and memories as the technology advances.
Speaker 4: Nobody wants to live in a world where some of these misuses or abuses exist.
Speaker 3: While medical research facilities are subject to privacy laws, private companies that are amassing large caches of brain data are not. And based on a study by the Neuro Rights Foundation, two thirds of them are already sharing or selling the data with third parties. The vast majority of them also don't disclose where the data is stored, how long they keep it, who has access to it, and what happens if there's a security breach. Which is why Pazowski, medical director of the foundation, led the passage of a first in the nation law in Colorado that includes biological or brain data in the state privacy act, similar to fingerprints if the data is being used to identify people.
Speaker 4: This is a first step, but we still have a long way to go.
Speaker 3: And with companies and countries racing to access, analyze and alter our brains, Pazowski says privacy protections should be a no brainer.
Speaker 4: It's everything that we are. You know, it's everything about our thoughts, our emotions, our memories, our intentions.
Speaker 2: And Sean, we're also wondering, can any of these devices actually control a person's thoughts?
Speaker 3: They have been used to control the thoughts of mice in a lab.
Speaker 1: All right, so much to take in. Sean, thank you for that report.
Speaker 5: What
Speaker 2: do you think? Is it a future you're ready for? You may be surprised to learn that it's a future that has already arrived. Everything in that video that you just saw is based on technology that is already here today. Artificial intelligence has enabled advances in decoding brain activity in ways that we never before thought possible.
Sensors that can pick up your brainwave activity, earbuds, headphones, tiny tattoos that you can wear behind your ear. We can pick up emotional states like, you happy or sad or angry? We can pick up and decode faces that you're seeing in your mind. Simple shapes, numbers, your pin number to your bank account. It's not just your brain activity here that we can pick up.
We can also pick up your brain activity in different places, like as your neurons fire from your brain down your arm and send signals to your hand to tell you how to type, move. All of that could be decoded through electromyography, and that's what you're seeing here is a device now in the form of a simple wearable watch that can pick up that activity. And one of the pivotal acquisitions of the field, Meta acquired this company, Control Labs, in 2019 because major tech companies are investing and helping to make these devices universally applicable as the way in which we interact with the rest of our technology? What if everywhere has ubiquitous monitoring? In fact, during the pandemic, what we found was that 80% of companies admitted that they use at least some forms of so called bossware technology to monitor the productivity of their employees, whether it's a white collar employee monitoring what's on their screen, or in any other context, surveillance is part of our everyday lives.
Surveillance for productivity is part of what has become the norm in the workplace, and maybe with good reason. Nine out of 10 employees waste time during the workday. They focus on other things. There may be good reasons why we want to be able to find better ways to monitor whether somebody is paying attention or they're doing something different. The newest way to monitor attention is through a device like this one.
These are EarPods that are launching later this year. These EarPods, much like the video you watched earlier, are EarPods that can pick up brainwave activity and tell whether or not a person is paying attention or their mind is wandering. Okay. Well, you might think, fine, but even if we can tell whether a person is paying attention or their mind is wandering, you can't tell what they're paying attention to. You would be wrong.
Turns out that you can not only tell whether whether a person is paying attention or their mind is wandering, but you can discriminate between the kinds of things that they're paying attention to. Whether they're doing something like central tasks, like programming, peripheral tasks, like writing documentation, or unrelated tasks, like surfing social media or online browsing. When you combine brainwave activity together with other forms of software and surveillance technology, the power becomes quite precise. So what do we do with this? What do we do with technology that enables us to monitor brainwave activity for attention?
Do we embrace it? Do we resist it? If you've heard of Havana syndrome, Havana syndrome is a belief that people have suffered from the leading theory is that it's targeted microwave activity of brains to disrupt brainwave activity. There's no proof of it yet.
Speaker 5: I had a hearing this week in homeland security, and this this hasn't even become very mainstream yet, but it was about, different foreign adversaries using direct weapons, direct energy weapons against US citizens. They completely incapacitate citizens of The United States. You guys might have heard of it called Havana syndrome. And then we went down to the skiff, and we got a classified briefing from some of the people on the on the panel, and it was one of the most I'm a former Navy SEAL, so I've traveled around the world and hunted bad guys for a long time. But I can tell you this, when I went down to that skiff, it was one of the most terrifying briefs that I've ever been a part of.
Okay? This is how brazen our enemies are becoming because of how foolish, corrupt, incompetent, and I would act act actually say wicked we have become.
Speaker 2: But there's at least a couple dozen cases where there isn't a good explanation for why the individual suffered from disruption of mental abilities. And there's certainly a lot of investment in trying to figure out whether you could target the brain remotely. It's much more difficult to figure out how you could read the brain remotely.
Speaker 6: Let's get to that, because I think it's one of the most important and crucial questions about how this develops. And by the way, raise your hands. I'm just going to ask this question and then we'll move to the audience. You talked at the end. In the beginning you said you won't be able to read complex thoughts.
It seems as though we can understand emotions. There's some way you can recreate some images inside your head.
Speaker 2: Already, gamers have figured out, for example, while a person is wearing a headset, how to, you know, prime a person through their brainwave activity to be able to decode their PIN number and their home address. So you don't have to have your full complex thought decoded to reveal your thoughts, right? It just, it gets at what we think thought is.
Speaker 6: And how do you decode somebody's pin number? You flash a series of numbers and see how their brain reacts to them?
Speaker 2: So, you have recognition memory signals that are preconscious and subconscious, and this is part of why it's been used, for example, by governments to interrogate criminals. Do you recognize this potential co conspirator? Do you recognize, you know, this murder weapon? Those preconscious signals, like what we call the P300 wave or the N400 wave, these are before you even consciously process information. So, you could prime it with a number and then see if a person recognizes it.
And you can do it without them realizing that that's what you're doing.
Speaker 6: So will all of our passwords be cracked first by this or quantum computing?
Speaker 7: Hard to tell. Alright.
Speaker 8: There's a whole set of things around hacking and bad actors. So, for example if you have some headset and it communicates over Bluetooth Bluetooth is just not that secure. Most of these things are kind of read and not write. But there are technologies like TMS that do try to write signals to the brain. And I'm sure people are going to try to do that for various reasons.
Imagine those systems being hacked. So we really want to think this through. We want to get a jump on it. I think that's needed fundamental point. I completely agree with it.
No matter how long the time scales are on some of the specifics we need to get on it.
Speaker 9: I do fall on the side of this is moving faster rather than slower. You know I'm working with one of the world's experts on neurotech Rafael Ustad who says that things that he thought would take five years are now taking one or two. So I think we're moving faster. And also because a billion dollars a year is being spent just by China alone through its military and researching neurotech. And I'm quite confident that they're working on, even though they have no personal knowledge, decoding human thoughts, potentially using these devices for torture and other kinds of things.
Speaker 10: Use this artificial intelligence voice in the head to break down the ego and control an individual.
Speaker 11: Ultimately, yes. You can't plug your eardrums. You can't stop the sound. A lot of the targets are tricked into believing evil aliens have abducted their brains, demons. They're tricked.
Yes.
Speaker 10: How are they tricked?
Speaker 11: They're told. By who? By the voices. A lot of these school shootings, I think, that you hear about on the news, they hear voices.
Speaker 8: And we've learned that Cruz told the BSO detective that he heard a demon in his head.
Speaker 10: And police now say he also heard voices.
Speaker 12: Who heard voices in his head.
Speaker 11: The scripts they're called. And they're meant to confuse the very derogatory. That's just typical breakdown. And why would you wanna break down the ego of that person to rebuild it? So this gets into creating Manchurian candidates.
Speaker 3: Police have released video made by the man who opened fire at Florida State University
Speaker 11: in Project Soul Catcher. Referred to a Myron May as a Myron May, right? As a psychobomb. They didn't care who the target was. They were just trying to make him explode and do something bad.
He was a lawyer trained there. His reasoning why he shot up the school was he needed news publicity to make sure people understood this was real, and he left the video testimony.
Speaker 5: As sick as this may sound, I've even had stalkers following me into church.
Speaker 10: He believed government stalkers were harassing him and using a direct energy weapon to hurt him.
Speaker 11: But he gave out, seven packages in the mail, and the FBI intercepted them all. What were in these packages? Just information. Just information.
Speaker 3: May then opened fire at an FSU library, wounding three people. He was killed in a shootout with police.
Speaker 10: If these people do explode and do something bad like this, there's absolutely no way to prove that there's been any sort of manipulation to the brain. In this guy's case, talked about it. I mean, obviously, he talked
Speaker 11: But it but it was covered up.
Speaker 10: He's the way they they way they write the article, he sounds like a crazy person.
Speaker 5: Guys, if your assessments here are correct, these are very covert weapons, aren't they?
Speaker 13: That's correct. There's no entry or exit wound. How they're designed is to make the target feel like they're crazy, like they're imagining things.
Speaker 5: And you guys also said that these attacks are happening right here in this city. Is that correct?
Speaker 12: Mean, there have been some that have gone public with respect to Washington DC.
Speaker 5: I think it was mister you mister Grosev said, you spoke to a Russian agent who said that they believe that Americans are using the same weapons on them. Is that correct?
Speaker 11: That is correct.
Speaker 5: Might that have something to do with part of the CIA's motive to cover up the existence of the this tech and these weapons?
Speaker 11: That is a very logical possibility.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Mister chairman, I yield back.
Speaker 12: Gentleman yields. Chair now recognize the gentleman from New York, mister Goldman, for his random questioning.
Speaker 14: Thank you, mister chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for being here. Mister Grozov, I wanna follow-up a little bit on the interactions you've had with Russian intelligence about these a AHIs. And mister Zaid, you I wanna ask, and this is a hypothetical, but I I'm trying to understand why our government would try to block information sharing or conceal information that they have. And one thing that comes to mind is whether there's an operational risk to revealing any of the of the details of their investigation. Is is that something that you have come across, in any of your work?
There's a lot
Speaker 12: of reasons why the information might not be publicly released. And I do think that's something we could address more in a classified environment to explain that, but there are understandable reasons why the US government, has not revealed much of what it knows.
Speaker 13: There's some long term things that needs to be done in terms of of new acts. But in the short term, we need to do things like implement the original Havana Act. DOD still hasn't done it.
Speaker 7: So this is not out of the realm of these very nefarious people like in the CIA and these other types of secret societies institutions of our government. We're now finding out the use of AI can be used against people. We've already heard from the World Economic Forum that they have ability with AI to be able to read people's thoughts by putting in a little Bluetooth in someone's ear that they can actually see what someone is actually thinking about as they're working. They're gonna sell it to us, Alison, as this is gonna be good for employment because employers will know whether or not their employees are daydreaming or thinking about other things other than the job. But what is it saying?
It is saying that they now possess the ability to read our thoughts and now weaponize us with acoustical types of things that can be sent to us that throws us off balance or makes us feel crazy. This is all, where is it going? All about controlling the narrative, controlling people.
Speaker 15: Absolutely. That is most certainly what it is all about as has been made rather clear over the past couple of years, But, yeah, I think this could obviously take an extremely dangerous turn here. Mean, wouldn't be surprised if this led to targeting and testing and even, like, torturing of innocent civilians, which brings me to my next thought is which is the inevitable threat of artificial intelligence mixing into all this. Right? Mix AI into the use of neuroweaponry and you get an entirely new uncharted territory.
Speaker 7: And the whole idea is that we would have these biological sensors in our bodies and then they could read our thoughts, know our emotions, know whether we're hungry or not, or anything like that. And so now it's a warfare of information. They will have everything on you. They will know we are coming and going. And so this kind of warfare, this kind of being able to target individuals and think about this, there is no way to detect.
There's no entry point. There's no exit point like a bullet would have. They could just target somebody and they're saying, you know, yeah, he went crazy. Yeah. I'm sorry.
We we you know, and then turn the kill switch on somebody and, you know, and then lose a thread. Now
reSee.it AI Summary
Starting in 2026, the SSA will raise the full retirement age to 67 for anyone born after 1960. Americans must work longer because Congress spends our Social Security. Senator Tuberville calls it a scam: it’s spent here, it’s a scam, and retirees living on $2k–$3k will find it impossible. He warns a wave—about 150 million people—will soon ask, Where’s our damn money?
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Starting in 2026, the Social Security Administration will raise the full retirement age to 67 for everyone born after 1960. Americans must work longer because Congress keeps spending our Social Security. Senator Tommy Tuberville confirms they spend our Social Security, “It’s all a scam — what happens, it comes up here, we spend it” “This is all a scam. I mean, we got people that's getting ready to retire that's gonna try to live off $2k-$3k, Impossible. It's impossible. Because what happens, it comes up here, we spend it.“ “In this body, we had better start figuring that out because we're gonna have a run from this city here soon, and there's gonna be about a 150 million people coming up here saying, where's our damn money that we paid in?”
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 argues that the system is a scam, noting that retirees living on $2,000–$3,000 a month is impossible because money is spent as it comes in. He cites $35 trillion in debt and $2 trillion in American taxpayers’ credit card debt, warning of a looming run on the city and questioning why Social Security money is taxed again. He reflects on personal pension and union involvement and asserts that people will need to work longer.
Speaker 1 counters by outlining the history and current state of Social Security. He notes that Social Security began as a 2% tax with a promise it would never exceed 6% of income, but now it takes 12.4%, with projections (CBO or Social Security trustees) suggesting 15.8% to 17.5% in the future. He states that originally promised tax caps were not maintained and that money taken from workers’ paychecks has been spent immediately to pay promised benefits for the past thirteen years. He argues that the system benefits higher earners disproportionately and imposes a larger burden on lower-income workers, who have less left to save for retirement, and highlights disparities in life expectancy, noting that one in four African American men may die between 45 and 64 after paying into the system. He asserts that lower-income and African American workers risk receiving little or nothing in return.
Speaker 0 asks for a solution. Speaker 1 proposes shifting toward a universal benefit system, bending benefits for middle and upper income earners while increasing them for lower-income earners, indexing retirement age to life expectancy, and using a more accurate inflation index. He suggests workers should have an option to invest money in something that earns a positive return and cannot be spent by Congress.
Speaker 0 shares a personal perspective about his two young sons paying into Social Security and questions whether they will receive any benefits. Speaker 1 responds that younger workers will likely see some benefits, but not what has been promised.
Speaker 2 adds that pensions and Social Security both provide guaranteed income, and introduces protected retirement solutions with step-ups and lock-ins that address market volatility. He credits Secure Act 1.0 and 2.0 for enabling these options and advocates adding at least one of four types of plans—401(k), 457, 403(b)—to provide Americans with retirement options and assurances about what they will get in retirement.
Speaker 0 notes that young people ask why they can’t invest in their own 401(k) instead of Social Security, and Speaker 2 responds positively, stating there is a place for Social Security, pensions, and 401(k) plans, and that the right questions about savings are being asked.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is all a scam. I mean, we got people that's getting ready to retire that's gonna try to live off 2 to $3,000. Impossible. It's impossible. Because what happens, it comes up here, we spend it.
We're 35,000,000,000,000 in debt. We don't have any money. We're dead broke. And then taxpayers have $2,000,000,000,000 in credit card debt. We are in huge trouble.
In this body, we had better start figuring that out because we're gonna have a run on this city here soon, and there's gonna be about a 150,000,000 people coming up here saying, where's our damn money that we paid in? I could have put my Social Security money for forty years in tax in in in the market and probably worth 8 to 10,000,000 a day, But the federal government wasted it. So I'll get off my horse there. But it's good we have this because we got you know, I get a pension check from education. I I was part of a union.
It's not gonna help people. People are gonna have to work continue to work longer and longer. Am I right, miss Gendrick? Can you say something about Social Security and and it being taxed for some reason? We're taxing people for the second time on Social Security that they put into into an account.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And I'd like to point out when Social Security was first founded, those who established it, it was started out as a 2% tax, and they said this will never take more than 6% of your income. Today, it takes 12.4%. And depending on whether you go with CBO or Social Security trustees, it needs to take between fifteen point eight and seventeen point five percent. So we're talking about thousands of dollars more per year.
It also was actually only originally recommended that the tax be up to $66,000 equivalent in today's dollars of earnings. But over time, it has expanded massively, and the money has been spent every year. So whereas everybody thinks this money's been set aside for me, no. For the past thirteen years, every dollar that has gone out of workers' paychecks has gone immediately to pay promised benefits. And that's what happens when you have a system that enables those in charge of it to spend the money in the immediate term and leave the buck to the next generation that's coming along.
And because Social Security has grown so much, it's actually to the detriment of lower income workers in particular who have to pay such a large share of their tax their paycheck to Social Security, they have little left to save for retirement. And then lower income and African American workers have the lowest life expectancies. So they are the least most likely to get nothing back in return. One out of four African American men will die between the ages of 45 and 64 after having paid into this system for decades tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they get might get nothing back.
Speaker 0: What's the solution?
Speaker 1: I think we ultimately have to shift towards a universal benefit system. That's what true social insurance is. It does not make sense that we are paying the biggest benefits to the highest income earners. So gradually over time, I think we need to bend down the benefits for the middle and upper income earners, actually increase them for the lower income earners. Look at things like indexing retirement age to life expectancy, more accurate inflation index.
And I think that workers need an option to have their money in something that actually earns a positive rate of return and that can't just immediately be spent by congress.
Speaker 0: I have a 28 and 29 year old, two boys, got a job working hard, paying Social Security. They ask me all the time, dad, will I ever see any of that money? Will they see it?
Speaker 1: I think they will see some of it. That's the exact same thing I hear whenever I ask a group of younger workers, and none of them raises their hands. So I think that there will be something there, but it's not going to be what has been promised.
Speaker 0: Mister Steven, you got anything to add to that?
Speaker 2: Thank you, senator. What I would add is when we talk about Social Security or we talk about pensions, the two things that they both have in common is that guaranteed income, you know what you're gonna get, generally speaking, at the end of it. What I referenced in terms of protected retirement, we have developed now solutions that get at both of those in a very efficient way, and they also address the issue around market volatility because we have step ups and lock ins, and it's a very efficient way to deliver that to millions of Americans that we we've been talking, and and that's all because of what you all did around Secure Act 1.o and 2.o. They have put us in a position to do that, and that's why I'm really encouraging us to have every four zero one k plan, four fifty seven plan, four zero three b plan, add at least one of those solutions so that the American workers can choose. If they wanna know what they're gonna get in retirement, we can deliver that for them.
Speaker 0: Young people of all ages ask me, why can't we put our money in our own four zero one k instead of putting in Social Security? Is there an answer to that?
Speaker 2: I think what I love is that they're asking the right question. Savings in any way is a good thing, and I think there's a place for Social Security. There's a place for pensions, and there's certainly a place for what we're doing in four zero one k plans.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Senator Hassan. Thank
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Another politician glitches like a robot. https://t.co/HlPAyocw4b
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker asserts that no one on the Republican side in the House and Senate, who control both chambers, will speak up to challenge them. The central priority highlighted is protecting Americans’ privacy and their Social Security. The speaker emphasizes the significance of Social Security in Americans’ lives by citing two specific statistics: for 40% of all Americans, Social Security is the basis for their retirement and their retirement savings, and for 28,000,000 Americans, Social Security is the only thing that they have. Because of these the speaker argues that it is essential to ensure the protection of Social Security. The speaker notes that the time for the discussion has ended for the moment, with “The gentleman's time has expired. In the letter that” beginning a concluding fragment, suggesting a transition to the next point or document in the debate.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Don't worry. No one on the Republican side in the House and Senate who control both the House and Senate is going to speak up and challenge us. But we need to protect Americans' privacy and their social security. For 40% of all Americans, Social Security is the basis for their retirement and their retirement savings. And for 28,000,000 Americans, Social Security is the only thing that they have, and that's why we have to make sure that we are protecting it as well.
The gentleman's time has expired. In the letter that
reSee.it AI Summary
I assert Obama was a CIA asset meant to destroy the US. I list SEALED records at Occidental, Columbia, Columbia thesis, Harvard, Selective Service, medical, Illinois Senate schedule, law practice client list, certified birth copy, live birth certification, baptism. I question why Michelle Obama can’t practice law and note she has 22 assistants, while other first ladies had only one.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Obama was a CIA asset put in place to destroy the US. Occidental College records -- SEALED Columbia College records -- SEALED Columbia Thesis paper -- SEALED Harvard College records -- SEALED Selective Service Registration -- SEALED Medical records -- SEALED Illinois State Senate schedule -- SEALED Law practice client list -- SEALED Certified Copy of original Birth certificate -- SEALED Signed Endorsed paper Certification of Live Birth -- SEALED Baptism record -- SEALED Michelle Obama can no longer practice law as an attorney why? Michelle has 22 assistants, when other first Ladies had only one?
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Mike Benz Cracked The WikiLeaks Cables and Found The Soros Family Has Been Working With The US State Department For 50 Years https://t.co/OTxgJTse6f
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker outlines a project to map US State Department involvement with George Soros, The Open Society Foundations, and related entities across many countries, noting that the WikiLeaks cables (Kissinger, Carter, and Cablegate) cover 1973–2010 but omit the 1980s and 1990s. The goal is to create a comprehensive picture of how US policy has aligned with “George Soros, The Open Society Foundation, The Open Society Institute, every open society spandrel in every country.” The speaker highlights that Strobe Talbott in 1995 said US foreign policy had to be synchronized with allied governments and with Soros, describing it as “like working with a friendly, allied, independent entity, if not a government,” and stating that Soros then became “the number one political downer.”
The narrative begins with precedents before the Open Society Foundation’s creation in 1979. In 1973–1975, Soros references appear in cables before the Open Society Foundation started. The speaker then focuses on a troubling example from 1976 in Gabon, via a Kissinger cable titled Visit by Brown and Root Executives to Gabon. Brown and Root, later Halliburton, is connected to George Soros through Brown and Root’s executives and projects. The CIA’s reaction to a Ramparts article about Brown and Root is discussed, showing Herman Brown (founder of Brown and Root) and his son George Rufus Brown as covert associates with the CIA under project LP coin, with Herman Brown serving as president and director of Brown and Root and trustee of the Brown Foundation. The claim is that both Herman Brown and his son had covert security clearances and were involved with CIA projects from 1965–1967, including potential service on the board of a CIA creation in Thailand/Laos. Brown and Root is described as one of Soros’s top five holdings in the mid-2000s, implying a CIA-connected origin for the company.
A note is given that in Gabon, Soros Associates (founded by Paul Soros, George Soros’s older brother) is involved in port projects. Paul Soros’s shipping and engineering influence is illustrated by a Washington Post obituary, and the speaker mentions a related anecdote from Bill Burns’s autobiography The Back Channel about embassy construction projects in Russia being prebugged, and the implication that Western engineering firms with ties to intelligence could have facilitated spying.
Before Open Society Foundations existed, in June 1975 Bandar Abbas Port Project in Iran involved three senior Dravo Corporation executives, plus International Systems, Van Houten Associates, and Soros Associates. The embassy was instructed to assist American bidders to ensure Soros Associates’ bid, noting Soros Associates’ engineering focus and the aim to eliminate competing bids. The government of Iran’s consideration of the American group and the influence of Soros’s bid on Iran’s judgment are documented. In Gabon, 1975–1976, financing arrangements are described: a financing package for Soros’s contract including a down payment by the Gabonese governor, an Export-Import Bank direct loan, and a First National City Bank loan, with the U.S. embassy consulting to emphasize more favorable terms and to potentially extend financing into a larger package.
The accounts emphasize multiple U.S. government roles: Commerce Department, State Department, Export-Import Bank, and embassies, colluding to support Soros financing and projects, with the claim that this occurred years before the Open Society Foundations were created and began collaborating with U.S. agencies. The speaker suggests a long-standing family involvement, with older brother Paul Soros already coordinating with the State Department to secure deals for Soros Associates before 1979. The Mongolia story is promised as a later highlight. The compilation is framed as a five-decade pattern of government support for Soros-related deals, starting in 1973 and continuing through the Cablegate era.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I went into the WikiLeaks cables, all the diplomatic cables. These include the Kissinger cables from 1973 to 1976, the Carter cables, 1977, 1979, and Cablegate from 2003 to 2010. So this is missing the nineteen eighties and the nineteen nineties. But what I did is I ran a search for Soros and then separately searches for the Open Society Institute, the Open Society Foundation, The Open Society Forum. And my goal is to create a comprehensive tapestry of all US State Department involvement with George Soros, The Open Society Foundation, The Open Society Institute, every open society spandrel in every country in the world to create a comprehensive picture of how it is, for example, that Strobe Talbot came to say in 1995 that US foreign policy has to be synchronized, deputy secretary of state came to say, it's identical to The US the foreign policy of the US government, but it's compatible with it.
It's like working with a friendly, allied, independent entity, if not a government. We try to synchronize our approach to foreign policy with Germany, France, Great Britain, and George Soros. The magic sauce. And, of course, Soros then turns around and is the number one political downer. And so I began this task, and I'll start the story here.
So I began this exercise by seeing all this stuff in 1973. 1973, 1974, 1975. You see the entire first page is before 1979. So I I skipped over it at first. I thought that must be a mistake.
It's gotta be it's gotta be it's gotta be a different source. So I started because again, this leaves out the nineteen eighties and nineteen nineties. So I really started my review at first in from 2003 to 2010, and I'll show you some crazy shit. But then when I was on my way to stuck on the way from Miami to Portland to Maine to do the Tucker thing, I thought, you know, that is an awful lot of George Soros references before 1979. Maybe I maybe I should check a couple of them out.
It didn't make sense to me because 1979 is when the Open Society Foundation started. So that is when I had assumed the Soros relationship with the State Department. Why is Soros popping up in so many State Department cables before Soros even started the Open Society Foundation? And I'm about to tell you that story, and then we'll work our way up to Mongolia. The Mongolia story is one of the craziest stories I've ever heard in my life.
I've been telling everyone this week about Mongolia. I told Tucker about Mongolia. I was on a date. Told the girl about Mongolia. I couldn't sleep because Mongolia.
But let's let's tell it in order. So I'm gonna show a couple things to you here. This is a Kissinger cable. The cable is called Visit by Brown and Root Executives to Gabon. It's the governor of Gabon, I believe.
Let me show you this. So here is our map. We are right here in Central Africa on the Atlantic Ocean side port a bit in Gabon. This is where our drama begins. And what you will see here is a visit visit by Brown and Root executives.
Now if you remember, we started off talking about Brown and Root. Brown and Root is now Halliburton. Halliburton owns Brown and Root. They acquired them. And we brought up this memo.
Let me find it. Here we go. This one. The CIA let me move this over. This is 1976, ten years earlier.
We just found this out though in the full unredacted in 2025. And this is the CI's reaction to a Ramparts magazine article titled the CIA's Brown and Root Dimensions. And here we have a visit by Brown and Root, Halliburton. So the CIA's Halliburton connections, dimensions. And what you'll see here is George Rufus Brown and Herman Brown.
So there is no mistaking things. Herman Brown, an American businessman and philanthropist with the Brown Foundation, also listed in the JFK files for CIA work, was the cofounder of Brown and Root, a prominent construction and engineering firm. He played the central role in development of the company, which is known for its major work on infrastructure projects, dams, bridges, military installations, offshore drilling, oil, oil and gas. Now it turns out in the CIA files, Herman Brown, president and director of Brown and Root, Houston, Texas, president and trustee of the Brown Foundation, Houston, Texas, was granted a covert security clearance approval for work with the Central Intelligence Agency for use as a covert associate under project LP coin. So the founder and president of Brown and Root, which became Halliburton, was secretly working as a covert associate with the Central Intelligence Agency as he grew what was then the largest construction, oil exploration, and military construction, and infrastructure development company in America.
Founder and president of the company, secretly working for the CIA for thirteen years. His son, the vice president of Brown en route, George Rufus Brown, so both Herman Brown and his son, was also granted a covert security clearance for use as a covert associate for work with the Central Intelligence Agency on project LP coin. We don't know what project LP coin is. And then also granted a provisional covert security approval for him being used in connection with possible use in serving on the board of directors for a CIA proprietary being set up to work in Thailand and Laos and was issued another covert security approval for working with the CIA from 1965 to nineteen nineteen sixty seven. So Browning Root, one of the top five holdings of George Soros, his Soros Management Fund in the mid two thousands at least.
It's one of his top five holdings. Its creator was CIA. Its president, its vice president was CIA. And here, we have that same construction and development firm traveling to Gabon right here in 1976. I'm gonna read this to you.
Brown en route manager, international sales, Edward Sullivan, will arrive in Libreville. They plan to visit the Santa Clara site to develop estimates for cost of building that facility. They're interested in the Grand Puebara. O'Sullivan is anxious. The Brown and Root executive vice president I'm sorry, vice president, is anxious to meet with president Bongo, as well as any additional government of Gabon officials embassy may recommend.
O'Sullivan has been trying for several re weeks to obtain hotel reservations, but without success, they greatly appreciate embassy assistance, locating accommodations. We also like interpreter and a rental car. Department recognizes that these requests come in a difficult time for the embassy. However, very strong, brown and root interest in Gabon projects, particularly Santa Clara, critical competition factors preclude deferral. Company currently plans to go all out for Santa Clara Port construction.
We know that the US embassy is under stress right now in Gabon, but you have to help Brown and Root secure this deal with the government of Gabon to acquire this giant port construction project. Brown and Root's vice president O'Sullivan has just come from detailed discussions with Soros Associates to develop background for on-site estimates of construction and costs he to use in forthcoming talks with the government of Gabon officials. He's also met with Horstley of Leon Templeton and and Sons. Sullivan advised Commerce emphatically that Brown Root wants no, repeat, no relations or identity with the Templeton firm. End f y I, Kissinger.
Now Soros Associates Soros Associates is the group run by George Soros' older brother, Paul Soros, also a businessman and philanthropist. Soros founded Soros Associates, older brother of George Soros. Oh, that's interesting. I actually didn't know this about the Brazil side. And to Brazil report, Soros business interests in ports in Brazil.
Interesting. I wonder where that is today. I wonder if Bolsonaro had a problem with that. What Lula's relationship with the was. Okay.
One second. Let's come back to this. Now, I bring this up actually, let me just show you the here's the Washington Post obituary of Paul Soros. Paul Soros dies at 87. Shipping industry titan and prominent philanthropist.
He arrived in 1948 with $17. K. In his pocket, how much was in his bank account? He founded his engineering firm Soros Associates in 1956 from his home in Connecticut. At 65, he was already worth a 100 over a $100,000,000.
Then started the Paul and Daisy Soros Foundation, titan of the shipping industry. You know what's really funny? I'm reading Bill Burns's autobiography called The Back Channel. Bill Burns was the CIA director for Joe Biden. And, there's a funny incident where he's describing his time in the US embassy in Russia in the nineteen nineties under the Boris Yeltsin years.
And he talks about how every time there was a fire at the embassy, the Russians would come in and disguised as firefighters. They would plant bugging devices. And when one of the embassy adjunct buildings was built by a Russian construction company, it was prebugged with Russian spying devices because the construction and engineering companies in Russia were working with Russian intelligence. And he's teeing them up as, you know, these everything all the crisis relief and humanitarian relief and construction companies in Russia were secretly working with Russian intelligence and bugging everything. And then the next page, it says, and under US ambassador Thomas Pickering, he inherited a US Embassy that had no local Russians working at the embassy, which is a big problem for us to be able to gather intelligence on and make connections with Russian civil society out of the embassy.
But fortunately, Yeltsin had rolled back a ban on the US embassy for the past seven years because of the bugging and spying crisis where the embassy was bugging all of the Russian infrastructure. And so they got in trouble. They were hiring Russian, like, engineering firms and planting devices in the infrastructure. Then they got in trouble with the Russian government. So the Russian government said, okay.
Unless you wanna get kicked out of the country, you're not allowed to do this anymore, which makes me wonder, sort of apropos of nothing, given that Brown and Roots president was working for the CIA, its vice president was working for the CIA, its foundation was working with the CIA, and they're a major construction company. Were they bugging the infrastructure in these projects for the CIA? Burns Bill Burns, the CIA director, used the term prebugged that these buildings were built. They were constructed prebugged for the Russians, and then concedes that The US was doing the same thing. Do you think that's part of the deal maybe?
Do you think when these massive ports are constructed, where there's all this flow through traffic and the Gabon officials are all over it, do think they come prebugged from Soros? Open question. Let's keep going. So before George Soros started working with the state department, six years before he started his Open Society Institute, Open Society Foundation. His older brother was already in the game working with the state department, bending over backwards to make sure that his older brother secured deals.
Now remember, this is during the Cold War. There was an interest in having Westerners control the infrastructure rather than Russians controlling it. There were Russian development firms, Russian construction firms. Africa was tilting towards Russia. A lot of African companies were sympathetic towards communism.
There's a big battle over Russia, a big battle over Africa with Russia. So you can see a state department interest in pulling strings out of the embassy with the government to make sure Soros gets the deal rather than the Russians. This gets back to that clip about George Soros admitting on tape, bragging on tape that the Soros empire was built out of the ashes of the Soviet empire as he collected all of the assets the Soviets used to own.
Speaker 1: When the Soviet Union the Soviet Empire collapsed, and as the empire collapsed, moved in and picked up the pieces. First in Hungary in 1984 and then Poland in '87, China in '87 as well. And so this is how the this what I'm the Saurus Empire was replacing the Soviet Empire. And how do you think you're doing in your imperial ambitions?
Speaker 0: Here's another example. June 1975, again, still four years before the Open Society Foundation was created. Bandar Abbas Port Project. Three senior executives from the Dravo Corporation out of Pittsburgh. Let's check out this Bandar Abbas project, and this is in Iran.
Iranian revolution of nineteen seventy nine is when we lost Iran. K? We couped the CIA couped Iran. Was it 1953? 1953.
The US and UK cooed the Iranian government out of office. We overthrew Mosaddegh. We installed the Shah, and Iran was a US UK vassal state until four years later. At the time, the coup was in large part because of Mossadegh's attempt to nationalize Anglo British Petroleum, which is today BP, British Petroleum. And what you see here is while we still had a puppet government that was friendly to The US in Iran, the US state department is working, as well as the commerce department, is working to secure port projects for George Soros' older brother, Paul Soros.
Here's what he say. Three senior executives on the Dravo Corporation visited the Bandar Abbas Port project. Dravo is part of the Iranian American port Consortium bidding on the project. Other three members include International Systems, Van Hooten Associates, and Soros Associates. Dravo's estimated value of the project is between 700,000,000 and $1,000,000,000.
This is in 1975. Action requested. In addition to providing all possible assistance to only American consortium bidders, request embassy ascertain the following. In the government of Iran giving consideration to the American group, has the submission of the bid influenced favorably or otherwise their judgment. Here's 1975 back in Gabon, Santa Clara war project.
The US ambassador, the head of the state department, raised with the port director, Damas, question of mineral port design and asked if progress have been made in reaching a decision. Damas, the head of the port in Africa, said that meetings had been held within the government of Gabon and were continuing, which should lead shortly to the elimination of all but a few offers and that Soros was in very good position. So here is the head of the state department in the country, Gabon, on the coast on the West Coast Of Africa, back channeling with the head of the port to make sure that Paul Soros won the bid, Eliminate all of the opposition. Once choice narrowed, Damas said that further discussions would be had with firms selected. He mentioned that one difficulty with Soros' bid was that American specifications differed from Gabonese, I e French ones.
Ambassador told Damas that he felt sure that this problem could be overcome in further discussion with Soros. Decontrol on receipt. So The US ambassador already in 1975, four years before kid brother Soros, George Soros, even starts the Open Society Foundation, Paul Soros is already getting mucho favors from the US state department. The US state department is pulling strings to make sure that competing bids with Paul Soros are eliminated and encouraging the government of Gabon to go through with the deal and that the barriers can be overcome to make sure that Paul Soros wins the bid to control the ports of Gabon. Here's again 1975 in Gabon.
Recent visit to First National City Bank led the suggestion that Dravo Corporation Pittsburgh be contracted for construction of Santa Clara Mineral Port. It appears Soros Associates virtually certain to get engineering contract for port. Embassy's understanding is that Soros only does engineering, not construction. If this is the case, it obviously is in our interest to find an American firm, Sunnis, that wants to do construction. Thus, we'd appreciate any further information on Dravo.
So we know Soros has got it locked, but we need someone else to actually do the construction that Soros can then do the engineering on top of. Current status and outlook for Gabon's iron ore. Director general of Samophore, Gabonese iron ore consortium, called The US ambassador to review the latest developments since 1975 in Gabon. The director general, Delepin, stated governor of Gabon percentage in Samoafer is now 56, with Bethlehem at 20, French 10, German 10, and remaining four split between Europeans. Delepin thought governor of Gabon would eventually relinquish relinquish part of its 56% to attract participation of new iron consuming partners such as Japan.
Delepin added that he he pleased governor Gabon had and would keep single largest participation as this would induce favorable treatment of company, I e rail tariffs, and reduce chance of nationalization as well spread the cost. Philippines said plans likely moving forward for construction of the mineral port, and that Soros likely to get the engineering contract for how the iron ore iron ore will be exploited. I wanna get to the loan part of this. I'm jumping around a little bit, but this is 1973. Soros Associates study.
$10 from Bayer. $8.09 6. Mike's always working. True. Well, there's just so many of these Soros references that, like, I'm having a hard time finding the stuff in my notes.
Give me one sec. Ministry of transport. Major project, port consultant. Arrival, Paul Soros. So Paul Soros comes to visit.
Alternative dates. Kissinger, the Gabonese economy. The Gabonese economy. As embassy is aware, in absence of thorough and reasonable current data on Gabon's economy, Exem Bank has been processing cases for Gabon based on data available and indications that government of Gabon is credit worthy obligor. Loans recently approved on this basis for General Electric locomotives and Soros study financing.
So Soros is making loans. As you'll see, there's, like, a $25,000,000 loan. More on Iran. One sec here. Soros has indicated interest in design on on work for, yeah, again again in Iran.
You can already see that the Soros family wants to do the same thing in Iran and Gabon that the State Department want. A major project let me check out this one. 1974, major project, Ero Isla. Soros Associates again, so does the geological work. I think it was in 1976, so it's a little bit ways down.
Senegal, all of these. Soros, Soros, Soros, Soros, Soros. Soros financing. 1976, still in Gabon. First National City Bank, Liberville, has informed embassy that governor of Gabon has accepted completely financing package for the Soros contract.
So the governor of Gabon cannot afford to pay George Soros. They need to take out a loan to pay George Soros for the contract to construct the port and to extract the iron ore. Subject financing to be provided the following amounts. Governor of Gabon down payment of half $1,000,000, an Exim Bank direct loan of $2,000,000, First City National Bank loan, $2000000.1.5 total, 5,600,000.0, which is the total amount of the Soros contract. Thus, US portion of Soros contract, 4,000,000, and local costs being financed by Exim Bank other than the governor Gabon down payment.
When the Department of Commerce phoned First National City Bank, to call its representative visiting Gabon instructing to point out governor Gabon has more advantageous terms than the original one, stressing eventual combination Soros contract financing into larger package, including US source construction and extending beyond five years. So not only is the State Department negotiating Soros' deals, helping him secure the deals, they're also back channeling so that foreign governments can pay George Soros so that Soros makes his appropriate profit on the deal. Now, the Ex I'm Bank let me show you this. Refers to the Export Import Bank of the United States. This is a US Government agency who is working with your tax dollars.
So the US government so it's think about how many different government agencies are helping Soros Inc? The commerce department, the state department, the export import bank of the United States. So the commerce department is is working with the local trade representatives. The embassy is working with the senior leadership of the foreign country, and the export import bank with our tax dollars is loaning out to the foreign government so that they can pay George Soros his money. How far backward over yourself do you need to bend for the government to do favors for Soros Inc?
This is before the Open Society Foundation was ever created, years before it. So when the Open Society Foundation was created in 1979 and then right away hits the ground running, working with the state department, the treasury department, the central intelligence agency, You know, Pride didn't just pick it up on the fly. Do you think George Soros ever picked up the phone and called his older brother, or Paul Soros ever picked up the phone and told his kid brother, hey, you're running a hedge fund in in New York City. You're betting on all these portfolio companies. Dude, you gotta you gotta work with the governor on this.
This is where the money is. This is a family business where their deals are secured by the US government. So when they go around and do all of the things that advance what the state department wants. There is this favors for favors relationship that goes back now five decades, more than five decades, fifty two years, 1973. Those are just the earliest cables we have.
The WikiLeaks cable gate archive starts in 1973.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Jacob Rothschild slipped saying Covid was a distraction. https://t.co/g0pEsp4vst
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 notes a dramatic shift over the last two or three years: probably no child over the age of six is not deeply concerned about climate change. He points to a transformation in awareness, implying that climate issues have moved from a distant or theoretical concern to something that many children are actively thinking about and worrying over. He references concrete manifestations that shape public attention: droughts, storms, and the seaside being ruined, which together undermine life and daily existence. This framing emphasizes how climate-related events are presented as immediate and tangible threats that affect livelihoods and environments, reinforcing the impression that the problem is no longer abstract but present and pressing for younger generations.
Speaker 1 expands the discussion by noting that corona has, unfortunately, eclipsed the importance of this climate conversation. He acknowledges the immense devastation caused by the coronavirus but stresses the need to think long term about the planet. This observation places the climate discussion in the context of a broader global emergency, suggesting that the immediacy and scale of the pandemic have drawn attention away from ongoing environmental concerns that require sustained, future-oriented thinking. The remark implies a tension between addressing an acute crisis and maintaining focus on longer-term planetary health and sustainability.
Speaker 0 responds by characterizing the pandemic as a distraction, and more than that, as a tragedy with knock-on effects. He uses the word “distraction” to describe how corona competes for attention that might otherwise be directed toward climate issues, while also calling it a tragedy to acknowledge its severe impact. The phrase “knock on effect” underscores that the pandemic’s consequences reverberate beyond the immediate health crisis, potentially influencing climate-related responses, policy priorities, and public awareness in ways that complicate efforts to address environmental challenges.
Overall, the exchange highlights a shared concern that climate change has become a salient issue for children and that global attention to environmental problems competes with other major crises, most notably the COVID-19 pandemic. It also underscores a tension between the urgency of immediate crises and the necessity of sustained, long-term planetary thinking.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I think the phenomenal change that's come about in the last two or three years is that probably isn't a child over the age of six that isn't deeply concerned about climate change. I mean, there were reports in the past, but now the focus of the world are on those problems, whether it's droughts, it's storms, whether it's the seaside being ruined, just undermining life.
Speaker 1: Everything. And and in a way, corona has slightly, I'm afraid, eclipsed the importance of this conversation. No one's saying corona isn't incredibly devastating, but actually, we do need to think long term about the planet.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And it's a distraction. Well, more than a distraction. It's a tragedy, but it does have that knock on effect. Distraction distractions.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
The Rabbi who owns the largest pornography company in the world explains why. The *rabbi* says his goal is to legitimize porn in society, eliminate its taboo, and spread porn as far as possible. I remind you that OnlyFans is AIPAC's biggest donor. https://t.co/p1HlteHgB0
Video Transcript AI Summary
Interviewer: Out of all the businesses you guys could buy, why did you guys target buying Pornhub?
Executive: We saw an extraordinary opportunity. The fact that we've made the acquisition should tell you this is a space that has not had mainstream investment. It's a space that's legal—it's legal, and in every Western democracy it's constitutionally protected, and it could not be outlawed even if you wanted to. But it doesn't have that legitimacy. Nobody wants to say they are the owners of a major adult company. They want the benefits of owning a major adult company without being out front and engaging with other tech businesses, government, law enforcement, regulation in the way the modern tech industry has to. We saw in this an arbitrage opportunity where people from mainstream professional networks—law, law enforcement, tech, finance, etc.—could bring this industry into the twenty-first century. We saw an extraordinary opportunity to do that with this jewel of an asset, Pornhub, and the entire company.
Interviewer: I love it. Here are some stats. In 2018 Pornhub alone witnessed a jaw-dropping 5.8 billion hours of content consumption. Our average visit is about ten and a half minutes. They probably got off the computer and left the website on, but there’s a different story there. So that’s nearly 665 centuries of material over a single platform in just one year. Here’s another: the world was flocking to Pornhub in 2018 with 63,992 new visitors per minute. Is that true? 63,992 new visitors per month.
Executive: About does it sound unreasonable?
Interviewer: 33 and a half billion visitors. Insane. The most popular day to visit Pornhub is Sunday. You guys have all these different stats, and you even put up a stat recently on which state consumed the least while the election was going on and who was committed to it. So you’re also involved in the election stuff that’s going on. But at the same time, you’ve got a petition—
Executive: More than 2,200,000 people have signed an online petition to shut down the site.
Interviewer: Why do you think that is?
Executive: The topic of pornography has always been a divisive one. It has to do with sexuality in general. There are always going to be different views about human sexuality, and pornography is emblematic of those. It’s sex for the public. So you’re going to have people with deeply held convictions about the proper place of sex in our society, and that’s a good debate. But you take two and a half million signatures; we have a 130,000,000 daily active users. People have voted with their mice and with their feet in terms of where they’re going. But, of course, it’s going to be a subject of public debate.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Out of all the businesses you guys could buy, why did you guys target buying Pornhub?
Speaker 1: Yeah. So we saw an extraordinary opportunity. You know, the fact that we're it's it's no it's newsworthy or noteworthy that we've made the acquisition. That should tell you that this is a space that has not had mainstream investment. Right?
That it's a space I always said, you know, when we looked at the business, it's a business that's legal. Not only is it legal, but in every Western democracy, it's constitutionally protected. It it could not be outlawed even if you wanted to, but it doesn't have that legitimacy. And one of the reasons for that, and as we start to examine the business further, was that nobody wanted to say we are the owners of a major adult company. Right?
Everyone they sort of they wanted the benefits of owning a major adult company. It's a profitable business, but nobody wanted to be out front and engaging with other tech businesses, with government, with law enforcement, with regulation in that sort of way that the modern tech industry has to. So we saw in that this arbitrage opportunity, right? Where if people who come from, you know, the mainstream professional networks, whether it's law, law enforcement, tech, finance, etcetera, this is an opportunity to really bring this industry into the twenty first century. We saw an extraordinary opportunity to do that with this, you know, this jewel of an asset, Pornhub, but obviously with the entire company.
Speaker 0: I love it. Said jewel of an asset. So I'm gonna give you some stats here that that that we see. So one, it says 2018 Pornhub alone witnessed a jaw drop in five point eight billion hours of content consumption, which, by way, is kinda strange because most men should only be watching for a minute or two. Right?
But this is like when you hear 5,800,000,000 No.
Speaker 1: Our average visit is about ten and a half minutes.
Speaker 0: They probably got off the computer and they left the website on, but there's a different story there. So that's nearly 665 centuries of material over a single platform in just one year. Here's another one for you. The world was flocking to Pornhub in 2018 with a whopping sixty three thousand nine ninety two new visitors per minute. Is that true?
Sixty three thousand nine ninety two new visitors per month.
Speaker 1: About does it does it sound unreasonable?
Speaker 0: 33 and a half billion visitors. Insane. Right? Mhmm. The most popular day to visit Pornhub is Sunday.
You guys got all these different stats, and you even put up a stat recently on which state consumed the least while the election was going on and who Yes. Was committed to it. So you're also involved in the election stuff that's going on. Right? But at the same time, you got you got a petition.
I think something came out that says, more than two point thank you so much, Kelly. More than 2,200,000 people have signed an online petition to shut down the site. Why do you think that is?
Speaker 1: Well, I think that the topic of pornography has always been a divisive one. I think it has to do with the topic of sexuality in general. Right? There are always gonna be different views about human sexuality, and pornography is just emblematic of those. In fact, it's a little more public.
It's more in your face. That's the nature of it. It's sex for the public. So you're gonna have people who have really deeply held convictions about the proper place of sex in our society, and that's that's a good debate. There's nothing wrong with that with that debate.
But you take two and a half million signatures, we have a 130,000,000 daily active users. So people have voted with their mice and with their feet in terms of where they're gonna go. But, of course, it's gonna be a subject of public debate.
reSee.it AI Summary
I question whether solar farms are as green as they seem. Panels come wrapped in non-recyclable plastic that may end up in landfills as they degrade. The large land footprints can disrupt local ecosystems and agriculture. Can technology be truly green if it risks harming the very ecosystems it aims to protect? I think we must re-evaluate how net-zero goals affect land and communities, and whether we’re trading one problem for another.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Are solar farms really the 'green' solution we think they are? When we see vast fields of solar panels, it feels like progress towards a sustainable future. But there's more beneath the sunlit surface. Did you know many of these panels are wrapped in plastic packaging that can't be recycled? As they degrade, they may end up contributing to future landfill problems. Consider the irony: clean energy infrastructure built on the remains of unusable, non-biodegradable materials. Plus, the vast land area needed can disrupt local ecosystems and agriculture. Can technology truly be considered 'green' if it potentially harms the ecosystem it's meant to protect? Perhaps it's time to re-evaluate how our pursuit of net-zero impacts not just the climate, but the land and communities beneath our very feet. Are we trading one environmental issue for another?
Video Transcript AI Summary
Katie Hopkins enters a West Country field where a solar panel farm is being installed. She films as she argues that the countryside is being destroyed to place solar panels, claiming that “the valley is so pretty” and describing it as “heartbreaking.” She says she walked onto the site because the gate was open and insists she is showing what’s being done to farmland.
She points to plastic packaging around the solar equipment, asserting that it “cannot be recycled, obviously,” and contends that the packaging is environmentally harmful. Hopkins highlights the solar panels themselves, noting their large size and the plastic wrap on them, and she states that “these solar panels can’t be recycled,” implying that much of it will become landfill in the future.
Hopkins identifies herself and frames her critique as a stand against what she calls “the ridiculousness of net zero,” arguing against a perceived lie about net zero and its supposed benefits. She calls the situation “Batshit Bonkers Britain” and says she is trying to show people what’s been done to the countryside, vowing not to blame the workers but to condemn the vandalism of the countryside.
She emphasizes that the valley belongs to the public and not to the company (“this is my countryside. It’s not yours, and it’s certainly not Canadian solar panels”). Hopkins describes herself as a countryside walker and rebukes those in the site, telling them she does not have access and that she shouldn’t be there, while noting that she did “let myself on” because the gate was open.
She addresses the workers, arguing that they are angry with her and that she does not deserve to be there. Hopkins insists that the installation amounts to vandalism, even as she acknowledges the workers’ jobs. She asks what the workers are doing and expresses concern for safety, claiming she is “a dangerous person” and that her safety is at risk. She prays for reform to roll back net zero policies and for the end of what she calls “needless wanton vandalism of our countryside.”
Throughout, she reiterates her stance against net zero and frames the solar project as environmentally and aesthetically harmful, arguing against the idea that the project is good for the environment and for rural areas. She also repeatedly asserts ownership of the countryside and questions the legitimacy of the installation by Canadian Solar. The scene ends with her leaving the site after maintaining that she filmed to inform her audience of what she perceives as damage to the countryside.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So just wanted to bring you here to show you. Hello. Who are you? Sorry. Oh, I'm I've just been let in by by these guys.
This is a solar panel farm that's been put up in the West Country. Look at this field down here that they're completely ripping up in order to can't be on here. No. Thank you. Don't push me, guys.
You can't touch me. Can't on be here. I just walked in. You can't be on here. You're completely destroying the valley to put solar panels up and these solar panels are going they're just ripping up This is the big entire areas of our countryside.
And let me show you as well the plastic packaging that these guys have. So I think the one you're getting across with me is you that's ripping up my countryside. Please don't discuss with me. Thank you. So the plastic packaging that goes around all of this stuff, none of this can be recycled, obviously, but it's so green.
It's so good for the environment, I'm sure. And I'm sure local people didn't want this on their farmland either because this makes it harder for farmers to be able to rent space. Please don't touch me. And then over here, let me show you these boxes. I'll go in a moment.
Okay. I just want to show people what's being delivered to our farmland. And I let myself in. It was no one else. Thank you.
And here is all the solar panels. Bear in mind these solar panels can't be recycled. So this is all future landfill. Look at the look at the size of these things and look at all the plastic wrap on there. Film me, sir.
Yeah. My name's Katie Hopkins. I'm just trying to stand up for the countryside and the ridiculousness of net zero. These are the same solar panels that they're gonna be putting up at the same time that they want to dim the sun. I hope you're enjoying this.
This is Batshit Bonkers Britain. My name is Katie Hopkins. And then here, look at this look at the state of this. This is what's so distressing is the lie about net zero. The lie that this is good for us.
And what's upsetting as well is that these guys are like angry with me. All I'm trying to do is show you. I'm just trying to show you what's been I mean, this valley is so pretty. It's heartbreaking. Look at it.
This is the rolling countryside that we belong to, that belongs to us, and this is what these vandals are doing to it. I don't blame the people. I don't blame the workers. People But need a this I don't have access to do this. Is disgusting.
Sorry? You don't have access. I don't have access. Well, apparently, I do. But I'm just showing people what's being done.
You can't agree with this. What's going on. You cannot possibly agree with this. I know it's your job. I know you need a job, but this is just absolute vandalism.
What are you doing right now? It's not safe. I'm not safe. I'm I'm typically not safe, honestly. I'm quite a dangerous person.
It is heartbreaking. I pray to God. I pray to God reform get in. I pray we can roll back on this net zero bollocks, and I pray that this needless wanton vandalism of our countryside can stop Canadian solar. I mean, is there anything worse?
Look at it. Jesus. Okay. I'm fine. Please.
It's I'm going now. I just wanted to do my video. Now I'm off. No. You don't have the authority to go inside.
Okay? Nice meeting What did you say? You don't have the authority to go inside the site. But it's my countryside. I do have the authority.
It is in my countryside. It's not yours, and it's certainly not Canadian solar panels. I let myself on, though. I'm sorry. But it's a working side.
Yeah. But the gate was open, and I just let myself on. Well, gate was open. The gate was open. I'm just a handles.
But I'm just a countryside walker. I'm not a countryside walker. You're a a personality and you shouldn't be on here with that or without helmet or anything. But the but the gate was open. Go ahead.
Off, please. Please. Thank you. Off please. Your gate was open.
I wandered in. I would have thought you guys. I would have thought with all of your big boys. Was there, so you obviously just ignored him and walked on and No. No one stopped me.
I've had my film going. All of you big boys here, no one stopped me. Out. Out, please. Just go.
Look at your little face. Should be but children. I do. I can tell. It's the way I speak to my dogs as well.
Well, maybe your boys need to work on your security, but you shouldn't be vandalizing. Excuse me. Can you leave? Yeah. I won't be.
No. You shouldn't be vandalizing my countryside. No. I'm not talking to I'm talking to the 1,200,000 people that follow me, but you shouldn't be vandalizing the countryside. One's listening to me.
I'll put you in better than your people do. Just checking Thank you. You'd quite like it if I got run over, would you?
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Smart Meters are NOT what you think they are! https://t.co/1ggsPXRyyI
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 describes smart meters as more than just electricity meters, asserting they function as personal surveillance devices. They claim smart meters sense when devices are turned on or off, measure watt usage (even for small devices like an electric toothbrush), and transmit that data wirelessly through neighbors’ meters to the power company. The data allegedly records electric consumption every minute, stored forever on computers the public cannot access, revealing when someone is home, asleep, on vacation, hosting visitors, using lamps or tools, running a business from home, or bootlegging energy off the grid. The speaker asserts this creates a vivid profile of private living patterns and indicates at-home presence on the night of a murder.
The speaker contends this is not electrical metering but personal surveillance—a warrantless search daily. They claim personal life information travels from the meter to the power company, to the government, police, and insurance companies, and to anyone who partners with the power company to access it. The speaker further asserts that even without a direct data-sharing agreement, information can be intercepted via the wireless signal from the meter, because smart meters are radio transmitters. They identify a one-watt radio station licensed by the FCC as the transmitter sending all electrical life details to a data center.
Examples are given of authorities in Ohio, Texas, and British Columbia using smart meter data to pinpoint marijuana grow houses, enforce business licenses, and punish private home activities, implying surveillance beyond what residents accept. The claim is made that the power company can sell personal life data to anyone, and that unusual power usage patterns can be used as probable cause to raid a home for growing marijuana or running a computer server without a license.
The speaker describes this level of surveillance as “about as big brother as it gets,” with utility workers going door-to-door to install meters. They express a personal opinion that smart meters should be removed from homes, arguing that power companies cannot claim the right to install surveillance devices on residences. They equate smart meters with wiretapping and note wiretapping is illegal in all U.S. states and federal territories. The speaker asserts that allowing a smart meter is tantamount to walking around with a constant webcam on one’s head and accuses the industry of relying on implied consent—the idea that permission is granted if the utility can change the meter, even if residents don’t understand the scope of what’s happening.
As a practical step, the speaker advises telling utilities not to change the meter, noting that older meters were billed successfully. They claim to have sent a certified letter denying installation of a smart meter and mention a copy of their letter is available in the video’s description for viewers to adapt. They state post office certified mail is used to obtain a receipt. The speaker concludes that if the meters are installed on every house in America, it would cease to be America.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: World of smart meters. That means your electric meter will do so much more than just show how much electricity you use. The new smart meters are watching you. They sense all kinds of goings on. They see when you turn something on or off.
They see how many watts your electric toothbrush pulls. They send the record of that little event over wireless networks bouncing through your neighbor's smart meters all the way to the power company where they keep record of all your electric consumption volumes and patterns every minute of every day and store that data forever on computers that you'll never get to see. That data shows when you are at home, shows when you're sleeping, shows when you're on vacation, when you have visitors, when you use a lamp, a power tool, some extra computers, and if you look like you're running a business out of your home. It even senses when you bootleg energy off the grid. Your smart meter data shows a vivid profile of your personal living patterns and whether or not you were at home on the night of the murder.
This is not electrical metering. This is personal surveillance. This is a search without a warrant every day. This is your personal private life going straight out through your electric meter to the power company, to the government, to the police, to the insurance company, to anyone who cuts a deal with your power company to look at your life under a microscope. Sorry.
It's actually worse than that. People who don't cut a deal can get your information too by simply intercepting the wireless signal spewing from the side of your house. Yes. Smart meters are radio transmitters. Here's how you tell.
This one is a one watt radio station licensed by the FCC. On this all news radio station, every detail of your electrical life is shooting off to some institutional data center somewhere. Already, the police in Ohio, Texas, British Columbia, and places I don't know about are regularly using smart meter data to pinpoint marijuana grow houses, enforce business licenses, and punish people for doing things in the privacy of their own homes that you were not supposed to do, but they wouldn't even know you were doing if they weren't spying on you. Your power company apparently gets to sell your personal life story to whomever it wants. Any unusual power consumption pattern is considered probable cause to raid you for growing marijuana or running a computer server without a business license.
This is about as big brother as it gets. Those friendly men with their truckload of smart meters are going door to door with something a little different than a Christmas Carol. My personal opinion is that you and I need to demand that these things be taken off our homes. It is not possible for your power company to claim they have the right to install a surveillance device on your house. Smart meters are no different from wiretapping devices.
And in case you didn't know, wiretapping is illegal in all 50 of the states and the federal territories. If you let your power company put a smart meter on your house, you may as well walk around all day with a Facebook helmet webcam pointed at yourself. They have convinced themselves installing smart meters is lawful by some reaching to the moon jive called implied consent. If you say they can change your meter, they pretend you consent even when you don't know really what they're doing. Here's a tip.
Tell them they can't change your meter. They had no trouble billing you with the old meter. If you send them a notice by certified mail that they may not install a smart meter or any other surveillance device on your house, their implied consent goes out the window. I wouldn't do that if I were you. In fact, I did that, and I'm not even you.
You can see a copy of my letter in the drop down next to this video. You can copy and paste that into your word processor. Make sure and change the info into your own info. The post office will give you the certified mail slip. Those friendly guys on the sidewalk told me that they plan to put a smart meter on every house in America.
If they do that, it will no longer be America.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
The biggest manipulation of history https://t.co/ndMeKILEPg
Video Transcript AI Summary
Coca-Cola, having abandoned cocaine content and sticking to cola, noticed that people favored Coke in summer and less in winter, thinking of it as not a winter drink. Advertisers wanted to tempt people to drink Coca-Cola in winter as well and conceived a plan to anchor Coca-Cola in Christmas. At the time, Christmas wasn’t as big as Easter in cultural importance; Easter was the major Christian tradition, withMass and the focus on Christ’s birth versus his death and return.
To shift Christmas, Coca-Cola advertisers turned to Santa Claus. They found Saint Nicholas was being decanonized and merged him with Kris Kringle. Kris Kringle, described as a Danish thief whose job was a chimney sweep who could pop his shoulders out to fit down a chimney, was integrated into the Santa narrative. Coca-Cola then altered the character’s appearance: removed the young, green-and-brown-clad Saint Nicholas and transformed him into an old man with white hair, colored in Coca-Cola red and white, even giving him pink skin to align with Coca-Cola colors. This produced Santa Claus as a Coca-Cola icon, linking him to Christmas and the idea that he drinks Coca-Cola and brings presents, which helped elongate Christmas into a central holiday.
As a result, Christmas became the emotionally charged, central Christian holiday in the United States, shaping how people viewed the season. This shift influenced other religious celebrations; for Jews, who might have wished for a Christmas tree, Hanukkah did not hold the same weight, yet competition emerged for attention during that period. The spread continued to influence other celebrations like Kwanzaa as Coca-Cola advertisers sought to boost Coke consumption during the season.
The broader claim is that these advertising efforts changed not only holiday tradition but also religion, culture, and economics, illustrating the potential impact of targeted marketing. The passage closes by suggesting the hypothetical influence on government thinking when marketing strategies shape cultural and religious practices.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Coca Cola was doing the math on its sales. I believe by that point, already abandoned the cocaine content. It was just cola at that point. But once you name something cocaine cola, how do you ever walk back from that? You know what I mean?
It's too good of a name. So they noticed something. People bought Coca Cola in the summer. A little bit in the fall, a little bit in spring, not in the winter. People didn't think of it as a winter drink.
So the Coca Cola advertisers were like, wow, wouldn't it be great if we could somehow trick people or convince people or talk people or Cokes or whatever, brainwash people into drinking Coca Cola in the winter too. So here's what Coca Cola advertisers came up with. They thought, what if we somehow worked Coca Cola into Christmas? Now, I know what you're thinking. Christmas is such a big deal.
Not back then. Back then, Easter was the big deal. Christmas was important. People would go do mass to commemorate Christ's birth, but everybody's born. The real interesting thing is to be killed, executed, and then come back two days later.
That's that's fascinating, which is why people had focused on Easter. So what the Coca Cola advertisers did was they found a saint who was about to be decanonized, Santa Claus, the Catholic church with like, he hasn't performed a miracle in a while. Let's unemploy him. They grabbed him. They merged him with the story of Saint Nick.
And then they got a they got somebody got inspired. And the inspiration was to merge him with Kris Kringle. Kris Kringle was a Danish thief whose job in the day was a chimney sweep. He could pop his shoulders out and he could fit down a chimney. He would rob your house and then work his way back up, but you'd have a clean chimney.
And they merged this together, but they then took Saint Nicholas out of he was usually portrayed as a young man and skinny young man in green and brown clothing. They stuck him in Coca Cola colors, red and white. They even decided to give him some pink in his skin to keep the Coca Cola colors going, so they made him an old man so he could have white hair, and then they stuck him on the bottom. That's why periodically, you'll see Santa Claus on a Coca Cola can around Christmas time because they made him up, and they transformed Christmas. So instead of Christmas being an important emotional event and especially involved event necessarily.
I mean, were nice traditions around it, stockings, and maybe a Christmas tree. They turned it into this thing where all of a sudden this mythical being who drinks a lot of Coca Cola is bringing you presents. I guess that's how he stays up so late because think about how many hours it would take to bring presents to everybody. And in the process now, the average Christian in United States at least thinks Christmas is the important Christian holiday. And it's forced other religions to think about what holiday they could promote during that time period, like Hanukkah.
Hanukkah was never especially important. I mean, it's important, but not like you wouldn't revolve evolve like a whole bunch of time and energy and effort around it. But then, right, if you're Jewish and you're like looking at your kids going, we wish we had a Christmas tree. You need something to compete with this. And the next thing you know, there's a Kwan zaa because of Coca Cola advertisers trying to get you to drink more Coca Cola.
They've changed our religion. They've changed our culture. They've changed us economically. So you can imagine what happens when you have a government deliberately thinking about these things.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
The Rothschild family tree, arguably the most powerful bloodline on Earth. https://t.co/9akRR0MgOd
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Rothschild name comes from the German for red shield, a mark on their house. The story begins with Meyer Amschel Rothschild, a dealer in rare coins and apprentice banker who became a court Jew to William the Ninth of Hesse Castle. A court Jew was an official position, where Christians were barred from certain money-lending, so nobles hired Jews to manage finances. Meyer grew rich managing money for one prince, then for other princes and governments, and he created a Rothschild bank. He sent his five sons to lead branches in five capitals: Amschel in Frankfurt, Solomon in Vienna, Nathan in London, Carl in Naples, and James in Paris. The network of agents enabled safe gold transfers and rapid communication across Europe, making all five branches successful, with the London branch the most prominent. During the Napoleonic Wars, Nathan helped finance the British war effort and salaries across the continent. A legend that the family made their fortune by learning of Napoleon’s defeat a day early is not true; they profited by predicting European market movements and investing accordingly. By the 1820s, the Rothschilds were Europe’s wealthiest family and remained influential in 19th-century international finance. The five brothers were titled Barons by the Emperor of Austria; Nathan, outside Europe, did not use the title.
In the third generation, almost all the males married their first cousins to keep wealth within the family. Anselm, Solomon’s son, married Charlotte, daughter of Nathan; Lionel, Nathan’s son, married Charlotte, daughter of Carl from the Italian branch. The Frankfurt branch and the Naples branch eventually closed after the original arrangements: the eldest Frankfurt handler died childless and the two sons of Carl from the Italian branch took over; the middle son’s line ended with no heirs.
Austrian branch: after Amschel Rothschild’s death, the Austrian line became senior. By the fourth generation, some scions pursued wealth via art and mansions rather than banking. Nathaniel, the firstborn, favored wealth, Ferdinand moved to Great Britain and became an MP, and Albert, the third son, led the Austrian branch after marrying a French-branch cousin. The Austrian fortunes declined in the twentieth century due to World War I debt defaults, the Great Depression, and Nazi seizures. Louis de Rothschild was ransomed by the Nazis for about $21,000,000. The last male Austrian Rothschild died in 1976, making the British branch the most senior today. The Italian branch fizzled but intermarried with the British branch; the French branch remains active.
The French branch began with James, who married his niece Betty, daughter of Anselm. They had four sons; three have living male descendants. Solomon ended up in America, but the American branch never started. Edmund supported early Zionism, purchasing land from the Ottomans for Jewish settlement; his son James funded the Knesset building in Jerusalem. The main French branch today is led by David de Rothschild. In 2003, the French Rothschild company merged with the British one, with David as chairman. Nathan Rothschild helped end slavery in the UK by funding its undoing. The British branch’s running company, Rothschild & Co, is now associated with David de Rothschild and Edmund de Rothschild’s branch, run most recently by Benjamin de Rothschild. Evelyn Rothschild, who ran the British firm with Jacob, later saw a merger with the French branch.
If you go to rothschild.com, you’ll see two main Rothschild companies: Rothschild & Co and Edmund de Rothschild. Edmund is the only Rothschild on Forbes' billionaires list. This was a quick look at the Rothschild dynasty.
Are they super rich? Yes, they certainly are.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Today I'm going to show you the family tree of the Rothschild family, one of the wealthiest families in world history as well as one of the most controversial. This video is part one of a two part collaboration with fellow YouTuber MrBeat. In part one, I'll be focusing primarily on the family tree and introducing you to some of the more well known members of the Rothschild dynasty. In part two, Mr. Beat, a social studies teacher, will be delving deeper into the family's history and discussing some of the many conspiracy theories that have come to be associated with their name.
So first of all, the name Rothschild comes from the German for red shield. It's a reference to the fact that the family originally used a red shield as an identifying mark on their house. Their story begins in Germany with this individual here, Meyer Amschel Rothschild, who was initially a dealer in rare coins and an apprentice banker. However, things really took off for him because of a special relationship he had with a German prince, William the ninth of Hesse Castle. That prince appointed Meyer to be his court Jew.
A court Jew was actually an official position in those days. Because Christians were prohibited from certain types of money lending, nobles would often hire a Jew to fulfill this role. So, Meyer ended up managing the money for one of the richest princes in Europe, and by doing so, he himself became very rich as well. Eventually, he started managing money for other princes and even entire governments. By this point, he had several adult sons.
So what he did was he created a Rothschild bank, and he sent each of his five sons to a different capital in Europe to run a branch there. His eldest son, Amschel, ran the original branch in Frankfurt, and then his son Solomon was sent to Vienna, Nathan to London, Carl to Naples, and James to Paris. The family then developed a network of agents that allowed for safe and speedy transfer of gold across the continent, as well as for ease of communication between the various branches. This made all five branches extremely successful however, the London branch was perhaps the most successful of all. During the Napoleonic Wars, Nathan almost single handedly financed the entire British war effort and took care of paying British troops and their allies across the continent.
There's a well known legend that the family made their millions by taking advantage of the fact that they received word of Napoleon's defeat one day ahead of everyone else in London. But that story is not actually true. Although they did receive word of the defeat before everyone else, they didn't actually make money off that fact. What they did make money off of is accurately predicting what would happen in European markets over the next several years, and making the right investments based on those predictions. So by the 1820s, the Rothschilds were the wealthiest family in Europe, and they continued to be hugely influential within the world of international finance throughout the nineteenth century.
The five brothers were given the title of Baron by the Emperor of Austria, which is why you often see the German Von or a French de before their last name. Nathan, being based outside of the continent, was one of the few that did not use the title. So let's look at the third generation Rothschilds. Almost all of the males in the third generation married one of their female first cousins. This ensured that the dynasty's wealth stayed within the family.
So for example, Anselm, the firstborn son of Solomon, married his cousin Charlotte, the daughter of Nathan. He's shown in yellow because he's from the Austrian branch, and she's shown in red because she's a member of the British branch. Likewise, Lionel, the firstborn son of Nathan, married his cousin, also named Charlotte, but she was a daughter of Carl from the Italian branch. So let's look at each one of these branches in turn. The eldest son never married, so when he died the original Frankfurt branch was taken over by two of the sons of Carl from the Italian branch, these two individuals here.
The middle son took over the Italian branch, but none of these individuals had heirs. So eventually both the Frankfurt branch and the Naples branch closed. Let's look at the Austrian branch next. With the death of Amschel Rothschild, the Austrian branch became the senior branch, and the eldest son of Solomon became the most senior male in the family. By the time we get to the fourth generation, these people were born directly into extreme wealth.
Therefore, some of them weren't necessarily interested in the hard work of running a major bank. They were more interested in collecting art, building mansions, and pursuing their hobbies. This was the case for the firstborn son, Nathaniel. The second son, Ferdinand, actually moved to Great Britain and eventually served as a member of parliament there. So it was the third son named Albert who ended up taking over the Austrian branch.
He married a cousin from the French branch. From there, Albert's sons took over the business in Vienna. On the chart, I've only shown one of these sons, but there were a few others as well. However, the fortunes of this entire branch of the family declined quickly in the twentieth century due to three major events. First of all, Austria lost World War I, and therefore many of debtors defaulted on their loans.
Second, they were hit hard by the Great Depression, and in fact were one of the first banks to declare bankruptcy. Third, and most devastating of all, most of their assets were seized when the Nazis came to power. In fact, one of the brothers, Louis de Rothschild, who I've shown here, was captured by the Nazis and ransomed for $21,000,000 that's almost $350,000,000 in today's dollars perhaps the largest ransom ever paid. The last male member of the Austrian branch died in 1976, which is why the British branch is currently the most senior branch today. But we're going to skip the British branch for now and quickly look at the last two branches first.
I've already mentioned that the Italian branch eventually fizzled out. They intermarried with the British branch though, so their legacy lives on through that connection. That leaves the French branch. That branch is the only one other than the senior British branch that still exists today. It started with James, the youngest of the five original brothers.
He married his niece, Betty, who was the daughter of his brother Anselm. They had four sons, three of whom have male line descendants still living today. The third son, Solomon, actually ended up in America. The idea was that he might eventually start a branch there, but Solomon died young and an American branch never did come to exist. The youngest son, Edmund, was a big supporter of the early Zionist movement.
Long before the Holocaust and decades before the British occupation of Palestine, Edmund purchased land from the Ottomans and helped fund the first Jewish settlement in what is today the state of Israel. His son James would later bequeath the funds that went on to be used to build the Knesset building in Jerusalem, which today houses the Israeli parliament. However, the main branch of the French family is this one here. It is currently led by David de Rothschild. In 2003, the main Rothschild company in France merged with the main Rothschild company in Britain, with David being made chairman.
So in terms of the actual business side of the Rothschild Empire, David serves as the chairman of the World Jewish Congress, an international organization based in New York that represents Jewish diplomatic interests across the globe. Okay, I've left the British branch for last because it was the most successful, is currently the senior branch, and it's the branch that people in the English speaking world are most familiar with. It starts with Nathan Rothschild, third son of Meyer Amschel. As I mentioned earlier, he earned a lot of money for the family's firm in the years following Napoleon's defeat. What's less known though is he was also involved in ending slavery in The UK, using millions of dollars to help buy and free slaves.
Nathan had four sons. Two of them were engaged in politics as well as finance and served as members of parliament. Initially, Lionel was elected but unable to sit in parliament because he was a Jew. However, laws were changed, and in 1958, he became the first Jew to actually sit in parliament. His brother, Meyer, and his son, Nathan, joining him shortly thereafter.
I'll also point out this brother here, Anthony. He was the first Rothschild to be granted a British hereditary title. He was made a baronet, which is slightly lower than a baron and meant that he was still a commoner, but it was an important title nonetheless. He did not have any sons though, so his title passed to his nephew Nathan. Nathan was later upgraded to the title of Baron and thus became the first Rothschild to become a member of the British nobility and also the first Jew to sit in the House of Lords.
Nathan, as the senior most heir of his grandfather Nathan, was also head of the British branch like his father was before him. He was also involved in funding Cecil Rhodes, founder of Rhodesia and the De Beers Diamond Company. You'll notice here that Nathan married a cousin from the Italian branch of the family. He was followed by his son Walter, who was the second Baron Rothschild. Like his father and grandfather, he too served as a member of parliament.
He is mostly remembered for his association with the Balfour Declaration, which he helped to write and which was presented to him in 1917 by the British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour. It was the first official statement by the British government in support of the creation of national homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine. However, not all of the Rothschilds were Zionists. This cousin here, who also served as an MP, was actually against the creation of a Jewish state, and he created the League of British Jews to oppose it. But back to Walter.
Walter had no legitimate children, so the next Baron Rothschild was his nephew, Victor. Victor was a member of MI five during World War II and was an advisor to many British Prime Ministers up to and including Margaret Thatcher, although at one point he was suspected to be a Soviet spy. He, however, was cleared of those charges. He was followed by his son Jacob, who is the fourth and current Baron Rothschild, currently also the most senior male member descendant of Meyer Amschel Rothschild. He has a son named Nathaniel who will one day become the fifth Baron.
It is Jacob's face that is often seen in the many conspiracy theory videos about the Rothschilds. Let me point out a few other interesting connections. Jacob has a half sister who is a Harvard professor and married to Nobel Prize winning economist Amartya Sen. He also has a half brother who married into the Guinness family. Yes, the family of Beer and Book of Records fame.
They had three children. Their son married into the Hilton family of hotel fame and is the brother-in-law of Paris Hilton. Their daughters married the Goldsmith brothers, one of whom is currently a British MP. On the business side of things, the running of the actual company established by Nathan Rothschild eventually came to be run by this branch of the family here, most recently Evelyn Rothschild, who also served as the personal financial advisor to Queen Elizabeth. In the 1980s, there was a family feud between Jacob and Evelyn that ended in Jacob leaving the original company.
Later, after Evelyn retired, the British firm eventually merged with the French branch, as I mentioned earlier, and is currently being run by David de Rothschild. If you go to their website, rothschild.com, you'll notice that there are links to two main Rothschild companies. Rothschild and Co. Is that original company started by Nathan, now run by David de Rothschild. Edmund de Rothschild is a company run by a junior part of the French branch and is currently run by Benjamin de Rothschild.
You can see that the company name is named after his father. Interestingly, if you do a search on the Forbes list of billionaires, he's the only member of the Rothschild family that you will find. So that was a quick look at the Rothschild dynasty. Are they super rich? Yes, they certainly are.
Do they
reSee.it AI Summary
I report that General Flynn claims the AIDS virus was manufactured by the U.S. government, that it creates diseases and drugs that don’t help, including vaccines, and that Fauci created AZT, causing hundreds of thousands of deaths.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
General Flynn says if you dig into the AIDS virus, you’ll find that it was likely manufactured by the US Government “What it really comes down to is our government involved in manufacturing diseases and then manufacturing drugs that are supposed to help when in fact they don’t help, just like the vaccines that we have now.” He also says Fauci created the HIV drug AZT which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of men.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 argues that the AIDS virus, like COVID and monkeypox, was manufactured for a specific reason, and claims that all of these were produced by the United States government. They state that AZT, “the total numbers of [people] … killed by taking a drug that was known at the time that was going to actually have that kind of an effect,” contributed to mass deaths, and that buyers clubs emerged as a form of a black market to obtain treatments. They compare this to the situation with COVID, noting that obtaining ivermectin felt like buying on the black market, despite ivermectin having won a health Nobel prize years ago, and they describe the ongoing insanity of government actors who have not yet been held accountable.
They reference history involving Ted Kennedy and his uncle, suggesting a broader pattern of government activity linked to disease manufacturing and drug development that purportedly does not help, paralleling the vaccines “that we have now learned.” The speaker shares a personal update about a friend who recently underwent surgery and is now facing extubation after three bypasses, describing him as a healthy man who should not be having these problems, and likening his situation to other cases they know of.
The speaker claims to know “about six” people who were fully vaccinated due to job or other requirements and who have since died, using these experiences to illustrate perceived consequences of vaccination programs. They pivot to Anthony Fauci, asserting that Fauci’s involvement in government actions spans “twenty five, thirty five years,” and claims Fauci has been involved in nefarious acts that have resulted in the deaths of many people. They reference Bobby Kennedy describing the creation of a drug that allegedly caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of men through AIDS.
The speaker concludes with a pointed remark about AIDS and gay people, insisting that “nobody deserves that kind of a fate,” emphasizing that the tragedies described apply to all affected groups, and reiterating the belief that the government and officials have engaged in harmful, deadly activities related to disease and treatment.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And I think if you really dug deep into the whole AIDS virus, the whole the virus of it, that you're you know, that you would find that it was probably like we learned with COVID and monkeypox. Right? Monkeypox. The m pox. The keyword, I think, for all of these is manufactured and manufactured for a specific reason, and in our case, all by The United States Of America, all by the United States government.
And so AZT, you know, as he said, and I I know the the total numbers of it's it's probably well north to that that were that were killed by taking a drug that was known at the time that was going to actually have that kind of an effect. And so then they created these buyers clubs, you know, and we talked about the buyers club. This is really a black market. When when you think about COVID, we almost had to have, you know, to get ivermectin was like having to go on the black market, even though ivermectin, won a health prize health Nobel prize years ago. I mean, the insanity that we are faced with when we talk about people in our government that have still yet to be held accountable.
And you know, you can look through all the other stuff that he talked about with his uncle Ted, senator Ted Kennedy, who's got his own interesting background. In all that all that other the other, you know, sort of first that senator Kennedy did, what it really comes down to is our government involved in manufacturing diseases and then manufacturing drugs that are supposed to help when in fact they don't help just like the vaccines that we have now learned. It's interesting that it just so happens that today I got an update on my friend that did go in for surgery. He ended up And this is a very healthy guy, known my whole life. He ended up having to go three bypasses.
Just came out of surgery and they're gonna extubate him off of a breathing apparatus. I mean, this is a guy that should be no problems, and he's a very healthy guy. But no. And as I've said, it's actually I'm probably sadly now probably upwards of about six people that I know that were fully vaccinated because they were either you know, they had they had to be because of jobs or because of other circumstances, and they made that decision, and and now they're dead. And when I look at all of the and I look at everything that's going on around in our country right now, and we look at people like Anthony Fauci.
Anthony Fauci goes so far back in our government's history, and I'm talking twenty five, thirty five years, where this guy has been involved in nefarious acts that have resulted in the deaths of many, many people. Sad, you know, I mean, that's what what Bobby Kennedy was just talking about. The guy created a drug that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of of men, in this case, men because of AIDS. And, you know, say what you want about AIDS. Say what you want about gay people.
Nobody deserves that kind of a fate. No one.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
THE HOLLYWOOD PEDOPHILES: Former CIA Officer confirms the existence of an Elite Pedophile Ring operating at the highest level in our society. Prince Andrew, Bill Gates, Bill and Hillary Clinton, William Burns, Rothschilds and many more are all involved. https://t.co/BKIvEapd24
Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript explores a conspiracy-laden view of elite abuse networks and attempts to connect public figures, media, and entertainment industries to child trafficking and satanic rituals. It begins with a meditation on how people come to believe facts—through trusted stories and news—and questions whether those stories can be recognized as deceptive.
Several participants discuss a belief in elite pedophile rings and describe the psychological barriers people face when confronted with that possibility. They emphasize critical thinking as a tool to examine what one is being fed, recounting personal difficulties in accepting the notion of an overseas or hidden network of abuse, and then recount how Liz Crokin’s reporting, initially dismissed by the media, led one speaker to consider that there may be truth to such claims.
Speaker 3, a journalist with two decades in mainstream media, recounts a career rooted in verification and reporting, noting that he was widely respected until he reported on Pizzagate. He claims the media corrupted or misrepresented Pizzagate and argues that the code words in John Podesta’s emails—especially “pizza” and “handkerchiefs”—are used as pedophile code words. He asserts that “pizza is a well known pedophile code word,” used by law enforcement in other cases, and cites a 2007 FBI document claiming symbols used by pedophiles, including a triangle signifying “boy love.”
Speakers discuss the Podesta emails, insisting that no single email explicitly discusses child sex trafficking or pedophilia, but arguing that strangely worded messages about pizza and handkerchiefs indicate coded conversations. They contend that mainstream media framed Pizzagate as depictions of a conspiracy and accuse media figures of avoiding difficult questions of the clues within the Podesta material and related social media posts.
The discussion shifts to broader allegations of elite complicity and cover-ups. It references Jeffrey Epstein’s death, debates about who might be involved or protected, and claims that powerful people who associated with Epstein and traveled on his plane or to his island were part of a wider network of abuse. Bill Gates’ ties to Epstein are discussed, with a New York Times report cited about meetings and a bidirectional philanthropic collaboration that allegedly connected Gates to Epstein. The text mentions other prominent figures, including members of royal families, models, actors, and politicians, and raises questions about why investigations did not occur or were suppressed.
MKUltra and Nexium are invoked as examples of mind-control tactics and systemic abuse, with testimonies about branding, ritual symbolism (pyramids, one eye), and the recurrence of satanic imagery in Hollywood and political circles. The narrative asserts that many elites publicly display occult symbols, that discussions of pedophilia are sometimes dismissed as jokes, and that whistleblowers face threats and retaliation.
The transcript includes personal testimonies about media complicity, the manipulation of public perception, and the fear of crossing elite lines. It closes with a promotional segment for the film Sound of Freedom, describing it as a true-story-inspired project about rescuing trafficked children and urging mass audience participation, including a pay-it-forward ticket program, with the aim of inspiring two million viewers in opening weekend.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Why do you believe what you believe? Because at some point in your life, you trusted the information that somebody was giving you. And that someone you trusted told you that a car was a car, a tree was a tree, a bird was a bird, the blue stuff above you is the sky, and that's the way that we began to determine what we believe to be a fact. Most of the things that we believe to be a fact in our lives are told to us through our stories or the news that we hear. So my question would be, if they were deceiving you with the stories they tell you, would you be able to recognize that?
Speaker 1: Look, talking of all you perverts, it was a big year. It was a big year for pedophile movies. Surviving R Kelly, leaving Neverland, two popes. Shut up. Shut up.
I don't care. I don't care.
Speaker 2: Most people don't want to cross the psychological line that this stuff is going on. And we all have a mental defense mechanism. It's like finally admitting there's an elite pedophile ring. I mean, people just don't wanna go there. And and the same is here.
Psychologically, lose your safety, your security, and whatever innocence you have when you realize that this stuff is really going on. And it's a it's a chore to cross over that barrier and realize, oh my gosh, this stuff is really happening. And that's why it takes critical thinking. The people have got to look at this stuff critically and see what they're being fed so they can cross that psychological line that they just refuse to to see it when it's right in front of them.
Speaker 0: When Kevin said there's an elite pedophile ring, well, I'm thinking to myself, this is this is a hard thing for me to come to terms with. Now, it made me start thinking about conversations and things I'd heard, but I'd never saw it. It's not out in the open. And to me, I was like, no one could do that. Because I mean, if I saw someone hurting a kid, would kill them.
I mean, I would literally kill them. I would never allow someone to hurt a child in front of me. Things Kevin was saying were things that were hard for me to cross the barrier. I did not wanna believe it. I didn't wanna go there.
But as I went down this journey, I forced myself to go consider what if this is real. And the only person that was talking about this stuff was a girl named Liz Crokin, and the media had declared her completely out of her mind. But as I started researching some of the things she was reporting on, I was like, there there's truth to what she's saying. So I wanna talk to her.
Speaker 3: I started working in journalism at a very young age. I got my first job working for Fox Chicago at about the age of 17 years old. At the University of Iowa, I studied science and journalism. One semester, I interned for Bill O'Reilly at Fox News Channel. My last year in college, I interned for the State Department's White House reporter and that placed me reporting in the White House every single day for a few months.
I went on to work for the Chicago Tribune and my first boss there told me that everything that I should get should be checked over and over and over again and verified to death. That's how I was trained and that's what a true honest journalist does. I started covering local politics and local hard news and then eventually I got my own column for seven years where I interviewed tons of celebrities and politicians and musicians and worked at Us Weekly and then at one point I worked at In Touch Weekly magazine. But then in 2015, I felt the need to get back into covering hard news. And in early two thousand sixteen, started working for town hall and then eventually I started working for the New York Observer and broke a lot of election related stories.
I worked in media for over two decades and I never had any issues. I was very well respected. I basically was embraced by the mainstream media until I started reporting on Pizzagate. Now when Pizzagate came out, the media tried to turn Pizzagate into something that wasn't.
Speaker 2: Surprises of the presidential campaign was the explosion of fake news on the Internet.
Speaker 4: 28 year old Edgar Welch was arrested in Washington Sunday afternoon outside Comet Ping Pong, popular family pizza parlor. DC police say Welch fired at least one round into the restaurant floor with an a r 15 rifle like this one on his Facebook page. No one was injured.
Speaker 5: Someone on Twitter whose name remains unverified but has several thousand followers posted that new emails found on Anthony Weiner's computer confirmed that Hillary Clinton was involved in a pedophilia ring. The rumors spread, inspiring some newfound internet sleuths to start digging around in John Podesta's hacked emails searching for proof and location of the so called sex ring.
Speaker 3: In those emails, they are absolutely littered with code words. And many of these code words are food words such as pizza.
Speaker 6: Somebody said to me, hey, Dave. Search for pizza in Podesta's emails. And once you go down that rabbit hole, you never really emerge the same person.
Speaker 3: It was obvious from the get go that these words were code words for something else because the context that they were used in did not make sense.
Speaker 7: To be clear, not one single email in the Podesta emails discusses child sex trafficking or pedophilia. That is a fact. But there are dozens of what seem to be strangely worded emails dealing with pizza and handkerchiefs, and investigators say that those words in the emails about pizza and the talk of handkerchiefs is code language used by pedophiles.
Speaker 6: There is some kind of code language. They're just not talking about pizza folks. Who phrases that? Who blocks out an hour of time to eat a slice of pizza?
Speaker 3: You can get a service for a half an hour. You can get a massage for half an hour, but you can't get food for half an hour. It just absolutely makes no sense.
Speaker 8: There's other ones like, the realtor found a handkerchief. I think it has a map that seems pizza related. And another one is Obama spent $65,000 flying in pizza and hot dogs from Chicago. Are we using the same channels?
Speaker 3: Pizza is a well known pedophile code word that actually has been used by law enforcement to arrest online sexual predators of children. And there's been multiple arrests that have been made by law enforcement of pedophiles trying to solicit children by using the pedophile code word pizza.
Speaker 7: 2,007 unclassified FBI document. That document, according to the FBI, contains commonly used symbols by pedophiles to express their preference in children. Notice this one on the end, the triangle? That image signifies something called boy love. The pizza place next door to comet ping pong pizza, that's the pizza.
Well, this was their logo until only a few weeks ago.
Speaker 3: People don't know that because the mainstream media refuses to cover it. The entire mainstream media redefined what Pizzagate was to make it sound ridiculous and less believable, and then they had people like Megan Kelly come in, interview James Alifantis, didn't ask him any challenging questions.
Speaker 9: A conspiracy theory that even the DC police say has no basis in fact.
Speaker 3: She didn't ask him any questions about the pictures of children on his Instagram page looking abused, being sexualized. She didn't ask him about the pedophile talk. So the whole mainstream media painted him as this poor victim, as this person that was innocent, that was just victimized as something that wasn't true. But just his Instagram page alone should have been enough for authorities to look into him.
Speaker 7: Investigators have already proven there's nothing to the story. Right? Well, actually, no. And that's what you need to know. For all that is here, there has not been one single public investigation of any of this.
Not from local police, not from the FBI, no one. And that has to be the big question. Not for Podesta or for pizza parlor owners, but for law enforcement based on what may be or may not be here. The big question is, why hasn't any investigation taken place?
Speaker 10: This is insane.
Speaker 3: So many people in the mainstream media have said, Pizzagate is conspiracy theory. Pizzagate has been debunked. It has not been debunked. If it's been debunked, explain the code words. No one to this day, including John Podesta himself, can explain the code words in his emails.
Hey, John Podesta. Can you please explain why you have children rented for entertainment for your adult hot tub parties? No one has ever explained why John Podesta has literal pedophile and cannibalism paintings all over his office and his home. Tony Podesta too. And then you look into the spirit cooking dinners, and you look into Marina Abramovic who's the one that was conducting the spirit cooking dinners.
Why are they going to spirit cooking dinners? Why are they sacrificing chicken samolac in their backyard? This isn't my words. This is their words. This is in their emails.
I'd be willing to debate anyone who thinks that Pizzagate has been debunked.
Speaker 11: You asked me when Yeah. When did how am I getting additional briefings? That that was the first and last time I
Speaker 10: talked to So October 9 is the last time you've heard from the FBI at all? Yes. You have not gotten an update on the investigation to your personal email?
Speaker 11: That that is correct.
Speaker 3: So not only did the mainstream media lie to you about pizzagate, they actually told you that it was illegal to read John Podesta's emails on WikiLeaks. Chris Cuomo with straight face on CNN looked into the cameras and said, it's illegal for you to read John Podesta's emails.
Speaker 12: Also interesting is remember, it's illegal to possess these stolen documents. It's different for the media. So everything you learn about this, you're learning from us.
Speaker 3: That's how scared they are of those emails and that's how explosive the content in those emails are. That they felt the need that they had to tell you you could not read those emails and if you do you might get arrested. Why?
Speaker 12: It's different for the media. So everything you learn about this, you're learning from us.
Speaker 3: People that blow the whistle on elite pedophiles tend to have accidents. And a lot of those people have died mysteriously.
Speaker 13: NBC News has learned that disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein is dead. Epstein took his own life while he was behind bars.
Speaker 10: There's absolutely no excuse for this. What happened here to me is mind boggling. The guy was a high risk prisoner, wasn't wasn't he? I mean, he's a guy that there are probably 50 very important people that have a motive to kill him. We don't even know who they are.
It's true. But we know there are some people that are in a lot of trouble because of Epstein. They know who they are.
Speaker 14: Would you raise your hand, please? Did you solemnly swear the testimony you're about to give in the matter now pending?
Speaker 15: 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 two men met at least six times.
Speaker 16: Well, I believe that there were more. This included visits to the mansion, seeing each other in Seattle, flying on Epstein's plane.
Speaker 17: 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 two were also involved in the process of co founding a multi billion dollar charitable fund.
Speaker 15: Why would they ever set up a charitable trust benefiting Jeffrey Epstein?
Speaker 16: That it was all about philanthropy, that Bill Gates just wanted to find new sources of money.
Speaker 17: Why would one of the richest men in the world choose to partner with the world's most notorious pedophile?
Speaker 3: His flight logs contain names of some of the biggest, most famous, and most powerful people on the planet. Members of the royal family, Prince Andrew, models like Naomi Campbell, famous actors like Kevin Spacey, Bill Clinton on those flight logs over 25 times. Hillary Clinton, she's also been to the islands. So the bigger question is how many people that went on his private jet, that went to his private island, that went to his massive ranch in New Mexico, were also involved in the rape, torture, and trafficking of children.
Speaker 9: It hides in plain sight. Epstein was hiding in plain sight.
Speaker 15: We all knew about him. We all knew what
Speaker 9: he was doing, but we had no one that was no legal aspect that would go after him. They were afraid of him. For whatever reason, they were afraid
Speaker 10: of him.
Speaker 3: And the amazing thing about Cindy McCain is that her husband was a senator. She was on a board with the governor of Texas. She knew about Jeffrey Epstein. She did nothing. And her organization, the role of her organization is supposed to be to stop people like Jeffrey Epstein.
They all knew. They did nothing about it. When Ricky Gervais said at the Golden Globes, you're all friends with Jeffrey Epstein, he wasn't lying.
Speaker 1: So in the end, he obviously didn't kill himself just like Jeffrey Epstein. Shut up. I know he's your friend, but I don't care. You like to make your own way here and your own plane, didn't you? Right.
Speaker 3: But And how many of those elites have been to his islands? Not only is the mainstream media complicit, I would argue that there are accessories in the crimes against children.
Speaker 9: She told me everything. She had pictures. She had everything. She was in hiding for twelve years. We convinced her to come out.
We convinced her to talk to us. It was unbelievable what we had. Clinton, we had everything. I I tried for three years to get it on to no avail, and now it's all coming out, and it's like these new revelations, and I freaking had all of it. I I I'm just so pissed right now.
Like, every day I get more and more pissed because I'm just like, oh my god. We it was on what what we had was unreal. Brad Edwards, the attorney, three years ago saying, like, like, we there will come a day when we will realize Jeffrey Epstein was the most prolific pedophile this country has ever known. I had it all three years ago.
Speaker 3: Then what happened in early two thousand eighteen? Keith Ranier who ran the Nexium child sex trafficking cult was arrested. Who else was arrested? Alison Mack. She's a famous celebrity who was on Smallville.
She was also arrested for being a member of this cult that was involved in trafficking children. And not only trafficking children, they were running preschools down in Mexico. And Nexium is another example of how these elite pedophile rings exist because this was a massive organization. This was funded by really wealthy people including the Seagram heiresses, Nancy Salzman and Claire Bromfman. So obviously, they were using those preschools to traffic children and the cult also engaged in human torture experiments on some of their members and there actually was a civil lawsuit that was filed by 90 of their victims just the other day.
So I imagine we are gonna hear more about the human experiments, the torturing, the sexual abuse, and the child sex trafficking in this civil lawsuit. And a lot of the techniques that we see in this cult are very similar to the techniques that our government used in the MKUltra program.
Speaker 14: He was a branding women with case initials, and they were like, well, what's what's the bad thing exactly about that? Everyone on the outside world, aka the real world, is like, they're branding women. So I left. I went to the executive board, and I said, want my photos back. I want my videos back.
The branding session was filmed, I want all of that back, I want my collateral back. None of that happened.
Speaker 2: And it's it's the same fear, mind control, and you'll be destroyed if you cross. Get into the upper elites, and if you get to that point, if you start revealing anything, they have the same system to completely destroy you, destroy your career, blackmail you like Epstein, keep you catch you, film you in compromising positions, and and and this goes both within Hollywood and celebrities and some of the elite, and it also goes on in congress and the senate. And if they even insinuate that they're gonna reveal some of these things, they're done.
Speaker 10: A lot of people here tonight felt like they lost. You know why? Because y'all been lied to. Google lied to you. What, Google?
Facebook lied to you.
Speaker 3: The powerful people that be, whether it's the music industry or the movie industry, you are only allowed a certain level of success if you are willing to join their club. If you're willing to be part of their secret society or if you're compromised. They will not let someone obtain a lot of fame and and power if they can't control you.
Speaker 2: A classic example at least for me is Katy Perry. Katy Perry was was a gospel singer, very talented, but she was going nowhere. And she got up to Hollywood and and basically they said, you wanna be a success? You play by our rules. You step into the occult and you start putting that in your videos.
And now she's doing videos with her in hell with satanic themes and she's what? Highly successful. You see that over with Lady Gaga who came out and actually said she was so tired of being handled and manipulated, she had to take a break. That
Speaker 18: this is this young outrageous girl, wear strange clothes. She's into extremes. She's experimental. She have 43,000,000 people on the Twitter, following her, whatever she do, little monsters. And she came really very humble to my house and asked me if I could teach her.
We made this workshop in the woods and she was such a good student. She never cheat. She really went much farther than I asked her for.
Speaker 19: She is a limitless human being. As myself, a self proclaimed pop performance artist, wanna go home and slit my wrist and and I, you know, I have nothing. I have achieved no sense of art. She is she is so boundless.
Speaker 3: Marina Abramovic, is in the Podesta emails and she's the one that conducts the spirit cooking dinners. She said that Marina did an exercise with her where she stripped her completely naked and left her in the middle of the woods to fend for herself and find her way back. Those are the kinds of things that people who are behind MK Ultra programs do to children that they're mind controlling. We know Marina Abramovic is a satanist. You Google Marina Abramovic's name in spirit cooking and you will find hundreds of pictures of Marina Abramovic's events where they will have for example cake that looks like a human being and they'll depict human cannibalism and they claim they're not engaging in cannibalism and you will find a list actors and famous politicians and other very famous and successful powerful business people at her events.
They literally have food that look like human beings on dinner tables.
Speaker 20: He's Italian and Greek, I mean, you know, and a very good cook and a very good cook. And I'm sure there's something very nefarious about that risotto recipe. So
Speaker 3: After I started researching that cult, I learned that Satanist believe that they have to reveal who they are in some way shape or form. So that is why we see a lot of these occult members in Hollywood constantly flaunting symbolism. We see the pyramid, the lunatic pyramid a lot. We see the evil one eye constantly. It's always on the cover of magazines.
We see these are supposed to be the six six six devil symbols. We constantly see those symbols. We also see pedophile symbols, the swirl or the triangle within a triangle.
Speaker 1: I guarantee you this one is the first.
Speaker 3: And we also see a lot of these members of the cult go on their social media and they talk about raping children. They talk about worshiping Satan and people write it off as a joke, but they're not joking. I don't care if you're a major comedian. You can't tell me that's funny because there is no joke about raping children that's funny.
Speaker 21: You don't know what that is.
Speaker 0: I have no idea.
Speaker 21: You don't know. Jimmy Fallon doesn't know. David Letterman doesn't know. We don't know. All the comics and show business don't know what this is.
Speaker 2: Takes guts to put out a film that does this because no one's done it up until now, but when that's done and people see these facts and they say, my gosh, I didn't know that. I didn't know that about the Gulf Of Tonkin. I didn't know that about the Vietnam War. My gosh. And they go in, they check it out, and it's all true, and now they're seeing the dots.
And a
Speaker 6: a
Speaker 2: good film will teach them how to practice critical thinking, to analyze what you're watching. If we can get people to analyze what they're watching, we've crossed a huge hurdle. Mhmm. Because once they start analyzing it, they're gonna see the dots and and typically the dots will connect themselves.
Speaker 0: Liz Crokin put herself so far out in front that mocked. She was laughed at. She was called crazy. Well, let me ask you a question for all those people that did that to Liz. Does she seem so crazy now?
Speaker 3: When you put all of those facts together and you use critical thinking, you realize this stuff is real. There's not one smoking gun. There's many small smoking guns that you have to piece together and you have to use critical thinking to understand this stuff is real. So again, the bigger question is, now that Jeffrey Epstein's been exposed and he's allegedly dead, how many of his friends that were frequent visitors on his sex trafficking islands were also involved in the rape, torture, and trafficking of children. And that's what Pizzagate is.
Speaker 1: How many pedophiles you got?
Speaker 22: 288.
Speaker 23: How many kids you found?
Speaker 1: It is the fastest growing crime network that the world has ever seen. It has already passed the illegal arms trade, and soon it's gonna pass the drug trade. Think you can sell a bag of cocaine one time to a child five to 10 times a day. God's children are not for sale. How long you've been doing this?
Call here is now. How many pedophiles you got?
Speaker 22: 288.
Speaker 23: How many kids you found?
Speaker 1: For homeland security, you know we can't go off rescuing Honduran kids in Colombia, which means she'll disappear disappear for good. Imagine walking into a room right now, seeing an empty bed. What we do?
Speaker 20: You quit your job, and
Speaker 9: you go and rescue those kids.
Speaker 24: So at this moment, she could be a block down the road, or she could be at Moscow, Bangkok, LA. She's a major operator.
Speaker 1: It's all rebel territory. No one goes in. Not the army, army and the police, not us. What if this was your daughter? There's no marine unit coming.
Speaker 2: You're on your own.
Speaker 1: This job tears you to pieces, and this is my one chest. Put those pieces back together. When
Speaker 24: God tells you what to do.
Speaker 1: You cannot hesitate.
Speaker 22: An estimated two million children are trafficked every year, and we can help them. Sound of Freedom is based on a true story about real life heroes saving kids from the dark world of child trafficking. We know this is heartbreaking, and it hurts to look at. But the first step in helping these children is hearing their story. Not enough people know this problem exists, and even fewer people are willing to do anything about it.
Our goal is to inspire 2,000,000 people to attend the film's opening weekend to represent the 2,000,000 traffic children around the world. To spread the word, Angel Studios set up a pay it forward program where you can pay for someone else's ticket who might not otherwise see it. If the ticket price is stopping you from attending, claim your free who ticket at angel.com/freedom. Sound of freedom opens the week of July 4. Every parent, every adult, and every teenager in America should be there to see it.
If millions of us come together today to see this film, we could propel the movement to help save millions of children around the world. And you can send the message that God's children are no longer for sale.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Tucker Carlson says the Chief of the Police at the Capitol told him in an interview that the crowd on J6 was FILLED with federal agents. Fox News took Tucker off the air before the interview was released. https://t.co/YDvAXp4NgB
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker describes a shift in perspective about January 6, recounting that he did not initially suspect U.S. law enforcement or military involvement or a false flag. He notes an interview with Capitol Police Chief Stephen Sund, who he says stated that “that guy was filled with federal agents,” a claim Sund would know from being in charge of security. He observes that, two and a half years later, core claims about January 6 appear to be lies, arguing that when someone is caught lying about one thing, it prompts questions about what else they are lying about.
The speaker emphasizes he is not a conspiracist and grew up in a country with low belief in obvious conspiracies, but he asserts that “the amount of lying around January 6” is distressing and that anyone covering for those lies should be ashamed, including portions of the American media and Fox News. He acknowledges Fox News allowed him to air material, for which he expresses gratitude, but notes that some people there were angry at him for doing so and challenges critics to point out cherry-picking or miscontextualization.
He clarifies that he did not claim the events were entirely peaceful; police officers were injured, recognizing that injuries occurred in other protests as well. He emphasizes that his point is to ask obvious questions and scrutinize the narrative. He discusses Jacob Chansley, the QAnon Shaman, noting that surveillance footage had been hidden until he aired it, showing Capitol Police attempting doors and escorting Chansley into the Senate chamber, where he wandered and offered a prayer thanking the Capitol Police, before leaving. He argues there are many conclusions one could draw from this footage, but asserts that Chansley cannot be called an insurrectionist, labeling that designation a lie. He defines insurrection as a very specific meaning and remains pedantic about words, insisting the incident was not an insurrection, not armed, and not intended to overthrow the government but a “spasm of rage” that Trump helped inspire.
Regarding the election, he states he does not support leaders inciting anger, but asserts the event was not an insurrection. He condemns the prosecution of Chansley, a Navy veteran and American citizen, who was imprisoned for years after being let into the Senate chamber by uniformed Capitol Police, and he rejects the portrayal of Chansley as an insurrectionist. He condemns the lack of remorse in those who cover up or excuse what he views as lies, and quotes anger at the idea of imprisoning someone for something he believes was misrepresented.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You know it's infected when it hurts. You press it. You recoil. They immediately recoiled when you asked any questions about January 6. And that was a tip-off to me.
I mean, I had no thought in my head as I watched this happen on television and in the subsequent weeks that US law enforcement or military agencies had anything to do with it. That never crossed my mind. I never thought there was it was a false flag or anything like that. I'm not a conspiracist by temperament. I never thought that.
And then I interviewed the chief of the Capitol Police, Stephen Sund, in an interview that was never aired on Fox, by the way. I was fired before it could air. I I'm gonna interview him again. But Stephen Sund was the totally nonpolitical, worked for Nancy Pelosi. I mean, this was not some right wing activist.
He was the chief of the Capitol Police on January 6. And he said, oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That guy was filled with federal agents.
What? Yes. Well, he would know, of course, because he was in charge of security at the site. So, the more time has passed now it's been two and a half years it becomes really obvious that core claims they made about January 6 were lies. And my view about events and about people is if you catch someone telling a lie about one thing, the first question you have is what else are you lying about?
If you say to your wife, where were you? I was at the grocery store. If you find out she was not at the grocery store, then it raises Probably not just lying about being at the grocery store, were you? Like, what is this exactly? Why were you lying about that?
And that's kind of the way I feel about January. Like, what is this? What this is they're clearly lying. That's provable. Why?
And, you know, I'm the last person. I'm often accused of being a conspiracy nut. I'm the opposite. I grew up in a very stable country, The United States, the '70s and '80s, where people didn't indulge in conspiracies because there weren't any obvious ones afoot. Right?
I mean, we took things at face value. We trusted our government by and large. But I the amount of lying around January 6, and it was obvious in the tapes that I showed, is really distressing. And anyone who's covering for those lies should be ashamed of himself. And that would include almost the entire American media, including Fox News.
People at Fox News. Fox News, to its great credit, let me air that. And I'm grateful that they did. But there, you know, there are people there who were mad at me for airing that. Really?
Why? If if you think I'm cherry picking it and taking it out of context, show me show me where. And by the way, I didn't make the claim that it was entirely peaceful. It it wasn't. Police officers were injured.
More police officers were injured at the riots in front of the White House the year before, but whatever. All injuries to police officers or anyone else are bad. I'm not certainly not making excuses for it, but I'm asking obvious questions. You said this happened. For example, there was a guy called the QAnon shaman, Jacob Chansley.
They put the guy in prison for years. There is surveillance tape that they hid until I aired it showing the Capitol Police trying lots of doors, trying to get into the senate chamber, the sacrosanct chamber that he wasn't allowed to be in, and then escorting him in. And he kind of wanders around like he's taken a hit of mescaline, just kind of you know what I mean? And, like, he says a prayer. He thanks God for the Capitol Police, and then he wanders out.
Now there are a lot of conclusions you could draw from that, but you cannot call that guy an insurrectionist. That's a lie. And by the way, an insurrection is a very specific meaning, and I'm pedantic about words because they're the currency that I trade in. I mean, that's what I do. I use words for a living, so I care about their specific meanings.
That was not an insurrection. It was not armed. And its purpose was not to overthrow the government. It was it was a spasm of rage that Trump definitely it helped inspire. That's true.
And, at the election results. Okay. You know? I I'm not actually for that. I don't think leaders should be making people more pissed in general.
But that's what it was. It was not an insurrection. And to put Jacob Chansley, an American citizen, a navy veteran, in jail for years after he was let into the Senate chamber by uniformed Capitol Hill police officers, and then I play that and I'm the bad guy? Fuck you. Like, what what do you make of that?
I'm sorry. It makes me mad just thinking about it. I said I wasn't gonna be a hater. That makes me mad. And I see people on other channels.
It's outrageous. He's trying to minimize January 6. Well, but what this guy went to prison. Went to prison. You ever been to prison?
Only for visits. Right. Okay. It's not very nice. Don't wanna go to prison to take a man's freedom away and call him all these names for something he didn't do and then show no remorse at all when you're exposed to have lied about it as a human being who was locked away in a prison.
It's an outrage to me.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
DOCTOR BURZYNSKI WAS ON TO SOMETHING THAT BIG PHARMA DIDN’T WANT TO GET OUT! https://t.co/kEfEhs2ovB
Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript centers on Stanislav Brzezinski, a Houston physician who developed a treatment called anti-neoplastons. It follows both dramatic patient outcomes and a legal battle over whether Brzezinski’s drugs should be used outside approved medical channels.
Key case: an eight-year-old boy named Paul Michaels, whose skull images six years after starting Brzezinski’s therapy show the tumor almost disappeared. Bruce Cohen, director of neurologic oncology at the Cleveland Clinic, states, “The only explanation is it shrunk because of the therapy Paul has received,” confirming Brzezinski’s claimed results on Paul.
Background on Brzezinski: At Lublin Medical University, Brzezinski graduated first in his class, earned a PhD in biochemistry, and later discovered a strain of peptides in human blood and urine not previously recorded. He observed that cancer patients seemed to lack these peptides, while healthy individuals had an abundance. He theorized that extracting these peptides from healthy donors and administering them to cancer patients might treat the disease.
Legal constraints and practice: Brzezinski sought permission to use experimental treatment (angioplastons) in private practice and to be involved in cancer research. Attorneys verified that, as long as he kept activities within Texas, he wasn’t breaking federal laws, but he could not introduce anti-neoplastons into interstate commerce. Consequently, he operated primarily within Texas to avoid federal issues, but word spread that he was curing terminal cancer in Texas, drawing patients from across the country.
Funding and controversy: Brzezinski’s early research received funding from the National Cancer Institute and Baylor College of Medicine. After opening his own laboratory, funding came from bank loans, patient fees, and insurance payments. While some physicians acknowledge his science as credible and professional, controversy centers on organizational aspects and access to therapies rather than the scientific method, with critics arguing that broader medical institutions act as a closed system hindering alternative treatments.
Public and legal proceedings: The Texas State Board of Medical Examiners sought to suspend Brzezinski’s license because treatments have never been approved. The Board argued that “the efficacy of anti neoplastons in the treatment of human cancers is not of issue in these proceedings.” Brzezinski argues he is saving lives, insisting, “They should realize that I am right. They’re fighting a losing battle.” He faces ongoing legal challenges, including a higher district court after a 1993 ruling.
Support and testimony: Georgetown University expert Dr. Nicholas Petronas, who helped analyze Brzezinski’s cases for the National Cancer Institute, testified that in five brain-tumor patients, the tumors resolved or disappeared. Petronas described Brzezinski’s work as remarkable, noting a boy treated from age four to twelve who was initially given up on by his original doctor, and whom the family says they owe to Brzezinski.
Impact on Paul and family: Paul’s mother, Mary Michaels, expresses fear about losing the treatment, emphasizing the personal stakes in the courtroom and the ongoing pursuit of Brzezinski’s methods as part of a broader legal and medical conflict.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Of an eight year old boy with a huge tumor most thought would kill him. He used doctor Brzezinski's drug. Images of his skull taken six years later show the tumor has almost disappeared.
Speaker 1: Doctor Bruce Cohen is the director of neurologic oncology at the prestigious Cleveland Clinic.
Speaker 2: The only explanation is it shrunk because of the therapy Paul has received.
Speaker 3: Attended Lublin Medical University, where he graduated first in his class at age 24, and then received his PhD in biochemistry the following year. While undergoing his research to acquire his PhD, Doctor. Burzynski made a profound discovery. He found a strain of peptides in human blood and urine that had never before been recorded in biomedical research. As his curiosity in these peptides evolved, he made another profound observation.
People who were inflicted with cancer seemed to lack these newly discovered peptides in both their blood and urine, while those who were healthy and free of cancer appeared to have an abundance of these peptides. Doctor Brzezinski theorized that if he could somehow provide a way to chemically extract these peptides from the blood and urine of healthy donors and administer these peptides to those with cancer, perhaps it could be useful in treating the disease.
Speaker 4: Before I started, I asked the lawyers for the advice. Can I use experimental treatment, which was the treatment of angioplastons? Can I use this in my private practice? And can I be involved in cancer research? Simple as the private company.
Speaker 3: Doctor. Brzezinski's attorneys verified that as long as he kept his activities within the state of Texas, he wasn't breaking any federal laws. However, Doctor. Brzezinski could not introduce anti neoplastons into interstate commerce, which means he had to keep his activities only within the state of Texas to avoid breaking any federal laws. However, once word got out that Doctor.
Brzezinski was curing terminal cancer in Texas, people began traveling from all over the country to receive anti neoplasticity.
Speaker 5: We're talking with Doctor. Stanislav Brzezinski who is an MD and a PhD, has done some experimental work in the area of cancer. How is your research funded?
Speaker 6: Initially, my research was funded from National Cancer Institute and from Baylor College of Medicine. After I decided to open my laboratory, the only funds available for me were loans from the banks, patients' fees, and payments from the insurance companies.
Speaker 5: Could you stand for just a minute, doctor Garner? This is doctor Harold Garner. Now is is there anything about this that you find controversial? I mean, his treatment, does it have a good scientific background hypothesis and really controlled studies behind it?
Speaker 7: Yes, as the science of investigation goes, Doctor. Brzezinski studies have been quite professional, certainly as creditable as most at Wayne State and the University of Michigan and others which I'm tied to directly. The controversy is less in his approach on a therapy basis than it is his approach organizationally. And much of the medical and hospital industry operates as a very closed shop. And if you have ideas that might in one way or another jeopardize that economic base, you fall into this favor very quickly.
Speaker 5: That is an incredible statement that you've just made.
Speaker 7: And I've been involved with several patients who have chosen options in Europe and in Canada. And those options are not available in this country because of economic and organizational reasons, not because of scientific reasons.
Speaker 5: What
Speaker 1: When Mary Michaels took the stand on behalf of her son, Paul, she trained her eyes on the state's attorney.
Speaker 8: I mean, I have enough to worry about when I go to bed at night about my son and my family. I don't need to worry that this treatment's gonna be taken away.
Speaker 9: What do you think might happen if oh, never mind. Never mind. I have no other questions.
Speaker 10: For all I know, the kid may still be alive.
Speaker 6: The tumors will grow, they will lose their vision, they will be paralyzed, and they will die because there's nothing in the world which can be used to save this patient's life.
Speaker 9: You intend to continue doing just what you've been doing until somebody is able to stop you. Is that not true?
Speaker 6: I'm going to do what the law will allow me to do, Mr. Hercum. I do whatever is necessary to bring my medicines to approval in The United States and everywhere in the world and bring you to justice for causing the death of 200 patients. And if we come back here to hunt you and to be dead.
Speaker 9: Are you threatening me, Doctor. Bershynski?
Speaker 6: I'm not threatening you, but that's what's going to happen in the future.
Speaker 9: Well, think that's something that'll be remains to be seen.
Speaker 10: They weren't real happy with me. I could tell that from the way they were talking to me and asking questions. Then they told me after they were gonna rewrite my proposal for a decision and take adverse action against doctor Brzezinski and I said I thought that was rather foolish.
Speaker 0: The state of Texas wants Houston doctor Stanislav Brzezinski to stop treating his patients with drugs he produces at his own pharmaceutical plant. The drugs called anti neoplastins are non toxic compounds of proteins and amino acids, often lacking in cancer patients. Even though the state of Texas acknowledges that the drugs may be helping some who are terminally ill, the state says the drugs shouldn't be used. This is the state board of medical examiners which licenses doctors in Texas. This is the agency challenging doctor Brzezinski in court.
One judge has already told the board members that they don't have a case.
Speaker 6: All of this nonsense is going now should disappear because they should realize that I am right. Okay? They're fighting losing battle. I am saving human lives, and if they put me out of business, the people will die.
Speaker 0: This is the brain of an eight year old boy with a huge tumor most thought would kill him. He used doctor Brzezinski's drug. Images of his skull taken six years later show the tumor has almost disappeared.
Speaker 1: Doctor Bruce Cohen is the director of neurologic oncology at the prestigious Cleveland Clinic.
Speaker 2: The only explanation is it shrunk because of the therapy Paul has received.
Speaker 1: He confirmed doctor Brzezinski's results on Paul.
Speaker 8: Seven years that we've had Paul, and he's been healthy. And I owe it to this man.
Speaker 11: And there's no way that
Speaker 12: I'd ever be able to thank
Speaker 11: him enough for what he's done for us.
Speaker 0: Today, that boy Paul Michaels and his anxious family sit in the courtroom with other patients.
Speaker 3: Undeterred by the 1993 ruling, the Texas Medical Board took Brzezinski to a higher district court.
Speaker 13: The Texas State Board of Medical Examiners, which has fought to suspend Brzezinski's license because his treatments have never been approved, says, quote, the efficacy of anti neoplastons in the treatment of human cancers is not of issue in these proceedings.
Speaker 9: It takes a bureaucrat to come up with that idea because a layman, that would really be the question.
Speaker 0: The state of Texas wants Houston doctor Stanislav Brzezinski to stop treating his patients with drugs he produces at his own pharmaceutical plant. The drugs called anti neoplastins are non toxic compounds of proteins and amino acids.
Speaker 10: Nicholas Petronis.
Speaker 1: Some of the most dramatic testimony on Doctor. Berzinski's behalf came from Doctor. Nicholas Petronas.
Speaker 14: Doctor, why don't you have
Speaker 10: to sit down here.
Speaker 1: A Georgetown University expert who was a member of the National Cancer Institute's team that analyzed seven of Doctor. Bruszynski's cases.
Speaker 14: The basic conclusion was that in five of the patients with brain tumors that were fairly large, the tumor resolved, disappeared. It's amazing. The fact that they are leaving, it's impressive and unbelievable.
Speaker 10: He was quite a witness. He said he had never seen anything like what Doctor. Brzezinski was able to accomplish with his anti neoplastons in brain cancer. He had one young boy there who had been treated, he was about 12 at the hearing, strapping lad, a good sized boy. But when he was he was first started on treatment when he was about four years old, I think his name was Paul, he was given up on by his original doctor.
Speaker 1: He confirmed Doctor. Brzezinski's results on Paul.
Speaker 8: Seven years that we've had Paul and he's been healthy and I owe it to this man
Speaker 11: and there's no way that
Speaker 12: I'd ever be able to
Speaker 11: thank him enough for what he's done for us.
Speaker 0: Today that boy Paul Michaels and his anxious family sit in the courtroom with other patients.
Speaker 3: Undeterred by the 1993 ruling, the Texas Medical Board took Doctor. Brzezinski to a higher district court.
Speaker 13: The Texas State Board of Medical Examiners, which has fought to suspend Doctor. Brzezinski's license because his treatments have never been approved, says, quote, the efficacy of anti neoplastons in the treatment of human cancers is not of issue in these proceedings.
reSee.it AI Summary
A user claims Bill Gates is the face of a multi‑generational eugenics project funded by a tax‑free foundation, enabling population control via vaccines, GMO seeds, and biometric digital IDs. They allege Microsoft origins with Pentagon/CIA links and say Gates now backs farmland, lab‑grown meat, and geoengineering, promotes a climate crisis while flying private, aiming to imprison humanity in a digital regime.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
THE TRUTH ABOUT BILL GATES - Full Documentary https://t.co/fdAmGkNVLp
Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript presents a critical examination of Bill Gates, portraying him as transforming from a software magnate into a global health power broker whose wealth and influence have reshaped public health, vaccine development, and population policy. It argues that Gates’ philanthropic activities are not purely charitable but are deployed to extend control over health systems, global research agendas, and even the reproductive choices of people worldwide.
Key claims and points are detailed across several strands:
- Public image and power shift: Bill Gates is described as no longer a “public health expert” yet becoming a central figure in billions of lives, guiding medical actions and vaccine strategies. The program asserts that Gates’ reinvention through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been aided by a sophisticated public relations apparatus and by directing media coverage of global health issues.
- Foundation scale and reach: The Gates Foundation is depicted as the world’s largest private foundation, with assets reported as tens of billions of dollars and a broad remit in global health, development, growth, and policy advocacy. Its influence extends to funding media outlets, think tanks, and reporting units across multiple outlets (BBC, NPR, Our World in Data, ABC, among others), creating what the program calls “tentacles” across global health.
- Partnerships and funding of global health initiatives: Gates is credited with initiating and funding major global health vehicles, including:
- Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, with seed funding and ongoing commitments that have shaped vaccination markets.
- The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, and other public-private partnerships that coordinate vaccine development and immunization programs.
- Support for CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations), the World Health Organization’s vaccine initiatives, and other pandemic preparedness efforts.
- The World Health Organization’s funding profile, described as heavily dependent on Gates Foundation support, with Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus noted as a non-medical doctor connected to Gates-backed initiatives.
- The “Decade of Vaccines” and vaccine policy: Gates is credited with launching a decade-long vaccine initiative, including a pledge of billions of dollars to vaccine development and distribution. This is linked to the creation of a global vaccine action plan and to Gavi’s role in establishing vaccine markets. The narrative asserts that vaccines have been used to steer global health policy and to secure roles for private firms in public health decision-making.
- Vaccine development concerns: The program raises concerns about the safety and speed of vaccine development, criticizing the eighteen-month timeline Gates advocates for a universal vaccine, and questioning the use of new technologies (DNA and mRNA platforms) and rapid deployment with limited testing. It highlights potential safety risks, including historical vaccine-associated disease enhancement and concerns about broad immunization in a short period.
- Vaccine safety and regulation: It is claimed that vaccine safety at scale is hard to guarantee and that liability protections for vaccine makers and public health officials have been enacted (e.g., a U.S. declaration granting liability immunity for COVID-19 countermeasures), a point framed as enabling risk-bearing without accountability.
- Population control framing: A central thread is the assertion that Gates seeks to reduce population growth through health improvements, vaccines, and reproductive health services. The transcript traces Gates’ interest in contraception and population issues to his family background and to Rockefeller-era eugenics historical contexts, arguing that discussions about fertility, contraceptive technologies, and demographic trends have long-term population implications. It cites specific Gates Foundation activities in reproductive health, including funding for innovative birth-control delivery methods, depot injections, implanted devices, and efforts to develop digital identity tied to health services as tools within a broader population-control framework.
- Digital identity and biometric ID: The narrative emphasizes Gates’ involvement with biometric identification through Gavi and ID2020, noting partnerships with Microsoft and the Rockefeller Foundation, the Aadhaar system in India, and the World Bank’s ID4D initiative. It argues that vaccination programs, biometric identity, and cashless payments are being integrated into a comprehensive “population control grid,” enabling state and private actors to track, truncate, or deny access to services based on identity and health status.
- Data, surveillance, and privacy concerns: The piece contends that the push for digital IDs, digital health records, and biometrics will erode privacy and enable broad government and corporate surveillance, linking health data to financial services, voting, housing, and welfare. It highlights projects involving digital certificates, immunity passports, and real-time health data collection via microneedle patches and barcode-like skin markers, suggesting these innovations could be used to control access to services.
- Epstein connections and broader conspiracy context: The program references alleged connections between Gates and Jeffrey Epstein, including flight logs and involvement in philanthropic funding discussions, framing these ties as part of a broader pattern of influence. It also points to prior associations with notable figures (Buffett, Rockefeller, Soros) and critiques of Gates as aligning with a “population control” ideology.
- The underlying motive and conclusion: Throughout, the narrative asserts that Gates’ wealth is being used not for charity alone but to build an overarching system of control—over health institutions, research funding, public policy, identification, and financial systems. It contrasts his public image as a generous philanthropist with alleged hidden agendas, suggesting that the real aim is to shape global governance and human behavior through vaccination, identification, and digital infrastructure.
- Final framing and call to action: The closing sections urge viewers to recognize Gates’ influence as part of an ideology rather than a single person’s plan. It frames the situation as a broader movement that could continue beyond Gates personally, urging awareness and action to resist what the program deems a population-control regime embedded in global health and digital identity initiatives.
In sum, the transcript portrays Bill Gates as a central figure driving a multifaceted, globally interconnected program—through the Gates Foundation, Gavi, CEPI, and related partnerships—that allegedly reconfigures vaccine policy, global health governance, reproductive health, biometric identification, and digital payments into a cohesive system of population control and surveillance, using philanthropy as a veneer for power and control.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hello. I'm Bill Gates, Chairman of Microsoft. In this video, you're going to see the future.
Speaker 1: Who is Bill Gates? A software developer? A businessman? A philanthropist? A global health expert?
This question, once merely academic, is becoming a very real question for those who are beginning to realize that Gates' unimaginable wealth has been used to gain control over every corner of the fields of public health, medical research, and vaccine development. And now that we are presented with the very problem that Gates has been talking about for years, we will soon find that this software developer with no medical training is going to leverage that wealth into control over the fates of billions of people.
Speaker 2: Because until we get almost everybody vaccinated globally, we still won't be fully back to normal.
Speaker 1: Bill Gates is no public health expert. He is not a doctor, an epidemiologist, or an infectious disease researcher. Yet somehow, he has become a central figure in the lives of billions of people, presuming to dictate the medical actions that will be required for the world to go back to normal. The transformation of Bill Gates from computer kingpin to global health czar is as remarkable as it is instructive, and it tells us a great deal about where we are heading as the world plunges into a crisis the likes of which we have not seen before. This is the story of how Bill Gates monopolized global health.
You're tuned into the Corporate Report. Until his reinvention as a philanthropist in the past decade, this is what many people thought of when they thought of Bill Gates.
Speaker 3: In the case of The United States versus Microsoft, the US Justice Department contended that the software giant had breached antitrust laws by competing unfairly against Netscape Communications in the internet browser market, effectively creating a monopoly. Bill's first concern was that the prosecution could potentially block the release of his company's latest operating system, Windows 98.
Speaker 2: You're asking me about when I wrote this email, or what are you asking me about?
Speaker 4: I'm I'm asking you about January 1996. That month? Yes, sir. And what about it? What non Microsoft browsers were you concerned about in January 1996?
Speaker 2: I don't know what you mean concerned.
Speaker 4: What is it about the word concerned that you don't understand?
Speaker 2: I'm not sure what you mean by it.
Speaker 5: We're gonna be working together on Microsoft Office, on Internet Explorer, on Java, and I think that, it's gonna lead to a a very healthy relationship. So it's a package announcement today. We're very, very happy about it. We're very, very excited about it. And I happen to have a special guest with me today via satellite downlink.
And if we could get him up on the stage right now.
Speaker 6: Police and security guards in Belgium were caught flat footed today by a cowardly sneak attack on one of the world's wealthiest men. The target was Microsoft chairman Bill Gates arriving for a meeting with community leaders. Watch what happens when a team of hitmen meet him first with a pie in the face. Gates was momentarily and understandably shaken, but he was not injured. The hit squad piled on with two more pies before one of them was wrestled to the ground and arrested.
The others released the moment he got away. Gates went inside, wiped his face clean, and made no comment. He then went ahead with his scheduled meeting. No word on the motive for this time.
Speaker 1: But once reviled for the massive wealth and the monopolistic power that his virus laden software afforded him, Gates is now hailed as a visionary who is leveraging that wealth and power for the greater good of humanity.
Speaker 7: In the twenty second century, a book will be written about the entrepreneur of the twenty first century. I'm sure that the person who will foremost come to the mind of those historians is certainly Bill Gates.
Speaker 4: I don't think it's hyperbole to say that Bill Gates is singularly, I would argue, the most consequential individual of our generation. I I mean that.
Speaker 8: Our next guest is one of the richest and most generous men in the world. Please welcome Bill Gates.
Speaker 9: At a time when everyone is looking to understand the scope of the pandemic and how to minimize the threat, one of the best informed voices is that of businessman and philanthropist Bill Gates.
Speaker 1: The process by which this reinvention of Gates' public image took place is not mysterious. It's the same process by which every billionaire has revived their public image since John D. Rockefeller hired Ivy Ledbetter Lee to transform him from the head of the Standard Oil Hydra into the kind old man handing out dimes to strangers.
Speaker 10: You've had a dime.
Speaker 11: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 12: Thank you very much.
Speaker 10: Consider And thank myself you for the ride.
Speaker 12: I consider myself more than amply paid.
Speaker 10: Bless you. You. Bless you.
Speaker 1: A More to the point, John D. Rockefeller knew that to gain the adoration of the public, he had to appear to give them what they want: money. He devoted hundreds of millions of dollars of his vast oil monopoly fortune to establishing institutions that, he claimed, were for the public good Similarly, Bill Gates has spent much of the past two decades transforming himself from software magnate into a benefactor of humanity through his own Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. In fact, Gates has surpassed Rockefeller's legacy with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation long having eclipsed the Rockefeller Foundation as the largest private foundation in the world, with 46,800,000,000 of assets on its books that it wields in its stated program areas of global health and development, global growth, and global policy advocacy. And, like Rockefeller, Gates' transformation has been helped along by a well funded public relations campaign.
Gone are the theatrical tricks of the PR pioneers. The ubiquitous ice cream cones of Gates' mentor Warren Buffett are the last remaining holdout of the old Rockefeller handing out dimes gimmick. No, Gates has guided his public image into that of a modern day saint through an even simpler tactic: buying good publicity. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation spends tens of millions of dollars per year on media partnerships, sponsoring coverage of its program areas across the board. Gates funds the Guardian's global development website.
Gates funds NPR's global health coverage Gates funds the Our World and Data website that is tracking the latest statistics and research on the coronavirus pandemic Gates funds BBC coverage of global health and development issues and the BBC itself. Gates funds world health coverage on ABC News. When the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer was given a $3,500,000 Gates Foundation grant to set up a special unit to report on global health issues, NewsHour Communications Chief Rob Flynn was asked about the potential conflict of interest that such a unit would have in reporting on issues that the Gates Foundation is itself involved in. In some regards, I guess you might say that there are not a heck of a lot of things you could touch in global health these days that would not have some kind of Gates tentacle, Flynn responded. Indeed, it would be almost impossible to find any area of global health that has been left untouched by the tentacles of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
It was Gates who sponsored the meeting that led to the creation of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, a global public private partnership bringing together state sponsors and big pharmaceutical companies whose specific goals include the creation of healthy markets for vaccines and other immunization products. As a founding partner of the alliance, the Gates Foundation provided $750,000,000 in seed funding and has gone on to make over $4,100,000,000 in commitments to the group. Gates the seed money that created the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, a public private partnership that acts as a finance vehicle for governmental AIDS, TB, and malaria programs. When a public private partnership of governments, world health bodies, and 13 leading pharmaceutical companies came together in 2012 to accelerate progress toward eliminating or controlling 10 neglected tropical diseases, there was the Gates Foundation with $363,000,000 of support. When the global financing facility for women, children, and adolescents was launched in 2015 to leverage billions of dollars in public and private financing for global health and development programs, there was the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as a founding partner with a $275,000,000 contribution.
When the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2017 to develop vaccines against emerging infectious diseases, there was the Gates Foundation with an initial injection of 100,000,000 The examples go on and on. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's fingerprints can be seen on every major global health initiative of the past two decades. And beyond the flashy, multibillion dollar global partnerships, the foundation is behind hundreds of smaller country and region specific grants (ten million dollars to combat a locust infestation in East Africa, or $300,000,000 to support agricultural research in Africa and Asia) that add up to billions of dollars in commitments. It comes as no surprise then that, far beyond the $250,000,000 that the Gates Foundation has pledged to the fight against coronavirus, every aspect of the current coronavirus pandemic involves organizations, groups, and individuals with direct ties to Gates funding. From the start, the World Health Organization has directed the global response to the current pandemic.
From its initial monitoring of the outbreak in Wuhan and its declaration in January that there was no evidence of human to human transmission, to its live media briefings and its technical guidance on country level planning and other matters, the WHO has been the body setting the guidelines and recommendations shaping the global response to this outbreak. But even the World Health Organization itself is largely reliant on funds from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The WHO's most recent donor report shows that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the organization's second largest donor behind the United States government. The Gates Foundation single handedly contributes more to the World Health Body than Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Russia, and The UK combined. What's more, current World Health Organization Director General Tedros Adhanom Gebreyesis is in fact, like Bill Gates himself, not a medical doctor at all, but the controversial ex Minister of Health of Ethiopia who was accused of covering up three cholera outbreaks in the country during his tenure.
Before joining the WHO, he served as chair of the Gates founded Global Fund to Fight AIDS Tuberculosis and Malaria, and sat on the board of the Gates founded Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the Gates funded Stop TB Partnership. The current round of lockdowns and restrictive stay home orders in Western countries were enacted on the back of alarming models predicting millions of deaths in The United States and hundreds of thousands in The UK.
Speaker 11: Imperial College in London released a COVID-nineteen report, and that's where most of our US leaders are getting the information they're basing their decision making on. The report runs us through a few different ways this could turn out depending on what our responses are. If we don't do anything to control this virus, over eighty percent of people in The US would be infected over the course of the epidemic, with two point two million deaths from COVID nineteen. That two point two million deaths also doesn't account for the potential negative effects of health systems being overwhelmed.
Speaker 7: From this evening, I must give the British people a very simple instruction. You must stay at home.
Speaker 0: Enough is enough. Go home and stay home.
Speaker 13: A statewide order for people to stay at home.
Speaker 1: The work of two research groups was crucial in shaping the decisions of The UK and US governments to implement wide ranging lockdowns and, in turn, governments around the world. The first group, the Imperial College COVID-nineteen research team, issued a report on March 16 that predicted up to five hundred thousand deaths in The UK and two point two million deaths in The US unless strict government measures were put in place. The second group, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation in Bill Gates' home state of Washington, helped provide data that corroborated the White House's initial estimates of the virus' effects estimates that have been repeatedly downgraded as the situation has progressed. Unsurprisingly, the Gates Foundation has injected substantial sums of money into both groups. This year alone, the Gates Foundation has already given $79,000,000 to Imperial College, and in 2017, the foundation announced a $279,000,000 investment into the IHME to expand its work collecting health data and creating models.
Anthony Fauci, meanwhile, has become the face of the U. S. Government's coronavirus response, echoing Bill Gates' assertion that the country will not get back to normal until a good vaccine can be found to ensure the public's safety.
Speaker 14: If you wanna get to pre coronavirus, you know, that might not ever happen in the sense of the the fact that the threat is there. But I believe with the therapies that will be coming online and with the fact that I feel confident that over a period of time, we will get a good vaccine, that we will never have to get back to where we are right back now.
Speaker 1: Beyond just their frequent collaborations and cooperation in the past, Fauci has direct ties to Gates' projects and funding. In 2010, he was appointed to the leadership council of the Gates founded Decade of Vaccines project to implement a global vaccine action plan, a project to which Gates committed $10,000,000,000 of funding. And in October, just as the current pandemic was beginning, the Gates Foundation announced a $100,000,000 contribution to the National Institute of Health to help among other programs Fauci's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases research into HIV. Also in October, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation partnered with the World Economic Forum and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security to stage Event two zero one, a tabletop exercise gauging the economic and societal impact of a globally spreading coronavirus pandemic. It began in healthy looking pigs
Speaker 15: months, perhaps years ago. A new coronavirus. The mission of the pandemic emergency board is to provide recommendations to deal with the major global challenges arising in response to an unfolding pandemic. The board is comprised of highly experienced leaders from business, public health, and civil society.
Speaker 2: We're at the start of what's looking like it will be a severe pandemic, and there are problems emerging that can only be solved by global business and governments working together.
Speaker 16: Governments need to be willing to do things that are out of their historical perspective or for the most part, it's it's really a a war footing that we need to be on.
Speaker 1: Given the incredible reach that the tentacles of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have into every corner of the global health markets, it should not be surprising that the foundation has been intimately involved with every stage of the current pandemic crisis either. In effect, Gates has merely used the wealth from his domination of the software market to leverage himself into a similar position in the world of global health. The whole process has been cloaked in the mantle of selfless philanthropy, but the foundation is not structured as a charitable endeavor. Instead, it maintains a dual structure. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation distributes money to grantees, but a separate entity, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Trust, manages the endowment assets.
These two entities often have overlapping interests, and, as has been noted many times in the past, grants given by the Foundation often directly benefit the value of the trust's assets.
Speaker 15: One of my favorite parts about my job at the Gates Foundation is that I get to travel to the developing world, and I do that quite regularly. My first trip in India, I was in a person's home where they had dirt floors, no running water, no electricity, and that's really what I see all over the world. So, short, I'm startled by all the things that they don't have. But I am surprised by one thing that they do have. Coca Cola.
Coke is everywhere. In fact, when I travel in the developing world, Coke feels ubiquitous. And so, when I come back from these trips and I'm thinking about development and I'm flying home and I'm thinking, well, we're trying to deliver condoms to people or vaccinations, you know, Coke's success kind of stops and makes you wonder, how is it that they can get Coke to these far flung places? And if they can do that, why can't governments and NGOs do the same thing?
Speaker 17: And the charity of Microsoft founder Bill Gates and his wife Melinda is under criticism following the disclosure. It substantially increased its holdings in the agribusiness giant Monsanto to over $23,000,000. Critics say the investment in Monsanto contradicts the bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's stated commitment to helping farmers and sustainable development in Africa.
Speaker 18: The study from the pressure group Global Justice Now paints a picture of the Gates Foundation partly as an expression of corporate America's desire to profit from Africa and partly a damning critique of its effects.
Speaker 19: You could have a case where the initial research is done by a Gates funded institution. The media reporting on how well that research is conducted is done. The media, outlet is a Gates funded outlet, so maybe a Gates funded journalist from a media program. And then the program is implemented more widely by Gates funded NGO. I mean, it's it there are there are some very insular circles here.
Speaker 10: Yeah. You don't have a
Speaker 18: Among the many criticisms, the idea that private finance can solve the problems of the developing world. Should poor farmers be trapped into debt by having to use chemicals or fertilizers underwritten by offshoots of the foundation?
Speaker 1: This is no mere theoretical conflict of interest. Gates is held up as a hero for donating $35,800,000,000 worth of his Microsoft stock to the foundation. But during the course of his decade of vaccines, Gates' net worth has actually doubled from $54,000,000,000 to $103,100,000,000 The Rockefeller story provides an instructive template for this vision of tycoon turned philanthropist. When Rockefeller faced a public backlash, he helped spearhead the creation of a system of private foundations that connected in with his business interests. Leveraging his unprecedented oil monopoly fortune into unprecedented control over wide swaths of public life, Rockefeller was able to kill two birds with one stone molding society in his family's own interests even as he became a beloved figure in the public imagination.
Similarly, Bill Gates has leveraged his software empire into a global health, development, and education empire, steering the course of investment and research, and ensuring healthy markets for vaccines and other immunization products. And, like Rockefeller, Gates has been transformed from the feared and reviled head of a formidable Hydra into a kindly old man generously giving his wealth back to the public. But not everyone has been taken in by this PR trick. Even The Lancet observed this worrying transformation from software monopolist to health monopolist back in 2009, when the extent of this Gates led monopoly was becoming apparent to all. The first guiding principle of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is that it is driven by the interests and passions of the Gates family.
An annual letter from Bill Gates summarizes those passions, referring to newspaper articles, books, and chance events that have shaped the foundation's strategy. For such a large and influential investor in global health, is such a whimsical governance principle good enough?
Speaker 20: $10,000,000,000. Just speak about the magnitude of that. That is by far the biggest commitment of the foundation, isn't it, Bill? This is by far the largest.
Speaker 2: That's right. We've been spending a lot on vaccines. With this commitment, over eight million additional lives will be saved. So it's one of the most effective ways that health in the poorest countries can be dramatically improved.
Speaker 1: In January 2010, Bill and Melinda Gates used the World Economic Forum at Davos to announce a staggering $10,000,000,000 commitment to research and develop vaccines for the world's poorest countries, kicking off what he called a decade of vaccines.
Speaker 2: Today, we're announcing a commitment over this next decade, which we think of as a a decade of of vaccines having incredible impact. We're announcing that, we'll spend over $10,000,000,000 on vaccines.
Speaker 1: Hailed by the Gates funded media
Speaker 2: For the record, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a NewsHour underwriter.
Speaker 1: And applauded by the pharmaceutical companies who stood to reap the benefits of that largesse. The record setting commitment made waves in the international community, helping to underwrite a global vaccine action plan coordinated by the Gates funded World Health Organization. But contrary to the Gates' own PR spin that this $10,000,000,000 pledge was an unalloyed good and would save eight million lives, the truth is that this attempt to reorient the global health economy was part of a much bigger agenda, an agenda that would ultimately lead to greater profits for big pharma companies, greater control for the Gates Foundation over the field of global health, and greater power for Bill Gates to shape the course of the future for billions of people around the planet. This is Bill Gates' plan to vaccinate the world. Given Gates' pledge to make this a decade of vaccines, it should come as no surprise that since the dawn of this coronavirus crisis, he has been adamant that the world will not go back to normal until a vaccine has been developed.
Speaker 2: But we're gonna have this intermediate period of opening up, and it won't be normal until we get an amazing vaccine to the entire world. The vaccine is critical because until you have that, things aren't really going to be normal. They can open up to some degree, but the risk of a rebound will be there until we have very broad vaccination. They won't be back to normal until we either have that phenomenal vaccine or a therapeutic that's like over ninety five percent effective. And so we have to assume that's gonna be almost eighteen months from now.
And then the final solution, which is a year to two years off, is the vaccine. So we've got to go full speed ahead on all three fronts.
Speaker 21: Just to head off the conspiracy theorists, maybe we shouldn't call the vaccine the final solution. Maybe just the best Okay?
Speaker 1: More interestingly, since Gates began delivering this same talking point in every one of his many media appearances of late, it has been picked up and repeated by heads of state, health officials, doctors, and media talking heads, right down to the scientifically arbitrary, but very specific, eighteen month timeframe.
Speaker 22: Realistically, COVID-nineteen will be here for the next eighteen months or more. We will not be able to return to normalcy until we find a vaccine or effective medications.
Speaker 23: The hard fact is until we find a vaccine, going back to normal means putting lives at risk.
Speaker 0: This will be the new normal until a vaccine is developed.
Speaker 7: The only thing that will really allow life as we once knew it to resume is a vaccine.
Speaker 24: Obviously, we continue to work on the vaccines, but the vaccines have to be down the road by probably fourteen, fifteen, sixteen months. We're doing great on the vaccines.
Speaker 1: The fact that so many heads of state, health ministers, and media commentators are dutifully echoing Gates' pronouncements about the need for a vaccine will not be surprising to those who saw last week's exploration of how Bill Gates monopolized global health. As we have seen, the Gates Foundation's tentacles have penetrated into every corner of the field of public health. Billions of dollars in funding and entire public policy agendas are under the control of this man an unelected, unaccountable software developer with no medical research experience or training. Nowhere is Gates' control of public health more apparent than in the realm of vaccines. Gates launched the Decade of Vaccines with a $10,000,000,000 pledge.
Gates helped develop the Global Vaccine Action Plan administered by the Gates funded World Health Organization. Gates helped found Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, aiming to develop healthy markets for vaccine manufacturers. Gates helped launch Gavi with a $1,000,000,000 donation in 2011, going on to contribute $4,100,000,000 over the course of the decade of vaccines.
Speaker 2: And so I'm pleased to announce to you that we're pledging an additional billion dollars to
Speaker 25: Thank you.
Speaker 12: All right. Thank you.
Speaker 2: It's not every day we give away a billion, dollars.
Speaker 1: One of the Gates Foundation's core funding areas is vaccine development and surveillance, which has resulted in the channeling of billions of dollars into vaccine development, a seat at the table to develop vaccination campaigns in countries around the globe, and the opportunity to shape public thinking about Bill Gates' pet project of the past five years: preparing rapid development and deployment of vaccines in the event of a globally spreading pandemic.
Speaker 2: If anything kills over ten million people in the next few decades, it's most likely to be a highly infectious virus. Whether it occurs by the quirk of nature or at the hand of a terrorist, epidemiologists show through their models that a respiratory spread pathogen would kill more than thirty million people in less than a year. And there is a reasonable probability of that taking place in the years ahead.
Speaker 26: Many high profile personalities have been gathering at this year's World Economic Forum in Davos, which aims to discuss and deal with the globe's most pressing issues. Amongst them is the Microsoft founder, Bill Gates. His foundation is investing millions in the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations to help combat infectious diseases. Here's some of what he had to say about his push to develop new vaccines.
Speaker 2: Unfortunately, it takes many years to do a completely new vaccine. The design, the the safety reviews Cost. The manufacturing, all of those things mean that an epidemic can be very widespread before that tool would come along. And so after Ebola, the global health community talked a lot about this, including a new type of vaccine platform called DNA RNA that should speed things along. And so this coalition for epidemic preparedness initiative, CEPI, is three countries, Japan, Norway, Germany, two foundations, Welcome Trust, who we work with on a lot of things on our foundation, Gates Foundation, coming together to fund actually trying to use that platform and make some vaccines, and so that would help us in the future.
We
Speaker 14: know vaccines can protect us.
Speaker 10: We just need to be better prepared. So let's come together. Let's research.
Speaker 18: And invest.
Speaker 14: Let's save lives. Pass smart epidemics.
Speaker 1: Given Gates' mammoth investment in vaccines over the past decade, his insistence
Speaker 2: that Things won't go back to truly normal until we have a vaccine that we've gotten out to basically the entire world
Speaker 1: is hardly surprising. What should be surprising is that this strangely specific and continuously repeated message that we will not go back to normal until we get a vaccine in eighteen months has no scientific basis whatsoever. Medical researchers have already conceded that a vaccine for SARS CoV-two may not even be possible, pointing to the inability of researchers to develop any kind of immunization against previous coronavirus outbreaks like SARS or MERS. But even if such a vaccine were possible, serious concerns remain about the safety of developing, testing, and delivering such an amazing vaccine to the entire world in this remarkably short timeframe. Even proponents of vaccine development openly worry that the rush to vaccinate billions of people with a largely untested, experimental coronavirus vaccine will itself present grave risks to the public.
One of these risks involves disease enhancement. It has been known for over a decade that vaccination for some viral infections, including coronaviruses, actually enhances susceptibility to viral infection or even causes infections in healthy vaccine recipients.
Speaker 14: Now the issue of safety is something that I wanna make sure the American public understand. It's not only safety when you inject somebody and they get maybe an idiosyncratic reaction, they get a little allergic reaction, they get pain. There's safety associated. Does the vaccine make you worse? And there are diseases in which you vaccinate someone.
They get infected with what you're trying to protect them with, and you actually enhance the infection.
Speaker 1: This is no mere theoretical risk. As researchers who were trying to develop a vaccine for the original SARS outbreak discovered, the vaccine actually made the lab animals subjected to it more susceptible to the disease.
Speaker 27: One of the things that we're not hearing a lot about is the unique potential safety problem of coronavirus vaccines. This was, first found in the early nineteen sixties with respiratory syncytial virus, vaccines at chill and it was done here in Washington with the NIH and Children's National Medical Center that some of those kids who got the vaccine actually did worse, and I believe there were two deaths as in in the consequence of that study. Because what happens with certain types of respiratory virus vaccines, you get immunized, then when you get actually exposed to the virus, you get this kind of paradoxical immune enhancement phenomenon. And what how and and we we don't entirely understand the basis of it, but we recognize that it's a real problem for certain respiratory virus vaccines. That killed the RSV program for decades.
Now the Gates Foundation is taking it up again, but when we started developing, coronavirus vaccines in our colleagues, we noticed in laboratory animals that they started to show some of the same immune pathology that resembled what had happened fifty years earlier.
Speaker 1: This specific issue regarding coronavirus vaccines is exacerbated by the arbitrary and unscientific eighteen month timeframe that Gates is insisting on for the vaccine's development. In order to meet that deadline, vaccine developers are being urged to use new and largely unproven methods for creating their experimental immunizations, including DNA and mRNA vaccines.
Speaker 28: For a self described wartime president, victory over COVID nineteen equals a vaccine.
Speaker 24: I hope we're gonna have a vaccine, and and we're going to fast track it like you've never seen before.
Speaker 28: Adding Trump style branding, the administration launched Operation Warp Speed, a multibillion dollar research and manufacturing effort to shorten the typical year plus vaccine development timeline.
Speaker 14: We're gonna start ramping up production with the companies involved, and you do that at risk. In other words, you don't wait until you get an answer before you start manufacturing. You at risk proactively start making it assuming it's gonna work.
Speaker 29: You're thinking eighteen months even with all the work that you've already done to this point and the planning that you are taking with lots of different potential vaccinations and building up for that now?
Speaker 2: Yeah. So the there's an approach called RNA vaccine that people like Moderna, CureVac and others are using that in 2015, we'd identified that as very promising for pandemics and for other applications as well. And so if everything goes perfectly with the RNA approach, we could actually beat the eighteen months. We don't want to create unrealistic expectations.
Speaker 25: So the concept of an RNA vaccine is let's inject the RNA molecule that encodes for the spike protein.
Speaker 30: It's making your cell do the work of creating this viral protein that is going to be recognized by your immune system and trigger the development of these antibodies.
Speaker 25: Our bodies won't make a full fledged infectious virus. They'll just make a little piece and then learn to recognize it and then get ready to destroy the virus if it then later comes and invades us. It's a relatively new, unproven technology, and there's still no example of an RNA vaccine that's been deployed worldwide in the way that we need for the coronavirus.
Speaker 30: There's the possibility for unforeseen adverse effects.
Speaker 31: So this is all new territory. Whether it would elicit protective immune response against this virus is just unknown right now.
Speaker 1: Rushing at warp speed to develop a new vaccine using experimental technology and then mass producing and delivering billions of doses to be injected into basically the entire world before adequate testing is even done amounts to one of the most dangerous experiments in the history of the world one that could alter the lives of untold numbers of people. That an experimental vaccine, developed in a brand new way and rushed through with a special shortened testing regime, should be given to adults, children, pregnant women, newborn babies, and the elderly alike would be, in any other situation, unthinkable. To suggest that such a vaccine should be given to the entire planet would have been called lunacy mere months ago. But now the public is being asked to accept this premise without question. Even Gates himself acknowledges the inherent risks of such a project.
But his concern is not for the lives that will be irrevocably altered in the event that the vaccines cause damage to the population. Instead, he is more concerned that the pharmaceutical companies and the researchers are given legal immunity for any such damage.
Speaker 2: You know, if we have, you know, one in ten thousand side effects, that's way more, seven hundred thousand people who will suffer from that. So really understanding the safety at gigantic scale across all age ranges, pregnant, male, female, undernourished, existing comorbidities, it's very, very hard. And that actual decision of, okay, let's go and give this vaccine to the entire world, governments will have to be involved because there will be some risk and indemnification needed before that can be decided on.
Speaker 1: As we have already seen, in the arena of global health, what Bill Gates wants is what the world gets. So it should be no surprise that immunity for the big pharma vaccine manufacturers and the vaccination program planners is already being worked on. In The U. S, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a declaration that retroactively provides liability immunity for activities related to medical countermeasures against COVID-nineteen, including manufacturers, distributors, and program planners of any vaccine used to treat, diagnose, cure, prevent, or mitigate COVID-nineteen. The declaration was issued on March 17, but retroactively covers any activity back to 02/04/2020, the day before the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation announced an emergency $100,000,000 to fund treatment efforts and to develop new vaccines for COVID-nineteen.
The plan to inject everyone on the planet with an experimental vaccine is no aberration in Bill Gates' envisioned decade of vaccines. It is its culmination. The decade of vaccines kicked off with a Gates funded $3,600,000 observational study of HPV vaccines in India that, according to a government investigation, violated the human rights of the study participants with gross violations of consent and failed to properly report adverse events experienced by the vaccine recipients. After the deaths of seven girls involved in the trial were reported, a parliamentary investigation concluded that the Gates funded Program for Appropriate Technology and Health which ran the study had been engaged in a scheme to help ensure healthy markets for GlaxoSmithKline and Merck, the manufacturers of the Gardasil and Cerverix vaccines that had been so generously donated for use in the trial. Had PATH been successful in getting the HPV vaccine included in the universal immunization program of the concerned countries, this would have generated windfall profit for the manufacturers by way of automatic sale, year after year, without any promotional or marketing expenses.
It is well known that once introduced into the immunization program, it becomes politically impossible to stop any vaccination. Chandra M. Gulhadi, editor of the influential Monthly Index of Medical Specialties, remarked that it is shocking to see how an American organization used surreptitious methods to establish itself in India, and Samarind Nundi, editor emeritus of the National Medical Journal of India, lamented that this is an obvious case where Indians were being used as guinea pigs. Throughout the decade, India's concerns about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and its partner's influence on the country's national immunization programs grew. In 2016, the steering group of the country's National Health Mission blasted the government for allowing the country's National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization the primary body advising the government on all vaccination related matters, to be effectively purchased by the Gates Foundation.
As one steering group member noted: The NTAGI Secretariat has been moved out of the government's health ministry to the Office of Public Health Foundation of India, and the 32 staff members in that Secretariat draw their salaries from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. There is a clear conflict of interest: on one hand, the BMGF funds the Secretariat that is the highest decision making body in vaccines, and, on the other, it partners with the pharma industry in Gavi. This is unacceptable. In 2017, the government responded by cutting all financial ties between the advisory group and the Gates Foundation. Similar stories play out across the Gates Foundation's decade of vaccines.
There's the Gates founded and funded Meningitis Vaccine Project, which led to the creation and testing of MenAfrovac, a fifty cent per dose immunization against meningococcal meningitis. The tests led to reports of between forty and five hundred children suffering seizures and convulsions, and eventually becoming paralyzed. There's the 2017 confirmation that the Gates supported oral polio vaccine was actually responsible for the majority of new polio cases, and the 2018 follow-up showing that eighty percent of polio cases are now vaccine derived. There's the 2018 paper in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health concluding that over four hundred and ninety thousand people in India developed paralysis as a result of the oral polio vaccine between 02/2017. There's even the WHO's own malaria chief, Doctor.
Arata Coci, who complained in an internal memo that Gates' influence meant that the world's leading malaria scientists are now locked up in a cartel with their own research funding being linked to those of others within the group, and that the foundation was stifling debate on the best ways to treat and combat malaria, prioritizing only those methods that relied on new technology or developing new drugs. Coci's Complaint, written in 2008, highlights the most common criticism of the global health web that Gates has spun in the past two decades: that the public health industry has become a racket run by and for big pharma and its partners for the benefit of big business. At the time that Kochi was writing his memo, the executive director of the Gates Foundation's global health program was Tachi Yamada. Yamada left his position as Chairman of Research and Development at GlaxoSmithKline to take up the position at the Gates Foundation in 2006, and left the foundation five years later to become Chief Medical and Scientific Officer at Takeda Pharmaceuticals. Yamada's replacement as head of Gates' Global Health Program, Trevor Mundle, was himself a clinical researcher at Pfizer and Park Davis, and spent time as head of development with Novartis before joining the Foundation.
This use of Foundation funds to set public policy to drive up corporate profits is not a secret conspiracy. It is a perfectly open one. When the Center for Global Development formed a working group to develop a practical approach to the vaccine challenge, they concluded that the best way to incentivize pharmaceutical companies to produce more vaccines for the third world was for governments to promise to buy vaccines before they were even developed. They titled their report Making Markets for Vaccines.
Speaker 11: The project Making Markets for Vaccines was really designed to address a problem that's existed for a long time, which is insufficient research and development budgets as well as investment capacity in vaccine development and production for the third world. How do you create better incentives to get the pharma community, the vaccine community to produce products that are specifically dedicated for the developing world? Michael Kremer, a professor at Harvard, had been thinking about this problem for many years.
Speaker 32: He realized that if the rich countries of the world were to make a promise that they would buy a malaria vaccine if somebody produced it, that that would give an incentive to the pharmaceutical industry to go and do the research and development needed to make one. But this idea was unfamiliar. No government had made a commitment to buy a product that didn't already exist.
Speaker 1: When the first such advanced market commitment was made in 2007, a $1,500,000,000 promise to buy yet to be produced vaccines from big pharma manufacturers, there was the Gates Foundation as the only non nation sponsor. The Gates founded Gavi Vaccine Alliance is an open partnership between the Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization, the World Bank, and vaccine manufacturers. Their stated goal includes introducing new vaccines into the routine schedules of national immunization programs and to engage in market shaping efforts to ensure healthy markets for vaccines and other immunization products. If introducing new vaccines and ensuring healthy markets for them was the aim of Gates' decade of vaccines, there can be no doubt that COVID-nineteen has seen that goal realized in spectacular fashion.
Speaker 10: Let's start the pledging.
Speaker 33: The EU kicked off its fundraising drive with €1,000,000,000. In the hours that followed, pledges were beamed in from across the globe.
Speaker 34: The Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia has pledged $500,000,000.
Speaker 33: Even pop icon Madonna made a last minute donation of a million euros.
Speaker 15: By combining the world's expertise and brainpower and resources, we can attack this disease in the way it's attacking us globally. Our foundation is proud to partner with you, and I'm pleased to announce today that we will pledge $100,000,000 towards this effort.
Speaker 33: Germany was one of the leading donors, pledging over €500,000,000 The money is earmarked for international health organisations and research networks in a bid to speed up the development of a vaccine.
Speaker 1: And there, at the centre of this web, is the Gates Foundation, connected to every major organization, research institution, international alliance, and vaccine manufacturer involved in the current crisis. Certainly, the Gates, like the Rockefellers, have profited from their years as the most generous people on the planet. As curious as it might seem to those who don't understand the true nature of this monopoly cartel, despite all of these grants and pledges commitments of tens of billions of dollars Bill Gates' personal net worth has actually doubled during this decade of vaccines from $50,000,000,000 to over $100,000,000,000 But once again, we come back to the question: Who is Bill Gates? Is he motivated simply by money? Is this incessant drive to vaccinate the entire population of the planet merely the result of greed?
Or is there something else driving this agenda? As we shall see next time, money is not the end goal of Gates' philanthropic activities. Money is just the tool that he is using to purchase what he really wants: control. Control not just of the health industry, but control of the human population itself.
Speaker 6: Hello, everyone. Mister b.
Speaker 4: What's your secret mission about?
Speaker 6: It's not my mission, but an idea that came from our good friend, mister Bill Gates.
Speaker 2: Hi, kids.
Speaker 4: The real, actual, in person Bill? Bill?
Speaker 11: He's trying to say that we're big fans, mister Gates.
Speaker 1: It's a strange fact that Bill Gates hagiographers PR hacks employed more often than not by large corporations that receive funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation consistently depict this drab software developer as a cartoon superhero using his superpower of being very rich to help save the planet.
Speaker 35: Behind closed doors on this New York campus, a secret gathering of some of the world's most powerful people. Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg, Winfrey. It was like, well, it was like the Super Friends.
Speaker 12: In the great hall of the Justice League, there are assembled the world's four greatest heroes.
Speaker 1: But these cartoon fueled puff pieces reveal more than they know about Gates and the other mega rich philanthropists they are attempting to idolize. They reveal that the idea of the selfless billionaire do gooder is a work of fiction so unbelievable it is only fit for Saturday morning cartoon fare. As we have seen in our first two explorations of Bill Gates' role as global health kingpin, the seemingly selfless generosity of the Gates family through their eponymous foundation has in fact greatly increased their own wealth, with Bill Gates' personal net worth having doubled in the past decade alone. But the takeover of public health that we have documented in How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health and the remarkably brazen push to vaccinate everyone on the planet that we have documented in Bill Gates' Plan to Vaccinate the World was not at base about money. The unimaginable wealth that Gates has accrued is now being used to purchase something much more useful: control.
Control not just of the global health bodies that can coordinate a worldwide vaccination program or the governments that will mandate such an unprecedented campaign, but control over the global population itself. This is an exploration of Bill Gates and the population control grid. From a journalistic standpoint, Good Morning America's inane report on the secretive billionaire meeting that took place in New York in 2009 was a failure. It listed some of the meeting's attendees and their combined net worth.
Speaker 35: Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg, Winfrey, together with others at the meeting including George Soros, Ted Turner, David Rockefeller, they're worth more than $125,000,000,000
Speaker 1: It turned to the senior editor of Forbes for a sound bite about what it would be like to witness such an assembly of wealth.
Speaker 23: To have been in the room and see this meeting of the minds really would have been a fascinating thing.
Speaker 1: And it dutifully reported the participants' own stated reason for holding the meeting.
Speaker 35: That much money, that much power around one table, it begs the question, what were they doing? What were they scheming? Total world domination? This group, together for six hours, was talking about charity, education, emergency relief, global health.
Speaker 1: Before wrapping up with another juvenile appeal to comic book superhero lore.
Speaker 35: The new Superman and Wonder Woman. The super rich friends. Not fighting bad guys, but fighting for good nonetheless. For Good Morning America, John Berman, ABC News.
Speaker 1: Yes, from a journalistic standpoint, Berman's report was an utter failure. There was no attempt to question the participants about the meeting, no space for any criticism of these billionaires or questions about their motives, no adversarial journalism of any kind. But as a PR piece, it was brilliant. It leaves the viewer with a vague sense that some kind of gathering took place somewhere in New York in which rich people talked about charity. One would have to turn to print sources to discover that the meeting was held at the personal residence of Sir Paul Nurse that the invitation to the gathering was co written by Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and David Rockefeller or that the aim of the meeting was to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world's population.
Given that these extraordinarily rich and powerful men have all expressed their belief that the growing human population is the greatest threat faced by humanity, it should not be surprising that they would convene a conference to discuss how best to channel their vast wealth into the project of reducing the number of people on the planet. Particularly unsurprising is that attendees of the meeting later dubbed Bill Gates, a man for whom population control is particularly close to his heart, as the most impressive speaker at the event.
Speaker 2: Here we can see a chart that looks at the total world population over the last several hundred years. And at first glance, this is a bit scary. We go from less than a billion in 1800, and then three, four, five, six, and 7,400,000,000 where we are today is happening even faster. So Melinda and I wondered whether providing new medicines and keeping children alive, would that create more of a population problem? And what the developing world does not need is more children.
Speaker 15: And I think that was the biggest to Bill and me when we got into this work because we asked ourselves, of course, the same hard nosed question you'd ask, which is if you get into this work and you start to save these children, will women just keep overpopulating the world? And thank goodness, the converse is absolutely true.
Speaker 2: This is a very important question to get right because it was it was absolutely key for me. When our foundation first started up, it was focused on reproductive health. That was the main thing we did because I thought, you know, population growth in poor countries is the biggest problem they face. You've got to help mothers who wanna limit family size have the tools and education to do that. And I thought that's the only thing that really counts.
Speaker 1: In recent years, critics have pointed to Bill Gates' own words linking vaccination programs with his goal of reducing population growth.
Speaker 2: The world today has 6,800,000,000 people. That's headed up to about 9,000,000,000. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps ten or fifteen percent.
Speaker 13: $10,000,000,000 over the next ten years, to make it the year of the vaccines. What does that mean exactly?
Speaker 2: Well, over this decade, we believe unbelievable progress can be made both inventing new vaccines and making sure they get out to all the children who need them. We could cut the number of children who die every year from about nine million to half of that if we have success on it. The benefits there in terms of reducing sickness, reducing the population growth, it really allows the society a chance to take care of itself once you've made that intervention.
Speaker 1: But as any number of fact checking websites not to mention Bill Gates himself are quick to point out, this doesn't mean what it sounds like it means.
Speaker 2: What we found out is that as health improves, families choose to have less children.
Speaker 15: The truth is that when people's lives improve, when children survive, for instance, or when girls go to school, people start making decisions based on the expectation that their children will live and thrive. The result is smaller families and slower population growth.
Speaker 2: I came across articles that showed that the key thing you can do to reduce population growth is actually improve health. And that sounds paradoxical. You think, okay. Better health means more kids, not less kids. Well, in fact, what parents are doing is they're they're trying to have two kids survive to adulthood to take care of them.
And so the more disease burden that there is, the more kids they have to have to have that high probability. So there's a perfect correlation that as you improve health, within a half generation, the population growth rate goes down.
Speaker 1: Yes. The Gates' stated plan is to reduce population growth by improving health. But the idea of using vaccines as sterilization agents, even without the public's knowledge or consent, is not conspiracy lore, but documentable fact. In its 1968 annual report, the Rockefeller Foundation addressed the problems of population, lamenting that very little work is in progress on immunological methods, such as vaccines, to reduce fertility, and much more research is required if a solution is to be found here. The Foundation vowed to correct this problem by funding established and beginning investigators to turn their attention to aspects of research in reproductive biology that have implications for human fertility and its control.
This was no empty promise. By the time of its 1988 annual report, the Rockefeller Foundation was able to report progress on its funding into contraceptive research, including Norplant, a contraceptive implanted under the skin of a woman's upper arm and effective for five years. In its 1988 report, the Rockefeller Foundation was pleased to announce that Norplant, which was developed by the Rockefeller founded Population Council, was now approved for marketing in 12 countries. The Rockefellers Population Council and other research organizations joined with the World Health Organization in 1972 to create a task force on vaccines for fertility regulation. By 1995, they were able to report progress in developing a prototype of an anti HCG vaccine, which works by combining an immunogen formed from a synthetic peptide of human chorionic gonadotropin a hormone secreted by the surface of the early embryo to remain implanted in the womb, with a toxoid carrier molecule.
The vaccine stimulates an immune reaction, causing women to develop antibodies against the hormone, thus preventing them from carrying babies to term. But beginning in the 1990s, a series of scandals over WHO led vaccination programs in the third world led to allegations that tetanus vaccines in places like The Philippines and Kenya were being laced with HCG in order to implement population control by stealth. The controversy generated by these stories led global institutions to step back from the campaign to champion population control by vaccine. But, as usual, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was there to renew interest, working with the UK government to host a London Summit on Family Planning in 2012, at which the foundation announced their support for funding the research, development, and deployment of injectable contraceptives to the developing world.
Speaker 15: You heard me talk earlier about Sadie, who I met in Niger. She was traveling 15 kilometers to get an injection. But let's ask ourselves, what if she didn't have to travel to that clinic? If we put it in her perspective, how can we keep her in her village to get the contraceptive she wants? Well, Pfizer is testing a new form of depot.
The injection that she goes 15 kilometers to get, they're now putting it in a new form, a new device that can be given. It's very, very small. It's called UniJECT. I think it's going to be pictured here. It's a high quality product.
It's effective. It's safe. It's tiny, as you can see, and it can be put in a health care worker's kit to give to the woman at the village level. So Sadie won't have to go 15 kilometers any longer to get that injection.
Speaker 1: But the Gates were not content to stop there. In 2014, it was announced that Microchips Biotech Inc, a company in Lexington, Massachusetts, had developed a new form of birth control: a wireless implant that can be turned on and off with a remote control and that is designed to last up to sixteen years. According to MIT Technology Review, the idea originated when Bill Gates visited Robert Langer's MIT lab in 2012 and asked him if it would be possible to create an implantable birth control device that could be turned on or off remotely. Langer referred Gates to the controlled release microchip technology he had invented and licensed to microchip's biotechnology, and the Gates Foundation granted $20,000,000 to the firm to develop the implants. Reducing population growth has, by Gates' own admission, been a core mission of the Gates Foundation since its inception.
But in order to really understand what Gates means by population control, we have to look beyond the concept of controlling population size. At its most fundamental level, the population control that Gates speaks of is not birth control, but control of the population itself. In order to understand the broader population control agenda and how it ties into the Gates Foundation's plans, we have to look at a puzzling development that took place in 2017. In that year, Gavi, the Gates founded and funded alliance that partners the Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization, and the World Bank with vaccine manufacturers to help ensure healthy markets for vaccines, took a strange pivot away from its core mission of vaccinating every child on the planet to providing every child with a digital biometric identity. The idea was first floated by Gavi CEO Seth Berkley in a Nature article that year Immunization Needs a Technology Boost where he states that the goal of one hundred percent immunization will not be reached without secure digital identification systems that can store a child's medical history.
He then gives a specific example: We are working with a company in India called Kushi Baby, which creates off grid digital health records. A necklace worn by infants contains a unique identification number on a short range communication chip. Community health workers can scan the chip using a mobile phone, enabling them to update a child's digital record even in remote areas with little phone coverage. This sudden interest in digital identity was no mere passing fancy for the Vaccine Alliance. Gavi doubled down by becoming a founding member of the ID2020 Alliance, a public private partnership dedicated to spearheading a global digital biometric identity standard.
Other founding members of the alliance include Gates' first company, Microsoft, and the Rockefeller Foundation. In 2018, Gavi issued a call for innovation in digital technologies for finding, identifying, and registering the most vulnerable children. The call specifically requested technologies for capturing, storing, and enrolling the biometric details of infants on rugged biometric devices. Berkeley continued to follow-up on this idea in public engagements as one of the new core missions of Gavi.
Speaker 36: What's interesting is that people tend to think of birth certificates as kind of a major document. But the most common, I mentioned before, not a birth certificate, is not a death certificate, is not a marriage certificate. The most common vital registration for the population is actually a child health card because we reach more than ninety percent of children with at least one dose of vaccine as part of routine. So they're in the system. The challenge is that contact is not connected into the system.
So if you could connect it, then you have the ability to give them their basic identity papers. You have ability then later on if they want to own land or they want to have their rights, you're able to help them with that. But we're not currently taking advantage of that, and so the children get seen, they get enrolled in the health centers, but that information is not used for anything else.
Speaker 1: Although vaccines and identity may seem unrelated, Bill Gates has spent the last few years funding research that can bring the two ideas together. Late last year, Gates once again turned to Robert Langer and his MIT colleagues to investigate new ways to permanently store and record the vaccination information of each individual. The result of their research was a new vaccine delivery method. They found that by using dissolvable microneedles that deliver patterns of near infrared light emitting microparticles to the skin, they could create particle patterns in the skin of vaccine recipients which are invisible to the eye but can be imaged using modified smartphones. Rice University describes the quantum dot tags left behind by the microneedles as something like a barcode tattoo.
So who was behind this development? As lead researcher Kevin McHugh explains: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation came to us and said, 'Hey, we have a real problem knowing who's vaccinated.' So our idea was to put the record on the person. This way, later on, people can scan over the area to see what vaccines have been administered and give only the ones still needed. The microparticles that form the FQD tags are delivered along with the vaccine, but they cannot be delivered by a traditional syringe. Instead, they must be delivered by a patch of microneedles made from a mixture of dissolvable sugar and a polymer called PVA, as well as the quantum dot dye in the vaccine.
It should be no surprise then, that big pharma vaccine manufacturers, in their scramble to produce the coronavirus vaccine that, Gates assures us, is necessary to go back to normal, have turned to a novel vaccine delivery method, a dissolvable microneedle array patch.
Speaker 37: The University of Pittsburgh is where the polio vaccine was first discovered. At the medical center, researchers are now developing a vaccine that is delivered using a dissolvable patch called a microneedle array.
Speaker 38: Think about them as almost like a band aid. And so the microneedle array is simply applied to the skin topically, pressed into place very shortly, and then taken off and thrown away. Then the antigen is already delivered.
Speaker 1: As is becoming evident, this new vaccine delivered barcode like tattoo is about much more than simply ensuring that children get all their Gavi recommended immunizations. On a recent Ask Me Anything thread on Reddit, when asked: What changes are we going to have to make to how businesses operate to maintain our economy while providing social distancing? Bill Gates answered: Eventually we will have some digital certificate to show who has recovered or been tested recently, or when we have a vaccine, who has received it. In his answer, Gates fails to mention that he has himself been instrumental in kick starting and funding the research into the very type of digital certificate for vaccination that he is speaking about, or that these digital certificates likely, at first, to be a digital marker linked to a biometric ID could very well one day take the form of vaccine implanted quantum dot tattoos. But as in so many other aspects of the unfolding crisis, Gates' unscientific pronouncement that we will need digital certificates to prove our immunity in the new normal of the post coronavirus world
Speaker 2: Eventually, what we'll have to have is certificates of who's a recovered person, who's a vaccinated person.
Speaker 1: Is now being implemented by a number of governments. It is now being reported that Onfido, a tech startup specializing in AI based biometric ID verification, is in talks with the British government to provide the type of digital certification Gates mentioned, dubbed an immunity passport. The proposed system would require would be workers to use the OnFido provided app to scan their face or other biometric data, link that information to a SARS CoV-two antibody test and then have their picture taken and immunity verified every time they wish to access a restricted space or work environment. Last month, Onfido announced that it had raised $50,000,000 in a round of investments led by Bill Gates' old company, Microsoft. But this is not Gates' first experience with the field of biometric identity.
A decade ago, the government of India began what has been called the largest social experiment on earth, enrolling over 1,000,000,000 people in the largest biometric identification database ever constructed. The project, involving iris scanning and fingerprinting the entirety of the Indian population, recording their biometric details in a centralized database, and issuing them a 12 digit identity number that could be used to prove residents and access government services all within the span of a few years presented an incredible societal, legal, and technological challenge. It's no surprise then that the person who was brought in as the chief architect of the Aadhaar project when it was launched, Nandan Nilakhani, co founder of Indian multinational Infosys, is also a longtime friend of Bill Gates and a partner with Bill and Melinda Gates on a philanthropic venture called Co Impact, which supports initiatives to address major social challenges at scale. Nilakhani's involvement in Aadhaar has even made him one of Gates' heroes featured in slick video promotions produced by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Speaker 2: My friend Nandan Nilakhani is one of India's best known entrepreneurs. He led the creation of the world's largest biometric ID system. Now he's working to promote his platform to improve the lives of the world's poorest people.
Speaker 39: There are more than a billion people around the world who don't have any kind of ID. You can't do anything in life without an ID because people are mobile, they're migrant, and wherever they go, whether they want a job or whether they want to board a train or whether they want to get a bank account or get a mobile connection, if the person has no way of proving who they are, then they just won't get access to those services. So the challenge we had was how do we give a billion people, many of whom don't have birth certificates, how do we give them ID?
Speaker 1: Engates has personally praised the Aadhaar scheme as a huge asset for India.
Speaker 2: Well, Aadhaar is a huge asset for India. It was designed very well. The fact that you can make digital payments so easily, you can open a bank account. India is a leader in that. Our foundation worked with the Reserve Bank, group of people that he pulled together did a great job.
Speaker 1: But Gates is not merely an arm's length admirer of the Aadhaar experiment. He is not only personally connected to its chief architect, he is also connected to one of the key companies that spearheaded the technology that underlies the project's biometric database. The company that provides the iris recognition technology at the core of the Aadhaar system, IDEMIA, also provides facial recognition systems for the Chinese government, and is currently developing digital driver's licenses for use in The United States. IDEMIA even created the cushy baby identification necklaces with embedded microchips that Gavi CEO Seth Berkley touted in his Nature article. Unsurprisingly, the company received support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation through its involvement in the GSMA Inclusive Tech Lab.
And now, Gates is funding a scheme to retool Aadhaar for a global rollout. In 2014, the World Bank created a multi sector working group to launch the Identification for Development Initiative (or ID4D), which aims to support progress toward identification systems using twenty first century solutions. The World Bank cites Goal 16.9 of the UN Agenda 2,030 Sustainable Development Goals, vowing to provide legal identity for all, including birth registration, in the next ten years as the basis for its initiative. But ID4D was little more than a pipe dream until 2016, when the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation provided catalytic contributions to launch the ID4D Multi Donor Trust Fund, which enticed The UK, French, and Australian governments, along with the Omidyar Network, into a partnership aiming to shape global approaches and a shared vision on identification. Unsurprisingly, this World Bank ID4D initiative includes Nandar Nilakhani, Gates' partner and the chief architect of Aadhaar, on its advisory council, and Gates has said that he is funding the World Bank to take this Aadhaar approach to other countries.
This headlong rush to capture the biometric details and assign digital identification to every person on Earth is sold to the public under the guise of financial inclusion. The poorest people on the planet have trouble accessing financial services and receiving government aid because they don't have official government identification papers. In this formulation, being issued a government ID, having one's biometric details registered, tracked, and databased by the government is a human right that must be secured. It should be no surprise by this point that this human right also has direct benefits for big business and for the entities that are looking to exert greater control over the human population. Gates provided insight into the real purpose of this identification control grid in a speech at the Financial Inclusion Forum hosted by the US Treasury in 2015.
Speaker 2: Every country really needs to look through these, KYC, know your customer rules, to make sure that, customers are able to prove who they are. But, of course, in many countries, you don't have any type of ID system. And the lack of an ID system is a problem, not just for the payment system, but also for voting and health and education and taxation. And so it's a wonderful thing to go in and create a broad identification system. Again, India is a very, interesting example of this where the Aadhaar system, which is a 12 digit identifier that's correlated to biometric measures, is becoming pervasive throughout the country and will be the foundation for how we bring this low cost switch to every mobile phone user in India.
The same type of thing is happening now in Pakistan, and there's early beginnings of creating these ID programs in Africa as well. We expect to be able to use the ID so that when you show up for any government service, say you walk into a primary health clinic, we'll be able to take that bio ID very quickly and bring up your electronic health record. Even if you move from one part of the country to the other, you will be well tracked and well served without nearly as much paperwork or waiting. And so the ID system is foundational.
Speaker 1: The ID control grid is an essential part of the digitization of the economy. And although this is being sold as an opportunity for financial inclusion of the world's poorest in the banking system provided by the likes of Gates and his banking and business associates, it is in fact a system for financial exclusion of any person or transaction that does not have the approval of the government or the payment providers.
Speaker 2: Once financial flows go underground, where you have lots of legitimate transactions mixed in with the ones you wanna track, once they're going over a digital system that The US has no connection to, it's far more difficult, to find the transactions that that you wanna be aware of or that you wanna block.
Speaker 1: And once again, this is no mere theoretical talk from Gates. He has been intimately involved in this process of switching the world over to a digital payment grid tied to biometric identity. In 2012, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation helped found the Better Than Cash Alliance, which brings together governments, international organizations, and the private sector to accelerate the transition from cash to digital payments globally. And, when the Indian government made a bold move to demonetize large amounts of its circulating currency in order to draw off the books' funds back under the purview of the Indian Tax Office, there was Gates to praise the move as an important step toward the creation of a brave new digital economy tied, of course, to the Aadhaar ID
Speaker 2: grid. The bold move to demonetize how the high value denominations and replace them with new notes with higher security features is an important step to move away from a shadow economy to an even more transparent economy. And digital transactions really I think will rise dramatically here. In fact, I think in the next several years, India will become the most digitized economy. Not just by size, but by percentage as well.
All of the pieces are now coming together. One piece of this that we enjoyed consulting with the government on making sure it comes together in the right way is the pending rollout of payment banks. This for the first time really will mean that you have full currency capability on those digital phones. Once you have that digital infrastructure, the whole way you think about government benefits can be done differently. Over time all of these transactions will create a footprint.
And so when you go in for credit, the ability to access your history that you've paid your utility bills on time, that you've saved up money for your children's education, all of those things in your digital trail accessed in an appropriate way will allow the credit market to properly score the risk and therefore loosen up more money for investments not only in the agriculture sector but for all the entrepreneurs in the country.
Speaker 1: The different parts of this population control grid fit together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. The vaccination drive ties into the biometric identity drive, which ties into the cashless society drive. In Gates' vision, everyone will receive the government mandated vaccinations, and everyone will have their biometric details recorded in nationally administered, globally integrated digital IDs. These digital identities will be tied to all of our actions and transactions, and, if and when they are deemed illegal, they will simply be shut off by the government or even the payment providers themselves. The Indian experiment in pioneering this biometric digital economy an experiment with which Gates has been so intimately involved also provides a perfect example of just how such a system will be abused.
In January 2018, a report in the Tribune revealed that all of the details of all billion plus ADHAR registered Indians was available for purchase on WhatsApp for 500 rupees (seven USD). The Unique Identification Authority of India that administers the Aadhaar scheme was then forced to admit that approximately two ten websites, including websites of the central government and state government departments, were displaying the list of government beneficiaries, along with their name, address, other details, and Aadhaar numbers. Even more worryingly, newly obtained documents show that the Indian government is integrating Aadhaar collected data to create a three sixty degree database that will automatically track when a citizen moves between cities or buys new property, and integrate that data into a real time geospatial database built by the country's space agency ISRO. Only the most wilfully obtuse could claim to be unable to see the nightmarish implications for this type of all seeing, all pervasive society where every transaction and every movement of every citizen is monitored, analyzed, and databased in real time by the government. And Bill Gates is one of those willfully obtuse people.
Speaker 40: Current debate that's on in India and globally as well around data. Now, you've been an advocate of Aadhaar. You've supported it. You've defended it. And I think that the questions arise not on on whether it's a good idea or not, but whether it should be made mandatory for every citizen, for every service possible because it was envisaged as people accessing government subsidy using the Aadharka to avoid duplication and leakages.
The question then is that India today is still grappling with putting in place a privacy framework, a privacy regulation, a data protection regulation. In that context then, does it make sense, even though the matter is in court today, to link Aadhaar to every possible service?
Speaker 2: Well, Aadhaar is just something that avoids you pretending to be somebody else, that you can have fake people on the government payroll. Adhar prevents you being on that payroll as a ghost worker. It prevents you from collecting things that you shouldn't collect, or accessing a health record you shouldn't have access to. So the basic AdHar mechanism is an identity mechanism. And so it's too bad if somebody thinks that because AdHar is there, that in and of itself creates a privacy problem.
Speaker 1: Gates' response is, of course, disingenuous. The very purpose of a globally integrated ID grid and cashless payment architecture is to remove privacy from our lives. It should be no surprise then, that this man who is not concerned about the privacy implications of a global, real time electronic ID and digital payments grid, is also a prime investor in EarthNow LLC, a company promising to deploy a large constellation of advanced imaging satellites that will deliver real time, continuous video of almost anywhere on Earth. No, this Gates driven agenda is not about money. It is about control.
Control over every aspect of our daily lives, from where we go, to who we meet, to what we buy and what we do. The great irony is that this billionaire philanthropist, so often depicted as a cartoon superhero for his dazzling generosity, actually resembles nothing so much as a comic book supervillain, right down to the use of his vast wealth to sponsor Harvard University research into dimming the sun by spraying particles into the stratosphere. But once again, we are driven back to the question: Who is this person? What ideology is driving this quest for control? And what is the end goal of this quest?
Who is Bill Gates? Computer whiz kid, talented software developer, shrewd businessman, benevolent philanthropist, global health expert. There could be no doubt that Bill Gates has worn many hats on his remarkable journey from his early life as the privileged son of a Seattle area power couple to his current status as one of the richest and most influential people on the planet. But as we have seen in our exploration of Gates' rise as unelected global health czar and population control advocate, the question of who Bill Gates really is is no mere philosophical pursuit. Given that we are currently living through a crisis that has been predicted by Bill Gates, which is triggering a response from the global health organizations that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has bankrolled, and driving us toward a vaccination and biometric ID solution which Bill Gates has been working on for years.
The answer to the question, who is Bill Gates? Is quickly becoming one of the most important questions of our lives. That answer will not only tell us about the world that we are living in, but about the one that we are being thrust into and how we can avoid it. Today, we will attempt to answer that question as we examine the motives, the ideology, and the connections of this man who has been so instrumental in shaping the post coronavirus world. Meet Bill Gates.
So who is Bill Gates? Some argue that he's a genius who leveraged his natural computer savvy into a billion dollar fortune.
Speaker 41: You're called a genius, and I will well, no. I don't think that embarrassed you at all. I didn't call you a genius. Part of your genius is that you are a computer whiz, and the other is that you did have the the the business acumen to to turn it into a working company. Is are you a business genius too?
Speaker 2: Well, wouldn't say genius.
Speaker 1: Others insist that he is a visionary who has changed our lives with his foresight and bold imagination.
Speaker 23: Bill had a vision, and I understand it went back even then, that computing would be ubiquitous. It would be part of all of our lives. And indeed, as you all know, he executed on that vision. And the world today has changed so dramatically in large part due to the work that Bill has done throughout the years.
Speaker 1: He has been hailed as a shrewd executive who built the Microsoft empire with his remarkable talent for business.
Speaker 13: When the biographers and historians write the history of the twentieth century, Bill Gates is going to go down as the best businessman of our century, and Microsoft is one of the greatest companies of the twentieth century.
Speaker 1: And he has been praised as a philanthropist who is selflessly devoting his wealth to improving the lives of people around the world.
Speaker 42: Bill, even your harshest critic would have to admit that your philanthropy work is, you know, planet shaking, incredible, and could could be, if you make it, a second act so amazing that it would dwarf what you've actually done at Microsoft.
Speaker 1: But like anyone of his status, he has his detractors. In the nineteen nineties, he was often portrayed as the greedy head of the evil Microsoft monopoly.
Speaker 43: Bill Gates isn't content with his Windows system running just a few PCs. He wants it to run the world, spreading like a computer virus into our faxes, our phones, our TV sets, and, yes, even our toasters.
Speaker 1: But in the age of the coronavirus crisis, he is most often treated like some sort of epidemiologist or leading health researcher.
Speaker 44: Back here with us once again to talk about, this as well as testing, treatments, more. Bill Gates, co chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Bill, thanks so much for being back with us. It's been a little over a month since you were here. At that time, you said The US had not hit its peak.
So at this point, do you think we have peaked? And where do you think we are right now in kind of the arc of the pandemic?
Speaker 1: But in truth, none of these perspectives are accurate. Microsoft's big break famously came from a deal to provide software for IBM as they moved into the personal computer market. But the deal was not the result of Gates' technical genius or amazing business acumen. As has been quietly admitted by IBM executives in the years since, Microsoft was given their shot at the chance to work with Big Blue as a result of Gates' mother's relationship with IBM CEO John Opal.
Speaker 34: You remember your partnership of IBM and Bill Gates? How did it break up?
Speaker 45: I do remember it very well. Actually. Bill Gates, at the time, at the beginning of our relationship with him, was living on pizza and Pepsi Cola in Albuquerque, New Mexico. And his mother happened to be on the on the United Way board with our chairman and asked his our chairman to help him. And, you know, when the chairman comes in and tells you to go help this kid, 900 people get on the plane Monday morning, and they all go down to try to help Bill Gates.
So I don't see Bill Gates as this great creative person. I see him as an opportunist. And in fact, in those days, there was a lot of sharing of software code. People gave it away. In Silicon Valley, they would share everything.
He came in and he tried to control everything and put a price on it.
Speaker 1: Computer historians have long known how the basis for what became MS DOS was not Bill Gates' brilliant imagination, but QDOS a quick and dirty operating system that had been thrown together by Tim Patterson, a worker at Seattle Computer Products, as a placeholder until he could sell the proper operating system to his customers. And as Even Gates himself admitted, the breakthrough graphical user interface that became the basis for Windows was ripped off from the researchers at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center.
Speaker 46: As Bill would say after Apple unsuccessfully sued Microsoft for copyright infringement over Windows GUI, hey, Steve, just because you broke into Xerox's house before I did and took the TV doesn't mean I can't go in later and take the stereo.
Speaker 1: And, as Gates also admits, it is not a spirit of selfless generosity that motivates his interest in vaccines and other lucrative health interventions.
Speaker 29: I'd like to talk to you about your approach to vaccinations. You wrote something recently. And like you always do, you kind of looked at the problem from a scientific and business perspective on things. You've invested $10,000,000,000 in vaccinations over the last two decades. You And figured out the return on investment for that.
And it kind of stunned me. Can you walk us through the math?
Speaker 2: You know, we see a phenomenal track record. It's been $100,000,000,000 overall that the world's put in. Our foundation is a bit more than 10,000,000,000 But we feel there's been over a twenty:one return. So if you just look at the economic benefits, that's a pretty strong number compared to anything else.
Speaker 1: As we have seen, Gates' philanthropic investment scheme has paid off well, with his $50,000,000,000 net worth having ballooned to over $100,000,000,000 after his decade of altruism in the vaccine market. As critics of his foundation have repeatedly pointed out, the nine million people who die every year of hunger would be best served by securing food supplies, running water, and other basic necessities, not costly medical interventions for rare diseases. But there is no return on investment to be made from that kind of charity. No, this is not about charity. It is about control.
The population control grid that Gates has been quietly funding into existence for the past decade a biometric identification system tied to a digital payments infrastructure that will be used to track, catalog, and control every movement, every transaction, and every interaction of every citizen is just now coming into view. But the real question is why is he doing this? What drives a man like Bill Gates, a man rich beyond the wildest dreams of avarice, to spend his time and invest his fortune in schemes to control the population? To find the answer to that question, we have to examine Gates' family background. Bill Gates, it should not be surprising to learn, was born into money.
His great grandfather, J. W. Maxwell, was the president of National Citibank in Seattle. His grandfather, Willard, was also a banker, and his grandmother, Adele, a prominent Seattle Civic Leader. Bill Gates' mother, Mary Maxwell Gates, was a scion of the Maxwell banking family and, by all accounts, as hard driving as her forebears.
She served as a director of several companies, including First Interstate Bancorp and KIRO TV of Seattle. She served as a regent at the University of Washington, and she was appointed to the Board of the United Way of America where, as we have seen, she persuaded IBM CEO John Opel to help her son in his fledgling software development career. Bill's father, William H. Gates Sr, was a prominent Seattle area lawyer. He co founded a powerful law and lobbying firm, helped Howard Schultz in his bid to buy Starbucks, served on the boards of numerous companies and organizations, and along the way, had a profound influence on his son's life and career.
Speaker 2: My dad was large presence, both physically and in terms of his wisdom. He worked very hard, so he'd leave in the mornings, often before we had breakfast, and get home in time for dinner. I always looked up to my dad in terms of how hard he worked. At the dinner table, my dad would go through various lawsuits and expect us to follow along. He had high expectations.
Speaker 1: The young Bill Gates. Technically William H. Gates III, although his card playing family dubbed him Trey learned much from his parents. From his mother's banking family, he inherited a nose for the dollar, as one childhood friend's father called it. From his hard driving, legal minded father, he learned the value of legalizing business arrangements.
As a child, he even had a legal contract drawn up to grant him the use of his older sister's baseball mitt. These traits would not earn him many friends, but they served him well as he began to bring order to the anarchic software development community of the 1970s. At that time, software for the brand new personal computer market was the realm of computer hobbyists, people whose excitement about the microcomputer revolution and love of engineering and problem solving led them to develop and share code freely with each other. But this was no good for the young Bill Gates, who, even before Microsoft was off the ground, was already dreaming of commoditizing this hobby and turning it into the basis of a business empire. In 1976, with the ink still wet on Microsoft's first contract with Micro Instrumentation and Telemetry Systems of Albuquerque, New Mexico, the then-twenty one year old Gates wrote an open letter to hobbyists, excoriating the early computer enthusiasts who represented his main market for sharing Microsoft code for Altair Basic.
As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid? Is this fair? The royalty paid to us manual, the tape, and the overhead make it a break even operation.
One thing you do do is prevent good software from being written. Who can afford to do professional work for nothing? What hobbyist can put three man years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute for free? The fact is, no one besides us has invested a lot of money in hobby software. We have written 6,800 BASIC and are writing 8,080 APL and 6,800 APL, but there is very little incentive to make this software available to hobbyists.
Most directly, the thing you do is theft. The letter was awkward and tone deaf, as many people have described the young Bill Gates in his social interactions. It heaped vitriol on the very people who would be the customers of any future business, and tried to change an established culture of sharing software code merely by decree. Even Apple computers restrict users' ability to control their own computers, scored an easy marketing victory by responding to Gates' angry letter with a reminder that yes, folks, Apple Basic is free. But the gauntlet was thrown down, and Gates would have his way.
Although freeware and other forms of open source software development still exist, the establishment of software code as legally protected intellectual property has led to the rise of billionaires like Gates. A nose for the dollar and a knowledge of how to use the legal system to get what you want were not the only things to emerge from Bill Gates' childhood, however. His parents also encouraged discussion about the family's charity work and the causes they held close to their heart. As Gates revealed to Bill Moyers in 2003, those causes included the population issue, which sparked a lifelong interest in reproductive health.
Speaker 2: The only issue that really grabbed me as urgent was were issues related to population, reproductive health. But did you come to reproductive issues as an intellectual? When I was growing up, my parents were always involved in various volunteer things. My dad was head of planned parenthood, and it was very controversial to be involved with that.
Speaker 1: Gates tips his hand when he equates issues related to population with reproductive health. The topic is particularly controversial because population control and reproductive health have been used for half a century as a euphemism for eugenics, the discredited pseudoscience that holds that certain families are fit to be leaders of society by virtue of their superior genes. As we saw in Why Big Oil Conquered the World, Eugenics was a field named and codified by Francis Galton, cousin of Charles Darwin. Ostensibly concerned with heredity and what would later be known as genetics, the eugenicists believed that the rich and powerful were rich and powerful not because of luck or chance or happenstance, and certainly not from the deployment of cutthroat business tactics and underhanded dealings. No, the rich and powerful had attained their status because they came from better stock.
Conversely, the poor were poor because of their defective germplasm. As transparent as it seems to us today that this ideology was a self serving self justification for the ruling class, it was quickly taken up as the great social crusade of the early twentieth century. From Teddy Roosevelt, to H. G. Wells, to Julian Huxley, to Winston Churchill, there was widespread support for the eugenicist notion that society must strive to make sure that the rich and well born breed as much as possible, and the poor, infirm, and feeble minded be prevented from having children.
A common eugenicist argument was that the scarce resources of society should not be used to support the lower classes, as that only encouraged more of their kind. Instead, life saving medical care and intervention should be rationed so that those resources can be best put to use elsewhere. So called negative eugenicists even took things further, with some, like famed playwright George Bernard Shaw, calling for people to be called before a state appointed board to justify their existence or be put to death.
Speaker 10: But there are an extraordinary number of people whom I want to kill, not in any unkind or personal spirit. But it must be evident to all of you, you must all know half a dozen people at least, who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth. And I think it would be a good thing to make everybody come before a properly appointed board, just as he might come before the income tax commissioners, and say every five years or every seven years, just put him there and say, sir or madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence?
Speaker 1: But in the post World War II era, as the name of Eugenics became tarred by association with the Nazi atrocities, the talk of death panels and other harsh Eugenicist notions was dropped from public conversation. Now, the quest to reduce the size of the poor population was spoken of as population control and reproductive health. Still, occasionally, these old negative eugenics ideas are revisited in moments of candor.
Speaker 2: You're raising tuitions at the University of California at the as rapidly as they can. And so the access that used to be available to the middle class or whatever is just rapidly going away. That's a trade off society is making because of very, very high medical costs and a lack of willingness to say, you know, is spending a million dollars on that last three months of life for that patient, would it be better not to lay off the those 10 teachers and to make that trade off in medical costs? But that's called the death panel, and you're not supposed to have that discussion.
Speaker 1: It is worth questioning why this man, who openly muses about death panels and the tradeoffs of providing healthcare to the elderly, is to be taken completely at face value in his attempts to slow population growth in the third world, or to handle a coronavirus health crisis that primarily affects the elderly. That the Gates agenda is being driven by a Eugenicist ideology is suggested by multiple lines of evidence, both historical and current. As we have also seen in Why Big Oil Conquered the World, the Rockefeller family was instrumental in funding and promoting Eugenics, both in America and overseas. The Rockefellers helped fund the Eugenics Record Office. The founding director of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, William Welch, sat on the ERO's board and helped direct its activities.
The Rockefellers sponsored the studies of the eugenics researchers at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes in Germany, including Ernst Ruden, who would go on to draft Nazi Germany's forced sterilization law. And, when the American Eugenics Society became embarrassed of its own name, its longtime director, Fredrik Osborne, merely took over as president of the Rockefeller founded Population Council. This dedication to the cause of public health did not escape the approving gaze of Bill Gates Sr. In a chapter of his 2,009 book, Showing Up for Life, called Walking with Giants, he writes admiringly of the Rockefellers and their influence in the field. Every corner we've turned in the field of global health, we've found that the Rockefellers were already there and had been there for years.
When we committed to childhood immunization, we found ourselves building on efforts the Rockefeller Foundation had helped launch and fund in the 1980s. When we became interested in fighting malaria and tuberculosis, we learned that the Rockefellers had been studying the prevention and treatment of such diseases around the globe for, in some cases, as long as one hundred years. A similar dynamic held true in the case of HIVAIDS. A lesson we learned from studying and working with the Rockefellers is that to succeed in pursuing audacious goals, you need like minded partners with whom to collaborate. And we learned that such goals are not prizes claimed by the short winded.
The Rockefellers stay with tough problems for generations. As Gates Sr. Suggests, it is by working with like minded partners that such great achievements in the field of global health can be made. For the Gates, these like minded partners include the Rockefellers themselves. Bill Gates Sr.
Got to discuss global health, agriculture, and environment with the likes of David Rockefeller Sr. And David Rockefeller Jr. At a meeting on Philanthropy in a Global Century at Rockefeller University Campus in 2000. And Bill Gates, as we have seen, co hosted a meeting on reducing the population with David Rockefeller in 2009. But the most salacious hints of a deeper agenda are not to be found in the Gates' public associations, but in the associations that they have tried to hide from the public.
Speaker 47: Jeffrey Epstein may be dead, but this story isn't. A shocking new report from The New York Times sheds light on the connection between Microsoft founder Bill Gates and the late Jeffrey Epstein. After Gates' name came up in connection with Epstein and MIT Media Lab, Gates gave a statement to The Wall Street Journal where he insisted he did not have any business relationship or friendship with Epstein. But new reporting for the New York Times outlines numerous meetings between Gates and Epstein and a conversation with Bill and Melinda Gates' foundation, a connection between their foundation and JPMorgan to set up a charitable fund that would financially benefit Epstein. You know what I wanna know?
Why?
Speaker 1: Beginning in August, a string of information connecting Bill Gates to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein began to emerge. Flight logs revealed that Gates had flown on Jeffrey Epstein's private jet. An email surfaced showing disgraced MIT Media Lab director Joy Ito, who resigned from his position after it was discovered that he had helped cover up Jeffrey Epstein's identity as an anonymous donor to the lab, informing his staff that a $2,000,000 donation to the lab in 2014 was a gift from Bill Gates directed by Jeffrey Epstein. As the story gained momentum, Gates tried to downplay the relationship, with a Gates spokesperson protesting that Gates didn't know it was Epstein's plane, and Gates himself insisting that I didn't have any business relationship or friendship with Epstein. This was immediately contradicted by the New York Times, who reported in October 2012 that Gates had in fact met with Epstein on multiple occasions, even going so far as to discuss the creation of a multibillion dollar charitable fund with seed money from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and JPMorgan Chase.
According to the Times, Gates emailed his colleagues about Epstein in 2011: His lifestyle is very different and kind of intriguing, although it would not work for me. Epstein's will even named Boris Nikolich, a Harvard trained immunologist who served as the chief scientific advisor to both Microsoft and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and who appears in the sole publicly known photo of Epstein and Gates' 2011 meeting at Epstein's Manhattan mansion, as the backup executor of Epstein's estate. It is not difficult to see why Gates would try to distance himself from his relationship with a child sex trafficker. Epstein, after all, is suspected of ensnaring high ranking politicians, businessmen, and even royalty in an intelligence directed 'honey pot operation', recording them in the act of sexually abusing underage girls and using that evidence as blackmail. But, as it turns out, the attempt to suppress the Gates Epstein story may have been an attempt to suppress the revelation of an altogether different shared interest.
Speaker 8: Sources say several accusers have come forward in New Mexico where Epstein owns a sprawling ranch. According to a new report published in The New York Times, not verified by NBC News, Epstein wanted to use the ranch for controlled breeding, using his DNA to improve humanity. Citing two award winning scientists and an adviser to large companies and wealthy individuals, the article reports Epstein surrounded himself with leading scientists and would tell them he wanted to have 20 women impregnated at a time on the ranch.
Speaker 1: The already scarcely believable Jeffrey Epstein story took another bizarre turn in August 2019 when it was reported that Epstein hoped to seed the human race with his DNA. As the New York Times explained, Epstein's plan to impregnate 20 women at a time at his New Mexico ranch in order to seed the human race with his DNA, a plan he told to a number of the scientific luminaries he kept in his orbit, put a modern gloss on a very old idea. Mr. Epstein's vision reflected his long standing fascination with what has become known as transhumanism, the science of improving the human population through technologies like genetic engineering and artificial intelligence. Critics have likened transhumanism to a modern day version of eugenics, the discredited field of improving the human race through controlled breeding.
Epstein's interest in genetics led him to sponsor a number of scientists working in the field, including George Church, a Harvard geneticist whose lab received funding from Epstein's foundation from 2005 to 2007 for cutting edge science. Church publicly apologized for his connection to Epstein, which included several meetings a year from 2014 onward. This was neither the first nor the last time that this unassuming Harvard biologist caused a public scandal. In 2019, Church proposed a genetics dating app which was immediately denounced as Applied Eugenics. Church also acted as scientific advisor to Editas Medicine, a startup seeking to use the genome editing tool CRISPR Cas9 to eliminate diseases by deleting the parts of a genetic code responsible for the illness.
In 2015, the company announced it had raised $120,000,000 from a group led by Epstein's appointed backup executor Doctor. Boris Nikolich. Naturally, that group of investors included Bill Gates. Yes, Bill Gates is certainly following his father's advice to collaborate with like minded partners. So the question remains: Is Bill Gates motivated by Eugenics?
Given that Eugenics went underground over half a century ago, we are unlikely ever to unearth a frank admission along those lines from Gates himself. After all, there are no longer any card carrying members of the American Eugenics Society. The Society was rebranded in the 1970s when, as the Society's founder noted, it became evident that changes of a eugenic nature would be made for reasons other than eugenics, and that tying a eugenic label on them would more often hinder than help their adoption. But there was an American Eugenics Society in the 1920s, and it just so happened to boast a William H. Gates on its member roster.
But perhaps that is just a coincidence. And there was an American Eugenics Society in the 1960s, when William H. Gates II was preceded as Head of Planned Parenthood by Alan Guttmacher, who simultaneously served as the Director of the American Eugenics Society. And perhaps it was coincidence that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation organized their London Summit on Family Planning, at which the Gates recommitted themselves to funding population control in the Third World, in July 2012, on the anniversary of the first International Eugenics Congress, held in London exactly one hundred years prior. And perhaps it is reaching to compare the young Bill Gates's dating preferences to the genetic based dating favored by modern day eugenicists.
Speaker 13: I interviewed several women who had dated Bill just briefly, and one told me the very very first question Bill asked her was, what did you score on your SAT test? You know, this is not exactly, you know, what a what a what a young woman wants to hear. For Bill Gates, though, he had scored a perfect 800 on his on his math portion of the SAT, and and this was a matter of pride with him. And he wanted to make sure whoever he was dating, had scored a pretty high grade.
Speaker 1: No. We cannot expect an answer about Bill Gates' true motives to come from Gates himself. By this point, the question of Bill Gates' intentions has been buried under the combined weight of hundreds of millions of dollars of paid PR spin. Like the Rockefellers before them, the Gates have long since learned the secret of enlarging their family fortune by donning the mask of philanthropy. There are many perspectives on Bill Gates.
Depending on who you ask, he is a computer savant, a genius businessman, or a saintly philanthropist. But all of these perspectives have been brought to you through PR outlets founded or funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Bill Gates is no longer a subject for historians but hagiographers. Now we must confront the question of why this man is motivated to build such a web of control Control over our public health agencies.
Speaker 2: And for all 193 member states, you must make vaccines a high priority in your health systems to ensure that all your children have access to existing vaccines now and to the new vaccines that have recently become available.
Speaker 1: Control over our identities.
Speaker 2: And the lack of an ID system is a problem not just for the payment system, but also for voting and health and education and taxation. And so it's a wonderful thing to go in and create a broad identification system.
Speaker 1: Control over our transactions.
Speaker 2: Once financial flows go underground, where you have lots of legitimate track transactions mixed in with the ones you wanna track. Once they're going over a digital system that The US has no connection to, it's far more difficult, to find the transactions that that you wanna be aware of or that you wanna block.
Speaker 1: And even control over our bodies.
Speaker 2: But we're gonna have this intermediate period of opening up, and it won't be normal until we get an amazing vaccine to the entire world.
Speaker 1: We must confront the possibility that this quest for control comes not from a selfless spirit of generosity that never seemed to exist before he became a multi billionaire, but from the same drive for money, the same desire for domination, and the same sense of superiority that motivated him on his way up the corporate ladder. But if the answer to the question who is Bill Gates is Bill Gates is a Eugenicist, that tells us some important things about the world that we are living in. It tells us that Gates is deceiving the public into supporting his takeover of the world with a false front of philanthropy. It tells us that the goal of the Gates, like the goal of the Rockefellers before them, is not to improve the world for humankind, but to improve the world for their kind. And most importantly, it tells us that Bill Gates is no comic book supervillain, single handedly directing all of the chaos that is unfolding in the world or single handedly bringing his own order to that chaos.
No. If Bill Gates is a eugenicist, driven by a belief in the superiority of himself and his fellow wealthy elitists, then what we are facing is not one man, or even one family, but an ideology. This is not a trivial point. One man, whatever his wealth, can be stopped easily enough. But even if Bill Gates were to be thrown in jail tomorrow, the agenda that has already been set in motion would continue without missing a beat.
An entire infrastructure of researchers, labs, corporations, governmental agencies, and public health bodies exists, funded more often than not by Gates, but driven by the belief of all those millions of people working for these various entities that they are truly working in the best interest of the people. No, an ideology cannot be stopped by stopping one man. It can only be stopped when enough people learn the truth about this agenda and the world of total pervasive control that is coming into view. If you have watched all four parts of this exploration on Bill Gates, then you are now one of the most informed people on the planet about the true nature of this agenda. You have seen how the takeover of public health has been used to railroad the world into a headlong rush toward mandatory vaccinations, biometric identification, and digital payments.
You have seen how the pieces of this puzzle fit together, and how they represent a far greater threat to the future of humanity than any virus. Here is the good news: armed with this information, you have the antidote to the scourge of this eugenicist ideology. The truth is that ideologies are viruses of the mind they spread from person to person, infecting them with ideas that can lead to a disease of the body politic. But here is the even greater truth: inoculations do work. Inoculations of truth against the lies of those spreading their poisonous ideology.
If you have made it this far, it is incumbent on you to help inoculate those around you against the corrupt ideology of Bill Gates and all those who seek to control the population of the world. You must help to spread this information so that others have a chance to see the bigger picture and decide for themselves whether they are willing to roll up their sleeves and accept what is coming or not. But time is not on our side. Even as we speak, mass vaccination campaigns are being prepared.
Speaker 48: We are already building our plans to vaccinate the whole city of Chicago and working with others across the region on a major plan for this. We've bought syringes. We've bought cold boxes. We've planned out locations.
Speaker 1: Biometric identification schemes and immunity passports are already being rolled out.
Speaker 20: And so while we started with travel, at our core, we're a biometric secure identity platform, where it's always been about attaching your identity to your boarding pass, the airport, or your ticket to get into a sports stadium, or your credit card to buy a beer. And so now with the launch of Clear Health Pass, it's about attaching your identity to your COVID related health insights for employers, for employees, for customers.
Speaker 1: Programs for tracking, tracing and surveilling the entire population are already being beta tested.
Speaker 49: Today we are launching another useful tool that can supplement the critical detective work we are conducting in public health. Alberta Trace Together is a voluntary, secure mobile contact tracing application to help prevent the spread of COVID nineteen.
Speaker 1: And the digital payment infrastructure, the system of financial exclusion that will allow governments to turn off our access to the economy at will, is being put into place.
Speaker 34: In order to avoid the risk of transmission through physical handling of money, we encourage the use of cashless transactions such as mobile money, M Pesa and otherwise, and credit cards.
Speaker 2: People are using touchless payment systems much more than they're using cash, both because we're not interacting with people directly as much anymore and also because cash is kind of skeezy.
Speaker 1: We must spread the word about the dark nature of this population control agenda to as many people as we can before our ability to speak out against this agenda is taken away for good. Thanks to the likes of Bill Gates, the virus of this population control agenda is already here. It is threatening to crash the system as we've known it. But if Bill Gates has taught us anything, it's how to deal with a virus. It's time for a hard reset.
@ChrisJo00291974 - BunnyCrumbs
Bill Gates isn’t a “tech genius”, he’s the face of a multi generational eugenics dynasty disguised as philanthropy. His “foundation” is a tax free shell funding population control through vaccines, GMO seeds, and digital ID systems tied to biometric data. Microsoft was seeded by Pentagon and CIA front programs; now Gates invests in farmland, lab meat, and geoengineering to play god with weather and food. He preaches “climate crisis” while buying private jets, because the goal isn’t saving the planet, it’s tagging and tracking humanity under the Great Reset’s digital prison grid.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
REMINDER: Everyone who has built a free energy device has been killed. https://t.co/RkHA4cpiff
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Brain dead is a lie, [they] invented brain dead to harvest your organs legally. https://t.co/gmZ74Xmqsc
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
13 Bloodlines of the Illuminati - The Rothschild Bloodline: bibliotecapleyades.net/bloodlines/rot…
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
VOICE TO SKULL TECHNOLOGY Demonstration of Voice to Skull remote 65 kilohertz Modulated signal, which enables voices to be beamed into someone's mind. Does it make a little more sense when these mass shooters who had previous interaction with FBI and CIA said they hear voices?
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
I found the video of Bill Gates admitting it https://t.co/t7gMb2d8Eg
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 notes the world population is 6.8 billion and is headed up to about 9 billion. He says if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, and reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15%.
Speaker 1 responds with the question: common sense would tell you that if a man standing in front of you says he's gonna reduce the world's population by 10–15% using vaccines, what does that mean to you? He explains that means somebody's going to die because you put a vaccine in them, and it doesn't mean you're going to save people. He says that’s common sense, but he saw him say it, and now he’s here; he says, "I’m now an anti vaxxer I wasn't before."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now the world today has 6,800,000,000 people. That's headed up to about 9,000,000,000. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15%.
Speaker 1: Well, common sense would tell you if you have a man standing in front of you saying he's gonna reduce the world's population by 10 15% using vaccines, what does that mean to you? That means somebody's going to die because you put a vaccine in them. It doesn't mean you're going to save people. That's pretty much common sense in my brain but yet I saw him say it, he said it and here we are I don't know I'm just here we are I'm now an anti vaxxer I wasn't
Speaker 0: before
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
An operating system has been installed inside billions of people https://t.co/3QxcKTBHg7
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
LIVE TO OVER 100 Dr Wallach “how do you live to over 100? this village In Russia has over 50 percent of the population living passed 100.” All we need to do is study the ancients, they used herbs & apothecaries not pharmacies & chemicals to maintain optimal health! https://t.co/lQm4aX7q8Q
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Pedophiles escape to the promised land https://t.co/5dMJEDm6Gi
Video Transcript AI Summary
A CBS News investigation identifies a loophole that allegedly allows accused and convicted American pedophiles to escape justice by moving to Israel. The report notes that Jewish Community Watch (JCW), an organization that tracks alleged pedophiles who flee to Israel from the United States, exploits a process known as the Law of Return, which permits any Jewish person to move to Israel and automatically obtain citizenship. The investigation highlights the ease with which some individuals accused or convicted of sexual offenses in the U.S. purportedly use this law as an escape route, a situation that JCW says haunts victims.
Among the cases discussed is that of Yomtov, who pled guilty in 2002 to sexually abusing and committing lewd acts against three other boys. He served jail time, but after his release he allegedly violated his probation and fled to Israel. JCW claims that he did so with help from individuals within the Orthodox Jewish community. JCW says it tracked Yomtov to Jerusalem and confronted him with a hidden camera, in which he admitted to illegally fleeing the United States with assistance and to using a fake passport to enter Israel.
The report notes that the district attorney in Los Angeles stated they have not requested Yomtov’s extradition and offered no further comment. JCW contends that this lack of extradition requests represents a broader problem: when American officials do not pursue accused pedophiles who are in Israel, those individuals allegedly escape justice and leave children at risk.
The interview conveys that law enforcement in the United States appears to be a central point of contention in this issue, with JCW asserting that the absence of extradition efforts allows suspects to evade accountability. The narrative emphasizes victims’ perspectives, including that of Mendy Hahn, who stated he was abused starting at age eight by a teacher at an Orthodox Jewish school in Los Angeles, and who is cited to illustrate the impact of such cases on victims and communities.
Overall, the report presents JCW’s perspective on the implications of the Law of Return and the perceived gap in U.S. prosecutorial or extradition actions that would otherwise compel suspects to face justice in the United States, and it documents a specific instance where a suspect admitted to fleeing with assistance and using a fraudulent passport, as alleged by JCW.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A CBS News investigation has uncovered a loophole that allows accused and convicted American pedophiles to escape justice by moving to Israel.
Speaker 1: Jewish Community Watch, an organization that hunts down accused pedophiles who flee to Israel from The US, exploiting a process called law of return whereby any Jewish person can move to Israel and automatically gain citizenship. The ease with which pedophiles seem able to use this law as an escape route haunts victims like Mendy Hahn I was 18 says he was abused from age eight by a teacher at an orthodox Jewish school in Los Angeles. Yomtov pled guilty in 2002 to sexually abusing and committing lewd acts against three other boys. He served jail time, but when he was released, he violated his probation, and according to JCW, fled to Israel with help from individuals within the Orthodox Jewish community. JCW tracked Yomtov down and confronted him with a hidden camera in Jerusalem, where he admitted to illegally fleeing The United States with help and using a fake passport to enter Israel.
The district attorney here in Los Angeles told us they have not requested Yompov's extradition and that they had no other comment. Jewish community watch says that is the problem. If American officials don't try to get accused pedophiles from Israel, then they simply escape justice and leave children at risk.
Speaker 0: It certainly seems like law enforcement both here
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
David Icke was right!!! https://t.co/vKoL0A1WvE
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 warns that “Across the millennium years is crunch time in this whole agenda, crunch time for the human race,” describing a plan by a global network of interbreeding bloodlines to establish a world government in which nation states become administrative units, a world central bank, and a world currency. The currency would be electronic rather than cash, with fundamental implications for human freedom. Underpinning this is a World Army designed to become a fully fledged World Army World Police Force, expanding leverage similar to NATO’s growth, and a global population system in which people are microchipped with financial and medical details.
The microchiping program is portrayed as enabling electronic tagging that would allow people to be tracked everywhere and, more provocatively, enable external manipulation of individuals’ mental and emotional processes through electronic means. The overall package is presented as a comprehensive shift in governance, economics, security, and personal autonomy, driven by this world order.
Speaker 0 asserts that this consolidation of power is intended to replace current national sovereignty with a unified system, consisting of a centralized monetary and financial infrastructure and a coercive security apparatus capable of enforcing compliance on a planetary scale. The electronic currency is framed as a move away from cash toward a system that tracks and records every financial transaction, tying it to individuals’ medical and other personal data via microchips.
This envisioned framework would not only provide continuous location awareness of individuals through tagging but would also enable manipulation of people’s mental and emotional states through electronic means. The combination of an electronic currency, centralized control, an expansive World Army/World Police, and population microchipping is presented as a single, coordinated agenda aimed at restructuring global governance and eroding personal freedom.
The speaker emphasizes that this outcome will occur unless humanity awakens quickly. The remedy offered is to educate people about “what’s really going on” without “beating about the bush” or “pulling punches.” The call is to state plainly what is happening: “this is what’s going on. Take it or leave it. Make of it what you will,” and to share this information openly rather than withholding it.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Across the millennium years is crunch time in this whole agenda, crunch time for the human race. This is the time when this network of interbreeding bloodlines wants to bring in its global fascist structure of a world government to which nation states would be administrative units, of a world central bank and a world currency, a currency that wouldn't be cash, it would be merely electronic for which there are fundamental implications for human freedom. And also the World Army, which is designed to be NATO, expanding and expanding as it is now, of course, to become the fully fledged World Army World Police Force. And underpinning that little lot is designed to be population, in which we are microchip with our financial details, our medical details, etcetera, etcetera. And that would allow not only electronic tagging, people knowing where we are all the time, it would allow the external manipulation through this electronic means of our mental and emotional processes.
This will happen unless the human race wakes up and wakes up fast. And to do that, we need to understand what's really going on. And to let people know that, we've got to stop beating about the bush, stop pulling punches, stop pussyfooting around, keeping information from people. Oh my goodness. How will they react?
And just say, this is going on. Take it or leave it. Make of it what you will, but this is what's going on.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
CPS is an evil pedophile organization! https://t.co/eB5Zj8qVKo
Video Transcript AI Summary
Former state senator Nancy Schaefer and her husband Bruce were found dead today. The speakers express a firm belief that parents across the country need to be warned of the dangers of the child protective services nationwide. GBI crime scene investigators are at her Northeast Georgia home, and the Department of Child Protective Services has become a protected empire. They are searching for clues that might tell them "It's built on taking children and separating families."
The discussion raises questions about what led to the sudden and violent deaths of Miss Schaefer and her husband, asserting that "A family is going to have to be destroyed in order for the, one world government to completely develop." The preliminary assessment is that it "looks to be a murder suicide." The speakers claim that "Children are being taken away from their parents in a ruthless kind of behavior," and they assert a critical view of how child protective services are obtained, stating, "How do you obtain child protective services?"
In their view, the remedy or alternative proposed is controversial: "It may be only by closing it complete and starting over at the beginning with ProFamilyVacus." The overall message emphasizes distrust of the CPS system, frames the deaths within a conspiracy-like narrative about government control over families, and identifies a perceived need for drastic systemic change as the purported solution.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Former state senator Nancy Schaefer and her husband Bruce were found dead today. I'm convinced without a shadow of a doubt that our that parents across this country need to be warned of the dangers of the child protective services nationwide. Tonight, GBI crime scene investigators are at her Northeast Georgia home. Department of Child Protective Services has become a protected empire. They're searching for clues that might tell them It's built on taking children and separating families.
What led to the sudden and violent deaths of miss Schaefer and her husband? A family is going to have to be destroyed in order for the, one world government to completely develop. Preliminarily looks to be a murder suicide. Children are being taken away from their parents in a ruthless kind of behavior. How do you obtain child protective services?
It may be only by closing it complete and starting over at the beginning with ProFamilyVacus.
reSee.it AI Summary
I note Ohio's proposal to let utilities remotely adjust thermostats to curb demand during peak periods. I expect this approach to spread across the Western world as the Net Zero transition allegedly triggers shortages in renewables.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Ohio has proposed legislation that would enable utility companies to remotely adjust customer thermostats in order to reduce strain on the power grid "during periods of high demand". Expect to see this being replicated throughout the entire Western world as the Net Zero transition towards intermittent "renewable" energy triggers widespread energy shortages in once energy secure nations.
Video Transcript AI Summary
A Republican lawmaker at the Ohio State House introduced a bill this week that would allow utility companies to automatically adjust household thermostats. House bill 4.27 would create a voluntary demand response program in which customers could sign up to let their utility company temporarily modify energy use, including raising thermostat settings or cycling water heaters during periods of high demand. The bill’s sponsor, representative Roy Kloppenstein, said the program is intended to help homeowners and small businesses save money while reducing the load on the power grid. An analysis from the Ohio Environmental Council estimates the program would generate between 34 and $100,000,000 in savings for the utility system depending on how many customers sign up for it.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Republican lawmaker at the Ohio State House introduced a bill this week that would allow utility companies to automatically adjust your thermostat at your house. House bill 4.27 would create a voluntary demand response program. Customers would be allowed to sign up to let their utility company temporarily adjust energy use, including raising thermostat settings or cycling water heaters during periods of high demand. The bill's sponsor, representative Roy Kloppenstein, said it's meant to help homeowners and small businesses save money while reducing the load on the power grid. An analysis from the Ohio environmental Council estimates the program would generate between 34 and $100,000,000 in savings for the utility system depending on how many customers sign up for it.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Vaccine expert Dr. Suzanne Humphries shocks Joe Rogan with the fact that doctors are financially incentivised to push vaccines—including three Covid shots for babies. "That doctor is likely to lose $250,000 a year if they don't do that." https://t.co/QrCoYsVWJ9
Video Transcript AI Summary
Most doctors can't tolerate being called quacks or having their reputation destroyed. "can we stop giving vaccines to my sick patients, to people who are having, chemotherapy while they're having chemotherapy to my patient before I've even seen them on the ward? Can we just can we just hold this up and give it to them on the day of discharge?" That was my request in the beginning. "do you know that they're giving COVID vaccines to six month old children now?" "We know how bad it is. We know that it ruins stem cells in pregnant women. They don't give stem cells to their babies. The industry is upset because the placentas no longer have stem cells." "There were two snake genes in there." "Nope. We gotta put it on the vaccine, the baby vaccine schedule, because any doubts whether or not well funded about the vaccination must not be allowed to exist." "Well, that that's been the case since, you know, basically, the the medical profession was infiltrated in the early nineteen hundreds by, you know, high level interests that that didn't want us thinking for ourselves and carrying along with the natural cures that actually work."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Most doctors can't tolerate being called quacks or having their reputation destroyed. And and, you know, I went from treating the CEO of of actually, head of the laboratory at my hospital for hypertension to becoming, you know, somebody that was doubted on every levels after a while because of one thing that I said, which was, can we stop giving vaccines to my sick patients, to people who are having, chemotherapy while they're having chemotherapy to my patient before I've even seen them on the ward? Can we just can we just hold this up and give it to them on the day of discharge? That was my request in the beginning. That's how this all landed here.
And had they not tried to intimidate me, doubt me, and pushed me to research and show that what I saw was actually real, I would still be lock step working as a regular doctor because there were some good things about it. So the the look. Even if you look at what happened with COVID, let's just look at that. Like, how did how did they pass this off? Look at the media today.
Do you know that they're giving COVID vaccines to six month old children now? We know how bad it is. We know that it ruins stem cells in pregnant women. They don't give stem cells to their babies. The industry is upset because the placentas no longer have stem cells.
They used to use those stem cells in research and cosmetics, etcetera. They're not getting them anymore because of what the COVID shots did to the placentas and those infants. That's not being talked about in the media. Nothing bad about the shots being talked about when we have Kevin McKernan and all these people looking at it going, there's s v 40 in it. There was a staphylococcal endotoxin gene.
There were two snake genes in there. Nope. We gotta put it on the vaccine, the baby vaccine schedule, because any doubts whether or not well funded about the vaccination must not be allowed to exist. That's why.
Speaker 1: That sounds like a religion.
Speaker 0: And it's been gone on.
Speaker 1: Like a cult. It sounds like a crazy cult that the whole world's been sucked into. Giving a COVID shot to a baby today is insane.
Speaker 0: Three of them. They get three by the certain I I you'd have to look up the schedule, but I I believe it starts at six months and they three of them kinda boom boom.
Speaker 1: Are doctors really recommending this?
Speaker 0: It's it's on the it it look. There's there's a group of people called ACIP, the doctors, usually with with vaccine interests in their bank accounts that make the recommendations for the vaccines, and they've recommended that that six month old. So if your doctor is following the ACIP program, you have to be offered that vaccine. And now that doctor this is another part of the story. Is that doctor's likely to lose $250,000 a year if they don't do that because there's incentive given to hospitals and doctors, which is what naively I was on the other end of when I woke up in 2008 and said, wait a minute.
Why are we doing this stuff to my sick inflamed patients? You're giving more inflammation. It's because the hospital would lose something like $40,000 if they didn't give a vaccine within the first twenty four hours of admission.
Speaker 1: Oh my god.
Speaker 0: And they would get 40,000 if it it it was all a money game. That's really the bottom line of it. And I didn't know that until a nurse years ago who was a high level administration says she said, Suzanne, this is why they do they did that to you. Oh, wow. Okay.
Well, at least it makes sense now.
Speaker 1: Nobody wants to think of it as a business. Nobody wants to think you're making business decisions at the expense of someone's health and and possibly whether or not they make it. Like, what are you what are you doing?
Speaker 0: Well, that that's been the case since, you know, basically, the the medical profession was infiltrated in the early nineteen hundreds by, you know, high level interests that that didn't want us thinking for ourselves and carrying along with the natural cures that actually work.
reSee.it AI Summary
In 1900, Wilhelm Reich claimed to cure various health issues with a few 15-minute sessions in his "orgone accumulator," a device designed to concentrate life energy. Despite its purported benefits, the FDA banned his inventions, leading to his imprisonment and eventual death in 1957.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
In 1900, a man named Wilhelm Reich claimed to have discovered a method to cure countless health problems, requiring only a few 15 minute sessions of sitting inside the box above. How was this possible? The box is a carefully crafted "orgone accumulator" which concentrates the orgone energy or life energy "Chi / Prana", and this has an incredible effect on patients. The FDA banned Wilhelm's inventions and sentenced him to prison where he died in 1957
Video Transcript AI Summary
Classic organ accumulator built in the fifties from Wright's design. It uses three layers: fiberboard, a first layer of steel wool, a second layer of cotton and steel wool, and a final cotton and metal layer. A layer consists of cotton and metal. Not only heat, but electrostatic sparking in the steel wool can be heard for fifteen minutes, with a popping noise. It’s four feet by six feet tall and can be sealed against light; two people inside could see each other, even with eyes closed, as light acts self-luminescing with blue-gray fog. Don’t use near electrical appliances. Life force moves in spinning waves; spiral energy denatures at corners. Cylindrical accumulators use a metal core and organic blankets; lay blankets on the core to make an accumulator, then remove them. A build uses cotton batting, steel wool pads, and a cotton pillowcase; lay layers of cotton and steel wool.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Classic organ accumulator built in the fifties from, Wright's design.
Speaker 1: Inside inside the thickness of this wall are the layers of the cotton and steel wall. And what three layers means is that this outside fiberboard, and then the first layer of steel wool behind it is considered one layer. And then there's another layer of cotton and steel wool. That's the second layer. And then there's another layer of cotton, and then the final metal layer, and that's the three layers.
So a layer consists of a layer of cotton and a layer of metal. And, lignanic and metallic equals one layer.
Speaker 0: In this one, not only do you get the thermic quality of the heat streaming in off the wall, but you can also hear electrostatic sparking in the steel wool sitting here for fifteen minutes and tell me what they think. And they all say they hear this popping noise or cracking or snap It's
Speaker 1: four feet and then about six feet tall. And, we see we could close it up and seal it completely against light coming in from the outside. And, within about five or ten minutes, even if two people were inside of it, you could see each other, and, you could see each other even with your eyes closed. Meaning, like, the light force acted like a a self luminescing, and, you've got all kinds of visual effects that that acted directly on your optic nerve even if with your eyelids closed.
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah.
Speaker 1: Oh, it's totally amazing. And you could see this blue gray fog drifting through the accumulator just like, Reich says in his books, yellow flashes. I've seen all that stuff.
Speaker 0: And, also, putting the shooter in here using it as a seat, that increases the shooter is a fivefold, I believe. Yeah.
Speaker 1: But it makes
Speaker 0: it eightfold in here, and then you can, like, charge up certain areas of the Very important thing to point out here, and I don't think we can stress it strongly enough, is you don't use these things around electrical appliances.
Speaker 1: You don't ever use one of these things with the television pointed at it or underneath fluorescent fixtures or There,
Speaker 0: the good side or the bad side.
Speaker 1: Right. This is just accumulating whatever around. And
Speaker 0: That's why we recommend that you find a river with some rocks in the middle, and you come down and you set up down here like we did. Because this is the best place in the world to do it.
Speaker 1: So I stopped telling people about this stuff because, it's pretty dangerous to build these things in the cities, because you're around a lot of high voltage and things like that. So many houses now have radioactive, sources in them in the ionizing style of smoke detector. Life force moves in what Wright called the spinning waves, and that is kind of a spiral movement of the energy. And when a spiral movement comes up against the corner like this, it kind of denatures it. It can't move in its natural spiral.
So what happens in an accumulator like this is that the energy starts denaturing and, moves in quality towards DOR. So what we started doing is we started building, cylindrical accumulators, just a cylinder with open ends with, lots of layering around that. And then when you get into that, the energy doesn't denature. And what you can do is you can set up just a metal core that's a cylinder and then, build up some blankets like this that are organic all the way on the outside. And then when you want an accumulator, you can lay these blankets down on top of the metal core and give yourself an accumulator when you want it.
And then when you're done with it, you can take the blankets off.
Speaker 0: But don't take our word for it. Try it and try it.
Speaker 1: Try it yourself. That's right.
Speaker 0: I didn't take anybody's word for it. I tried it.
Speaker 1: Me too.
Speaker 0: I will go feel the charge coming in up it. But one of the you can see where it's clearly organic wool on one side and the other side is metal, and there's couple layers in there.
Speaker 1: It's a steel screen.
Speaker 0: Now one of the disadvantages to this one is it's always on.
Speaker 1: Overcharge on this iron section here because this is pure cotton and pure steel wool in this, and it's organic on all sides, which means that, unless you wrap it around something like your your body, it's not accumulating anything because there's no final metal layer for the charge to build up on. I could feel it
Speaker 0: coming in right away immediately.
Speaker 1: Yeah. The thermal effect, this must be at least four or five layers because of the thickness of it.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Best one I have in my collection.
Speaker 1: This is very similar to the kind that I have built for myself in my research. It's the the simplest thing to do is just to go to a fabric store and buy some cotton batting that you put into a quilt and steel wool pads that you can just unroll. Cotton a 100% cotton pillowcase, and you just lay out layers of cotton and steel wool, cotton and steel wool, cotton and steel wool, and you just put it in the pillowcase and
Speaker 0: put
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
A two-month-old baby tragically passed away less than 48 hours after receiving routine vaccinations. "The aluminum level in his blood was 95 micrograms per litre." "Anything over 50 micrograms per litre in an adult is toxic. His was 95 and he was eight weeks old." https://t.co/z6k7bQz7Km
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
The disappearance of four members of a patent semiconductor travelling on Malaysia Airlines MH370 makes Jacob Rothchild as the sole owner of the important patent. https://t.co/J3U9AGoMV2
Video Transcript AI Summary
Diego Garcia. That's where that first Malaysian plane is. Four scientists on it; twenty scientists, but four had found for patents. It was Malaysia, but they worked out of Austin, Texas for Texas Instrument. And the ones behind that plane were Texas Instrument, the government, and Boeing who made the plan. Four of those top scientists Mhmm. That had filed for patents worth $400,000,000,000. K? So if one, two, three of us and your brother, four, we filed for patents, and then here's a friend of yours who's with us. So five of us filed for patents. If we die before the patent is granted, then your brother who wasn't on the plane with us, he owns them all. The patent was granted three days after the plane was listed. Well, these guys come up with something they don't have to inject you. They just put in this room and you come in and you smell it. That's that's what they were for.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Make look like Santa Claus. Diego Garcia. So Wait. Wait. Wait.
Wait. Sorry. Diego Garcia. That's where that first Malaysian plane is. That's where it landed.
Mhmm. And four scientists on it. 20 scientists, but four had found for patents. It was Malaysia, but they worked out of Austin, Texas for Texas Instrument. Alright?
And the ones behind that plane was Texas Instrument, the government, and Boeing who made the plan. And everybody is stupid enough to believe that a plane almost a block long can just disappear with the electronics we have, all the technology we have, the next generation of cars will come out. There'll be no driver. And so we got four of those top scientists Mhmm. Mhmm.
That had filed for patents worth $400,000,000,000. K? So if one, two, three of us and your brother, four, we filed for patents, and then here's a friend of yours who's with us. So five of us filed for patents. If we die before the patent is granted, then your brother who wasn't on the plane with us, he owns them all.
Mhmm. So those four scientists and the fifth person was to call our group. Mhmm. They own them all now. The patent was granted three days after the plane was listed.
Wow. Okay? And so what I'm saying is this is this is the game, and if you can't follow that thread, then you don't you don't see it. That's crazy. What were the patents for?
What were the patents for? Well, the patents was you heard people talk about they're gonna one day inject you and can control you. Well, these guys come up with something they don't have to inject you. They just put in this room and you come in and you smell it. That's that's what they were for.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Israeli Art Students Inside the World Trade Centers https://t.co/sTzswoXw9b
Video Transcript AI Summary
Go to methodicaldeception.com, Resources -> about the Israeli art students at the World Trade Center. This is the elephant in the room that nobody wanted to talk about, a sixty sixty one page DEA document connecting Israeli Mossad bomb experts to an art group that were traveling around The United States and to an art group that gave themselves the name of Gelatin. The Lower Manhattan Cultural Center rented the 90 First Floor to foreign art students; the DEA found out about a traveling art group that were going door to door to some of their agents' homes and their offices. The pink-shirted man with rappelling gear; they removed a window; a wooden balcony; photographs via a helicopter rented by their sponsor from the LMCC; a champagne party on top floors of the Millennium Hotel with a Bush relative. Behind the pink shirt are fuse holders; BB18; thousands of boxes for remote control demolition. Fuse holders from Lytel Fuse, a subsidiary of TRACOR; TRACOR Aviation, Lytel Fuse, TRACOR Defense Holdings. Westmark Systems; Bobby Ray Inman; Vetro; Kellex; Woolworth Building; Halliburton; Cheney's old company.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm gonna take you to Dick Cheney. Fasten your seat belt, and this is going to absolutely blow you away. I would like you, if you're if you can do this on your computer, to go to methodicaldeception.com. And when you open that up, on the navigation bar, you'll see where it says resources, and you'll wanna click on that resources. And then there's a big box that says about the Israeli art students at the World Trade Center.
Click here. Click on that and tell me when you get to that page that has some photographs because this is the elephant in the room that nobody wanted to talk about. And this is one of the documents, a sixty sixty one page DEA document that I went over and over and over and connected Israeli Mossad bomb experts to an art group that were traveling around The United States and to an art group that gave themselves the name of Gelatin. So are you there? I'm there.
So you got those pictures. Yeah. Okay. Now I'm gonna take you to Dick Cheney. Just listen up.
You're looking at those pictures. Those are some Israeli art students that came from a foreign country, and their art project was called Bee Thing. They called their team the gelatin group. And just so you understand this, gelatin is often referred to gelignite or blasting gelatin. It's also referred to as blasting jelly, but gelatin, and they later on changed their name because they people started waking up to this.
So they named their name their name Gelatin. They called their art projects the Bee Thing, and you will see on the left hand side a photograph of the title page of their book. And what the Bee Thing was, there was a group called the Lower Manhattan Cultural Center that was renting the 90 First Floor or allowed to live on the 90 First Floor. These foreign art students, and some of them were connected to a group of traveling art students that were all over the country that the DEA found out about because they were going door to door to some of their agents' homes and their offices. And some of the offices were not public locations, so they were like, Who are these people?
There's Israeli students trying to sell us art. This was just a smokescreen. So you wouldn't go to where we're about to go. Now the guy in the pink shirt, he's on the top right hand side. Kind of a pink shirt on.
He has rappelling gear on. They removed a window. This was their art project. They put a wooden balcony out, and they had photographs taken via a helicopter that was rented by their sponsor from the Lower Manhattan Cultural Center. And that particular gentleman also had a big party to celebrate this event, and he rented part of the Top Floors of the Millennium Hotel.
You'll remember that from 09/11 and who was there, the Bush relative, and, took pictures and had a big champagne party watching this. Okay? Look behind the gentleman in the pink shirt. You're gonna see two big bold numbers. It says BB18.
Those are fuse holders. Now look at all three pictures, and look at how many boxes of plastic fuse holders that can be used for remote control demolition. And ask yourself, why would art students from Israel and Austria be having thousands of fuse holders. This building was built in the early nineteen seventies. They weren't electricians.
They weren't redoing all of the electricity in that building. You know, think about this. Okay. So I get this book out. I'm waiting for my shipment of books to show up.
And I literally had a voice say to me, look into this. Those fuses, by the way, come from a company called Littel Fuse, l I t t e l, Fuse Company. They're located in Chicago. And some little voice said to me, take a look into this Lyttle fuse company, where all of those fuse holders behind those artists are. And now some of those artists are guaranteed experts, and that's in the DEA document that you can read.
So I find out that Lytel company is a subsidiary of a corporation called Trecor, t r a c o r. Now TRACOR, they went bankrupt and split their company. They were a government contractor. They split them off into TRACOR Aviation, Lytel Fuse, and TRACOR Defense Holdings. They're based in Austin, Texas.
They were bought out by Westmark Systems. Bobby Ray Inman was the chairman of Westmark at a point. Then Westmark kinda started losing it, and TRACOR bought them back. TRACOR bought out a company called Vetro, which used to be the Kelleck's company. Let me tell you about Kelleck's company.
The Kelleck's corporation was whole a wholly owned subsidiary of MW Kellogg, as in serial, you know that guy, Kellogg, company. Kellex was formed in 1942 that the so Kellogg's operation relating to the Manhattan Project could be kept separate and secret. Kell meaning Kellogg and X meaning secret. The new company's goal was to design a facility for the production of enrichment enriched uranium through a gaseous diffusion technique. In gaseous diffusion, isotopes of uranium two thirty five could be separated from uranium two thirty eight by turning uranium metal into uranium hexa fluoride gas and straining it through a barrier material.
Now this is kind of interesting too. So for those of you who remember that, originally, the first responders were getting calls that there was a missile launch from the Woolworth Building, the newly formed Kellex Company's original headquarters were in the Woolworth Building in Lower Manhattan. I know. This is another coincidence, isn't it? They later on moved to Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
But now the Kellex company, you will know them today. Here we are, fastening your seat belts as Halliburton. The Cheney's old company.
reSee.it AI Summary
In 1974, I heard Robert Welch, founder of the John Birch Society, warn about a globalist agenda aimed at dismantling America. He highlighted a strategy to gradually surrender American sovereignty to international organizations, with the UN being a prominent example.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
In 1974, Robert Welch—founder of the John Birch Society—delivered a speech warning of a globalist plan to destroy America, which has since proven to be eerily accurate. "A part of that plan... is to induce the gradual surrender of American sovereignty, piece by piece and step by step, to various international organisations, of which the United Nations is the outstanding but far from the only example."
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker describes a plan to gradually surrender American sovereignty to international organizations, notably the United Nations. The aims for the United States are: 1) greatly expanded government spending for every conceivable means of wasting larger sums of American money; 2) higher and then much higher taxes; 3) an increasingly unbalanced budget despite higher taxes; 4) wild inflation of our currency; 5) government controls of prices, wages, and materials supposedly to combat inflation; 6) greatly increased socialist controls over every operation of our economy and daily life, with a correspondingly huge expansion of the bureaucracy and the cost and reach of domestic government; 7) far more centralization of power in Washington and elimination of state lines; 8) federal aid and control over education, leading to complete federalization of public education; 9) constant emphasis on the horror of modern warfare and peace on communist terms; 10) willingness to appease that amounts to piecemeal surrender of the free world and the United States.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A part of that plan, of course, is to induce the gradual surrender of American sovereignty piece by piece and step by step to various international organizations of which the United Nations is the outstanding but far from the only example. Here are the aims for The United States. One, greatly expanded government spending for every conceivable means of getting rid of ever larger sums of American money as wastefully as possible. (two) Higher and then much higher taxes. (three) An increasingly unbalanced budget despite the higher taxes four.
Wild inflation of our currency five. Government controls of prices, wages, and materials supposedly to combat inflation Sixth, greatly increased socialistic controls over every operation of our economy and every activity of our daily lives. This is to be accompanied naturally and automatically by a correspondingly huge increase in the size of our bureaucracy and in both the cost and reach of our domestic government. Far more centralization of power in Washington and the practical elimination of our state lines. There is a many faceted drive at work to have our state lines eventually mean no more within the nation than our county lines do now within The States.
Eight, a steady advance of Federal aid to and control over our educational system, leading to complete federalization of our public education. (nine) A constant hammering into the American consciousness of the horror of modern warfare. The beauties and the absolute necessity of peace peace always on communist terms, of course. And 10, the consequent willingness of the American people to allow the steps of appeasement by our government which amount to a piecemeal surrender of the rest of the free world and of The United States itself.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
5 dancing Israelis on 9/11 linked to Israeli intelligence. https://t.co/YwpXQrKBzq
Video Transcript AI Summary
In the days after the September attacks, rumors swirled about strange coincidences. One report about a group of Middle Eastern men spotted the morning of September 11 parked just across the river from New York City has not gone away, raising questions about whether Israel was conducting espionage on US soil. ABC's John Miller has an exclusive: five Israelis waited in jail as the FBI and CIA sorted it out. A witness saw three men on top of a van posing for pictures with the towers burning, "they were happy" and "they didn't look shocked." All five, it turns out, were Israeli. The FBI needed the answers to three important questions: "Who were these men? What brought them to that parking lot on the morning of September 11? And did they have any advanced knowledge of what was going to happen that day?" They said they worked for Urban Moving. The FBI obtained a search warrant for the company's offices; two SUVs were filled up with between nine and twelve boxes and computers; Urban Moving offices were abandoned; the five Israelis were interrogated and given lie detector tests. Stephen Gordon was their American lawyer.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In the days after the September attacks, there were countless rumors about strange coincidences surrounding the events. One report about a group of Middle Eastern men spotted the morning of September 11 parked just across the river from New York City has not gone away. Investigation of their presence has led to questions about whether Israel was conducting espionage on US soil. We're joined now by ABC's John Miller with an exclusive report this evening.
Speaker 1: That's right, Elizabeth. This is a case that took the FBI and the CIA more than two months to sort out, while five Israelis waited in jail. It began when this woman was watching the Twin Towers burning from her apartment in New Jersey. She noticed three men on top of a van posing for pictures with the towers burning in the background.
Speaker 2: And I could see that they were, like, happy. You know? They they they were they didn't look shocked to me. You know? They didn't look shocked.
I thought it was very strange.
Speaker 1: The witness called police who stopped the van hours later and arrested five men. All five, it turns out, were Israeli. They were turned over to the FBI. Sources tell ABC News during a check of national security databases, some of the men were listed as having had connections with Israeli intelligence. At the FBI, that set off alarm bells.
The FBI needed the answers to three important questions. Who were these men? What brought them to that parking lot on the morning of September 11? And did they have any advanced knowledge of what was going to happen that day? The men said they were just taking pictures at the time.
They said they worked for a company called Urban Moving. The FBI obtained a search warrant for the company's offices.
Speaker 2: Two SUVs were filled up with between nine and twelve boxes and computers.
Speaker 1: Not long after the arrest, the offices of Urban Moving were simply abandoned. Almost everything was left behind. In jail, the five Israelis were repeatedly interrogated and given lie detector tests. Stephen Gordon was their American lawyer.
Speaker 3: Were asked questions if they had ever been approached by or hired by any non United States intelligence com
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
401k is the biggest scam https://t.co/lwzmvmRV9k
Video Transcript AI Summary
A board member from America's Best 401(k) highlights opaque, hidden fees in 401(k) plans. He notes it's a $4.4 trillion industry and claims "for thirty years, they didn't get to tell you what they were charging you," and that the Department of Labor only recently required disclosure. The new 35–50 page disclosures are hard to understand, even for finance PhDs. He cites that 58% of people think there are no fees. He warns that a 1% annual fee, due to compounding, can cost a large portion of retirement income, while many people believe fees are under 1% or zero, yet are paying around 3.1%. He gives a simple example: with a $100,000 investment over 30 years, paying 1% yields about $761,000 versus $432,000 with 3% fees; this implies 76% more money with lower fees and 19 years more income with higher fees.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You're a board member at America's Best four zero one k. Yes. And you've specifically looked into the fees that people pay a four zero one k's and the fact that most people don't even know that they pay a fee. This is the most amazing thing. It's a $4,400,000,000,000 industry that for thirty years, they didn't get to tell you what they were charging you.
Only three years ago, the Department of Labor changed the rules and said you gotta tell people what you charge them. Uh-huh. So now they do that by giving a 35 or 50 page disclosure document that if you have a PhD in finance, maybe you can figure out the hidden fees. Yeah. Good luck.
So here's what you have to know. Most people 58% of people don't even think there are any fees. Mhmm. I have three core messages for your viewer. One, fees matter and you're paying them.
A 1% in fee, because of the compounding over time, cost you ten years of retirement income. The average person thinks they're paying less than 1% or nothing, and they're paying 3.1. That's thirty years of fees. So I'll give you an example. If you have a 35 year old person, they have a $100,000 and they put it in the market and they let it compound for thirty years till they're gonna retire Yeah.
And they're paying 1% in fees, they have $761,000, which is nice growth, you know, from that time. But if you paid 3% of fees for the same stocks Yep. You have 432,000. So in other words, you have 76 percent more money if you have less fees. Or in the other view, you have nineteen years less income.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Many times people have solved the energy issue. They all get murdered. https://t.co/fHn1ONTpln
Video Transcript AI Summary
Tesla’s vision: "electric power is everywhere in unlimited quantities and can power the world's machinery without the need for coal, oil, or gas." His financier, "JP Morgan," "could not profit from Tesla's ideas. So he simply cut his funding at one point." The talk cites "Stanley Meyer" using water as fuel by "hitting the water molecule at its resonant frequency," building a dune buggy "on just one full tank of water" before a fatal poisoning. A "working device currently in Switzerland" "resembles an electrostatic Wimshurst machine" and "converts the ambient field energy or radiant energy... into usable electricity," a technology Baumann chose not to disclose "because humanity is simply not ready for it yet." Peter Lindeman "proposed four forces actually": "the banking system," "national governments," "deluded inventors or fraudsters," "consumers." "In a free market economy" "everybody is free to earn as much money as they like, but only in the form of the dollar or the euro." The "true basic need of every human" is "energy," and the hope is "energy is free for everybody."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You may all know this man. This man is called Nikola Tesla. And in my opinion, he's one of the brightest minds in the history of science. And he has worked on technologies which not only harvest electricity from the vacuum of space, but also to transmit it wirelessly across the globe for everybody to use freely. And just to quote him here, electric power is everywhere in unlimited quantities and can power the world's machinery without the need for coal, oil, or gas.
Isn't that amazing? Well, unfortunately, his primary investor called JP Morgan, he eventually found out that he could not profit from Tesla's ideas. So he simply cut his funding at one point, and Tesla died a rather poor man and without the respect he actually deserved. Now this is just a list of people who have worked on similar technologies if you're interested and want to do your own research, and I'm just going to name two more examples of this list. Next is up is that of Stanley Meyer.
You may all know of the possibility to run your car on hydrogen gas. You got the combustible mixture of oxygen and hydrogen. You burn it, it leaves you with excess power to run your car, and the byproduct of just tap water, h two o. Well, Stanley Meyer actually found out a way to use tap water as a fuel source by hitting the water molecule at its resonant frequency, and thereby very effectively splitting the water in hydrogen and oxygen. And with this, he built a dune buggy with which he could drive from the East to the West Coast Of The United States on just one full tank of water.
And at one point, unfortunately, he went out to dinner with his investors. Yes, again, investors. And after sipping his cranberry juice, he grabbed his throat, he bolted out the door of the restaurant, he dropped to his knees and cursed that he had been poisoned. And this sounds like something straight from a movie. Right?
But it's actually real, and you can look up the details yourself. I'll just give one more example that of the an actual working device currently in Switzerland. And to all you electrical engineers, this may resemble an electrostatic Wimshurst machine. Sounds complicated, but this one actually converts the ambient field energy or radiant energy as Tesla would call it into usable electricity. And the reason why mister Baumann has chosen not to disclose this technology is that he thinks humanity is simply not ready for it yet, and we may soon see why.
So this leaves us with a very big question, what happened? Why are we not driving in water fueled cars? Why are we not receiving electricity from the atmosphere or the vacuum of space freely. Peter Lindeman is an authority on the radiant energy Tesla was talking about, and he proposed four forces actually. And the first being the banking system.
And I know what some of you may think, oh, here comes that guy with that Illuminati conspiracy theory. No. We're going to leave that behind. So in a free market economy, everybody is free to earn as much money as they like, but only in the form of the dollar or the euro or whatever currency you have. So you're not going to be paid in gold anymore, for example.
So if I would have a system which I can with which I can raise my own capital with without borrowing it from a bank, the control of this banking system is lost. So naturally, they try they do everything to stop this. You can even see this in current day technologies, like photovoltaics and wind turbines. They're already already being reg regulated more and more because of their devaluating capacity. It's even on the cover of The Economist.
It's not a big secret or conspiracy. And that brings me to the second force, national governments. Because governments found out that the true policy that actually works is called an eye for an eye. So it's constantly jockeying for influence in world affairs, and it's survival of the fittest, basically. So imagine when one nation or one party in another nation achieves the ability to generate their own power.
The balance of power literally shifts from the government to that other nation or party within that nation. And everybody will want this technology, and at the same time, everybody will want to prevent the other from getting it. So to prevent this chaos, governments do something smart. They issue a restriction on any patent or invention that can give an opponent an advantage over the government in power generation. It's called invention secrecy, and it's still going strong as the Federal Agency of American Scientists says.
The third group, actually comprised of the deluded inventors or fraudsters, if you will, which actually are only in it for the money. So the problem is most of these these devices don't work. YouTube is full of them. And actually, the first two forces use the worst cases of these people to promote the idea that every technology concerning this free energy is a hoax, is a scam. So nobody believes in it anymore.
And then there's the people who actually have built a device that works, but they're still in it for the money. And then Shell comes to their doorstep and says, hey, here's a couple of million dollars. Go live a happy life, but don't speak about your technology again. So what is a couple of million dollars to a $20,000,000,000,000 industry anyway? Now I'm really wondering if somebody from the audience can guess what the fourth force is.
What is the fourth force that's preventing this tech from happening? Anybody has an idea? Consumers. Consumers. Exactly.
It's all the rest of us. It's you and me. Because you see, the in the incentives and the modus, the first three forces, they seem so selfish and so narrow, but in reality, we share those same motives. These forces are literally just different aspects of the same problem. It's a human one.
It's the greed, and it's the fear of competition, and it's that want for power. So in the end, I believe that this revolution, it has to happen within our lifetimes. And either it goes horribly wrong, and we destroy ourselves in the process, or we as a people choose the green transition. And we can nowadays because we have the internet to form a critical mass and spread the information as opposed to, let's say, twenty years ago. So that's why I challenge you all to do your own research into this subject if you are interested and spread the word because it is up to us to develop this technology that is already there, and the first three forces are not going to help us with this.
And I would like to close with this, the true basic need of every human. I don't think it's water, it's not food, and it certainly is not money. I think it's energy, and that is why my hope for the future is a world in which energy is free for everybody. Thank you very much.
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
This man, one of Europe’s top demolition experts, died in a car accident in 2011. 5 years earlier he makes a shocking claim about the destruction of WTC Building 7 on 9/11. “This is a controlled demolition… it’s been imploded.” https://t.co/Q8tR2upmQk
Video Transcript AI Summary
Ze beweren dat kolommen zijn weggeblazen en er nagespollen was. Dit gebouw 11 september ingestort; zij vergelijken het met World Trade Center en zeggen: 'De onderste verdiepingen gaan eerst... de rest zakt er gewoon in... Dit is control dimolition.' Er zou 'na gesprongen' zijn en 'een opdracht gebeurd' door 'een team gedaan van experts', met de bewering dat dit '7 uur nadat World Trade Center naar beneden viel' gebeurde. In het officiële onderzoeksrapport van Fima staat dat ze 'niet kunnen verklaren waarom gebouw nummer 7 is ingestort'. Danny Joenko bespreekt uitgebreid de mogelijke oorzaken en blijft erbij dat 'het gebouw is opgeblazen'. De vraag is of zoiets van tevoren voorbereid was of op 11 september zelf besloten, en hoeveel mensen en tijd daarvoor nodig zouden zijn: 'een man of 30 40', met 'snijbrander', 'deat koord met die boosters' en 'de elektronische systemen erop' voordat 'ie omhoog ging. Brand werd niet geblust.
English translation:
They claim that columns were blown away and there was after-pollen. This building 11 September collapsed; they compare it with World Trade Center and say: 'The lower floors go first... the rest sinks in... This is control dimolition.' There would have been 'after blown' and 'an order happened' by 'a team of experts', with the assertion that this occurred '7 hours after World Trade Center went down'. In the official investigation report from Fima, they state that they 'cannot explain why building number 7 collapsed'. Danny Joenko discusses the possible causes at length and maintains that 'the building is blown up'. The question is whether something like this was prepared beforehand or decided on 11 September itself, and how many people and how much time would be needed: 'a man or 30-40', with 'snijbrander', 'deat cord with those boosters' and 'the electronic systems on' before 'it goes up'. Fire was not extinguished.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Ze hebben gewoon kolommen weggeblazen. Er is nagespollen.
Speaker 1: Toch is ook dit gebouw op 11 september ingestort. Deze gebeurtenis heeft nooit veel aandacht gekregen en ook Danny Joenko heeft er nooit van gehoord. Zijn reactie op de beelden die we laten zien is onbevangen.
Speaker 2: Dit valt anders als het World Trade Center.
Speaker 0: Vind je niet al?
Speaker 2: Ja, je ziet het. De onderste verdiepingen gaan eerst.
Speaker 0: Ja, de rest zakt er gewoon in. Dus dit is control dimolition.
Speaker 2: Zeker weten?
Speaker 0: Zeker weten. Er is na gesprongen. Er is een opdracht gebeurd. Dat heeft een team gedaan van experts.
Speaker 2: Maar dat is ook op 11 september gebeurd. Dezelfde dag? Dezelfde dag. Dezelfde dag? Weet je dat zeker?
Ja.
Speaker 0: Was het zeker weten de elfde? Dat kan helemaal waar zijn.
Speaker 2: 7 uur nadat de World Trade Center naar beneden viel.
Speaker 0: Ja. Hebben ze hard gewerkt.
Speaker 1: In het officiële onderzoeksrapport van Fima staat dat ze niet kunnen verklaren waarom gebouw nummer 7 is ingestort. Uitgebreid bespreken we alle mogelijke oorzaken met Danny Joenko.
Speaker 2: Dat weet ik niet precies, maar het zijn wel
Speaker 1: Maar hij blijft erbij dat het gebouw is opgeblazen. Het
Speaker 2: is vakwerk, zonder meer. We weten heel goed wat ze doen jongens.
Speaker 1: De vraag is dan is zoiets van tevoren voorbereid of kan dat op 11 september zelf nog zijn besloten en uitgevoerd?
Speaker 2: Met hoeveel man heeft u hoeveel tijd nodig om dat te doen?
Speaker 0: Dat weet ik niet precies, maar maakt u een inschatting? Ja dan moet je wel ervaren mensen hebben maar als je een man of 30 40 zou hebben. Kijk een paar met de snijbrander de rest brengt hem aan andere mensen sluiten die de deat koord met met die boosters aan. Dat moet allemaal precies allemaal op hetzelfde moment gaan. Weer een derde die zetten de elektronische systemen erop.
En dan gaat ie.
Speaker 2: Terwijl overal brand was en ook in dat gebouw was brand. Ze hebben de brand niet geblust. Dus de mensen die dat moesten doen, die moesten het doen terwijl het binnen nog brandde.
Speaker 0: Ja, is vreemd. Dat vind ik ook heel vreemd. Heb ik geen verklaring voor.