reSee.it - Related Post Feed
@schmittpaula - Paula Schmitt
@DiasvelosoS Ele falou sim, sua mau-caráter. https://t.co/MWtRLdkIs9
Video Transcript AI Summary
Basically, regardless of the disease stage, many people in Maranhão are already receiving chloroquine. The state healthcare system primarily focuses on severe cases, so most of our patients who are hospitalized fall into that category. However, I cannot confirm if all of them are severe cases since I am not a medical professional.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: É basicamente isso. Independentemente também da fase da doença como o senhor disse que várias pessoas já estão recebendo a cloroquina no Maranhão, é o início meio e fim isso já está acontecendo é isso então? Por nós, lembrando que a rede estadual não cuida de casos leves primariamente, cuidamos de casos graves, Então nossos pacientes internados, na sua maioria não posso afirmar que são todos porque eu não sou médico intersevista,
@AethingInc - Aething Inc.
How may I trust you if that twit probably written by AI? https://t.co/MNqbnJU91H
@RealCapeTruther - MASS FORMATION PSYCHOSIS
THEY LIKE TO LIE #LIES https://t.co/ztiZI9M6Vn
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, various articles from The New York Times between 1915 and 1931 are mentioned. These articles discuss the plight of the Jewish population, with claims of 6,000,000 Jews facing poverty, starvation, disease, and death. The articles highlight the need for assistance and support for the Jewish community during and after the war. The speaker emphasizes the number of 6,000,000 Jews affected by these conditions.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Soon, at New York, Sunday, June 6, 1915. This is 18 year before Hitler ever sat for the government. Tell us, dear. 6,000,000 Jews. The New York Times, October 18, 1918.
The article isn't called $1,000,000,000 fund to be billed at Jewry. There it is. 6,000,000,000 souls will need help to resume normal life when war has ended. The New York Times, September 8, 1919. And the article is called Ukrainian Jews aim to stop problems.
Last week we asked that a 127,000 Jews are being killed and 6,000,000 on parole. In the New York Times, November 12, 1919, and it reduced the tragedy on bilingual poverty, starvation, and disease. About 6,000,000 souls with half the Jewish population of the Earth. February 23, 1920. 6,000,000 Jews.
Friday, May 7th 1920. The phone for Jewish war sofas in Central and Eastern Europe where 6,000,000 is horrifying conditions of famine disease and death. New York Times, Wednesday, July 20th, 1921, 12 year before that the It was at Montreal. December 29th 1931. Year.
And the honorable, but you must speak so for itself, 6,000,000 Jews via
@euphorio_ - Yan.x |
@dom_lucre Is Andrew telling the truth ? 👀 https://t.co/uErX5J1Dxj
Video Transcript AI Summary
Prince Andrew denies any involvement in the activities of Jeffrey Epstein and maintains that he did not have any sexual encounters with Virginia Roberts. He claims that he stayed at Epstein's house out of convenience and that his judgment was clouded by his sense of honor. He denies sweating or having any recollection of the specific events described by Roberts. He acknowledges being in a photograph with her but cannot explain it. He also denies any knowledge of suspicious behavior or underage girls at Epstein's residences. Prince Andrew states that he would be willing to testify under oath if legally advised to do so. He emphasizes that he is focused on his philanthropic work and moving forward.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Tonight, for the 1st time, Prince Andrew speaks out.
Speaker 1: I don't know why I've I've I've, collected that title because I don't I I never have really partied, and, and, and I've never really felt the need to go and party.
Speaker 0: I'm gonna write something. You you threw a a birthday party, for Epstein's girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, at Sandringham.
Speaker 1: No, it was a shooting weekend.
Speaker 0: A shooting weekend?
Speaker 1: Just a straightforward, straightforward shooting weekend.
Speaker 0: Why? Why were you staying with a convicted sex offender?
Speaker 1: Right. Because this was, serious, and I felt that doing it over the telephone was the chicken's way of doing it. I had to go and see him and talk to him. Oh! In 2010, there wasn't certainly wasn't a party to celebrate his release in December because it was a small dinner party.
There were only 8 or 10 of us, I think, at the at the dinner.
Speaker 0: But you were staying at the house as a convicted sex offender?
Speaker 1: It was a convenient place to stay and I admit fully that my Judgement was probably colored by my, tendency to be too honorable. Okay. And your strengths?
Speaker 0: But that definitely wasn't you getting a foot massage from a Russian girl in Jeffrey Epstein's house? No, thanks. I don't want to be part of your sex festival. It might seem a funny way to break off a friendship. A 4 day house party of sorts with a dinner.
It's an odd way to break up the trenches. It's different way
Speaker 1: of put is that that's a very, stark way of putting it. Yes, you're absolutely right.
Speaker 0: She says she met you in 2001. She dined with you. She danced with you. You bought her drinks. You were in Tramp nightclub in London.
And she went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia belonging to Ghislaine Maxwell.
Speaker 1: Didn't happen. There are a number of things that are wrong with that story. One of which is that I don't know where the bar is in, tramps. I don't drink. I don't think I've ever bought a drink in Trant, whenever I was there.
Speaker 0: You know that you were at home with the children? Was it a memorable night?
Speaker 1: On that particular day that that that, we now understand is the date, which is the 10th March. I was at home, I was with the children and I'd taken Beatrice to, a pizza express in working for a party at a, I suppose, sort of 4, 5 in the afternoon.
Speaker 0: Why would you remember that so specifically? Why would you remember a a Pizza Express birthday and being at home?
Speaker 1: Because Going to Pizza Express in Woking is an unusual thing for me to do. A very unusual thing for me to do. I've never been, I've only been through Woking a couple of times, and I remember it weirdly, distinctly. But as soon as somebody reminded me of it, I went, oh, yes, I remember that.
Speaker 0: She was very specific about that night. She described dancing with you and you profusely sweating and that she went on to have Bar, possibly
Speaker 1: There's a slight problem with with with with the sweating, because, I I have a peculiar medical condition, which is that I don't sweat. That's what's that's bollocks. No. Or I didn't sweat at the time and that was oh, is she? Yes.
I didn't sweat at the time because I, had suffered what I would describe as an overdose of adrenaline in the Falklands War when I was shot at and I simply it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was almost impossible for me to, sort of threat.
Speaker 0: She provided a photo of the 2 of you together.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: Your arm was around Her waist?
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: You've seen the photos?
Speaker 1: I've seen the photograph.
Speaker 0: How do you explain that?
Speaker 1: I can't.
Speaker 0: You think it is you next to her in the photo?
Speaker 1: Oh, it's definitely me. I mean, that's a that's a picture of me. It's not a picture of I don't believe it's a picture of me in London, because when I go out to when I go out in London, I wear a suit and a tie. That's what I would describe as those are my traveling clothes if I'm going to go if I'm going overseas. So there's a I've got plenty of photographs of me address in in in in those sorts of that sort of kit, but not there.
Speaker 0: There was a witness there, Johannes Stolberg, who says that You did visit the house in that month?
Speaker 1: I probably did. I don't think I've on one of the weird things, I was staying with the, because of the what I was doing, I was staying with the Consul General, which is further down the street, on on on 5th, so I wasn't I wasn't staying there. I may have visited, but, but, but No. Definitely didn't definitely definitely no no no activity.
Speaker 0: She said she had sex with you 3 times. Once in a London house When she was trafficked to you in Maxwell's house Yes. Once in New York, a month or so later at Epstein's mansion and once On his private island, in a group of 7 or 8 other girls.
Speaker 1: No.
Speaker 0: For the record, is there any way you could have had sex with that young woman or any young woman trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein in any of his residences? No.
Speaker 1: And without putting too fine a point on it, if you're a man, it is a positive act to have sex with somebody. You have to take some sort of positive action. And so therefore, if You try to forget. It's very difficult to try and forget positive action.
Speaker 0: Epstein's housekeeper, also in a Florida court legal deposition, said that you visited the Palm Beach residence around 4 times a year. You got a daily massage. Four times a year? That was what he said in a Florida court legal position.
Speaker 1: You know?
Speaker 0: I'm just wondering, when you look back now, is there a chance that those massages might have been the services of someone who was being 'Sextually exploited or trafficked by Epstein from the Palace. At no time did I see, witness or suspect -Any suspicious behavior. -Yeah. Virginia Roberts' legal team says you could not spend time around Epstein -And not know what was going on.
Speaker 1: If you are, somebody, like me. Then people behave in a subtly different way. You
Speaker 0: could not spend time around him And not know. But you'd notice if there were hundreds of underage girls in £1, wouldn't you?
Speaker 1: But you'd under but but sorry. You would notice if there were hundreds of underage girls in Geoffrey's house, wasn't there?
Speaker 0: -You seem utterly convinced you're telling the truth. Would you be willing to testify or give a statement under oath if you were asked?
Speaker 1: -Well, I'm like everybody else. And I would have to take, all the legal advice, that there was before I was to do that sort of thing, but if push came to shove and the legal advice was to do so, Then I would be duty bound to do so.
Speaker 0: -Because you've said there are many unanswered questions. Everyone affected wants closure. You would help To provide that closure.
Speaker 1: It was just as much, closure for me as there is for everybody else. But in the same way that I have questions to answer in the sense of what was what was I doing? What was I doing?
Speaker 0: When was your last contact with her?
Speaker 1: It was earlier this year, funnily enough, in the in the summer, in the spring summer.
Speaker 0: About what?
Speaker 1: She was here, doing some rally.
Speaker 0: So even though he had by then been arrested and was facing charges of sex trafficking?
Speaker 1: No, no, no. No, no, no. This was this was early spring, I think. It was long because when was he arrested?
Speaker 0: -July.
Speaker 1: -No, it was before July.
Speaker 0: -And that was the last time?
Speaker 1: -Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 0: Because -Could you discuss Epstein at all then?
Speaker 1: No. Not actually, funny enough. No, not at all. There wasn't anything to discuss about him, because it wasn't in the news, it wasn't, you know, it was just we moved on.
Speaker 0: How do you move on from this?
Speaker 1: Well, it's an interesting way of putting it. I'm carrying on with what I do. I have a number of things that I have been doing since 2011. We've got 500,000 or just over 500,000 young people, who are using the service and I'm trying to think what else we've got, but it's well, strings to Brent's bow, A for philanthropist.
Speaker 0: I know we have to bring this to a place because we're running out of time.
@NunyaBiznez101 - 🇨🇦 NOMAD 🇨🇦
@WiretapMediaCa Hmm, 🤔... !! https://t.co/sZH1rYgsqV
@_BruceBane - Brüce Bane (Pu/to)🇺🇸
This guy is a fucking liar! https://t.co/XHYM5qv0y5
Video Transcript AI Summary
During the Capitol incident, a law enforcement officer recounts being attacked and called a traitor. Another person claims that the officer was actually an FBI plant, not in uniform, and carrying a Confederate flag. They believe the narrative is unraveling and demand the release of FBI files to reveal the true culprits.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Because I was among the vastly outnumbered group of law enforcement officers protecting the capital and the people inside it, I was grabbed, beaten, tased, all while being called a traitor to my country.
Speaker 1: Yeah. That guy. Well, that guy was actually not in uniform And he was not there as a Capitol police officer. He was there as an FBI plant. The dude was there Carrying a Confederate flag.
You can't make this shit up. It's him, and he thought he was gonna get away with it. Once again, unraveling of the narrative because the narrative wasn't strong because it wasn't true. So we can try again, Try try again. But guess what, guys?
Release the FBI files, and you will see who's really guilty.
@Dr_Oseiwe1 - Dr Oseiwe
Everything they say is a lie https://t.co/pjL3uK0ddE
Video Transcript AI Summary
They claim that our heart is a pump, but it's actually a valve. Our hair is not just hair, it's an extension of our nervous system that helps us scan the environment. Dairy is said to be good for our bones, but it actually strips calcium from them. Looking at the sun is discouraged, but it actually stimulates our pineal gland and opens our third eye. They won't teach us anything that sets us free because they benefit from our mental enslavement. We must consider everything they tell us to be false.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Thing they ever have told us is a lie. They tell us that our heart is a pump. Your heart is not a pump. Your heart is a valve. Your lungs is a pump that pumps the blood to the heart.
Everything they tell us about everything is allowed. They tell you your hair is just hair. No. Our hair is not an ether hair. It is actually extension of your nervous system.
It is used to scan the environment permit, and it brings all of these different melanin neurotransmitters back to your skin to tell you whether to actually engage in the environment or take fight or flight and run away. That's why you get gut feelings. Us is why when you see paranormal activities, the hair on your skin stand up. So everything that they ever told us about ourselves is a lie. That dairy is good for the bones and calcium, milk actually strips the bone of calcium.
You know, they tell us don't look at the sun because it would make us go blind, sun gazing actually stimulates your pineal gland to open up your your 3rd eye. They will never teach you nothing to set you come free because you being enslaved mentally is what how they benefit tell it off of you so they will never teach you anything to make you free ever. So we have to take everything that they ever tell us is bullshit.
@MakaveliMemez - Makaveli Memez
Does anyone here suspect that he’s lying? 🤔 https://t.co/e5nU6dZocF
Video Transcript AI Summary
Did you give Mrs. Willis the double shocker and then drill her while shouting, "We're gonna get Trump"? No.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Did you give missus Willis the, double shocker and then drill her booty hole while shouting, we're gonna get Trump ever? Ever. Ever. No.
@abhicc225 - Perfectly Imperfect 🤷🏻
@crazyclips_ "he wasn't lying on text" different version 😭😭 https://t.co/7S8rPlhPxJ
@katee_K1 - Kate❤️🔥💕
Genuine question. https://t.co/VHEGfrmrHe
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker questions why liberals should be trusted to determine the future of the country. The speaker claims that many liberals have depression, anxiety, and personality disorders, and some are uncertain about their gender.
The speaker asserts that most liberals have never worked or were unsuccessful in their jobs. They allegedly spend most of their money on food and hair dye and do not care about their health, glamorizing obesity. The speaker describes protesters as fitting this description and questions why they should be seen as capable of making better choices for the country.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Can someone explain it to me like I'm five years old? Why we should take liberals seriously and why should we trust them to know the answers for the future of our country, to know what's right or wrong to do in politics? Because think about it this way. Most of them have depression, anxiety, all types of personality disorders, like borderline, all of these things. Right?
I'm sorry, but I don't trust people that have mental issues. Some of them don't even know what gender they belong to. It yeah. I don't trust that. Plus, most of them have never worked, and if they have, they've sucked at it.
Most of their money is spent on food and hair dye, and they don't really care about their health. They glamorize being obese and, you know, all the all the craziness that they do. You look at these protests, and 80% of the people who are there are the exact description of what I just told you. And they really think that we should look at them and be like, yeah. These are the people who are going to make better choices for this country.
Now please explain this to me. I really need to understand.
@AntonioTweets2 - 🇨🇦 Antonio Tweets
Always hiding the truth. Wild. https://t.co/BapcskmVOg
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker claims the media attacked them after they began reporting a story, leading to their firing. They cite the case of Isabella Ferrera, an independent journalist investigating Emmanuel Macron and Brigitte, who was found dead, with the media claiming suicide despite a friend's doubts. Another independent journalist, Natasha Ray, who has cancer, was sued by Brigitte Macron, not over the claim that Brigitte was born a biological male, but over errors when speaking to Amandin Roy, who was also sued for invasion of privacy. Xavier Poussard, the journalist who originally exposed the claim that Brigitte Macron was lying about her identity, has faced harassment, including financial audits and searches of his mother's home. Poussard has not been sued for defamation because his work has been thorough.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What the hell is wrong with our media? What the hell is wrong with our media that when I began to try to report on the story, they came for me. They started pitting me as Adolf Hitler. They started canceling me, demands for me to get fired. I was fired.
It was in March that I reported of last year on the story, and it was in March that same exact year that I got fired from my former employer. And nonstop have been fighting the press since. And, guy, by the way, you should know that there is this strange case of what happens to every journalist who tries to touch the story. and foremost, Isabella Ferrera, I think I mentioned this on a past episode. She was one of the Jean Valais Jean Jean Gillais, the yellow vest people who began prodding into the story as an independent journalist happened upon some huge information pertaining to the relationship of Emmanuel Macron and Brigitte.
But then she was found dead. She was found dead floating in a river, and her friend said that she didn't kill herself. But the media said she most definitely did, that she must have slipped and fell after she took a lot of pills. So that kind of stuff happens, I guess. Then there is Natasha Ray, who the media has been lying on attempting to ruin her entire life.
She has cancer. She was an independent journalist. This is the one that, Brigitte Macron notoriously sued. And similarly to what they sent him a letter, was not over the substance of the claim that Brigitte Macron was born a biological male, but rather pertaining to errors of misspeak when she spoke to Amandin Roy who was similarly sued for invasion of privacy. Okay?
And then there's one man still left standing, and that is Xavier Poussard. Xavier Poussard is the person that I am so honored to introduce to you guys on Monday. He is the journalist who has been diligently working on this, whose work I am repeating, really. I feel blessed that he even selected me to be able to bring this to the public, that he trusts me with this story. Xavier Poussard has been working on this for eight years and has given up everything, including his home country of residence because, well, how did they come after Xavier Poussard?
They looked into his finances, found who was funding his publication, and decided that it would be a really good time to go through a two year audit. One of the government's preferred ways of harassing someone is getting the IRS out there and finding the crime in any way possible. And so Xavier Poussard was dropped from the people that were investing in him. He had to move his family. His mother's house was searched just to scare them and to intimidate them and to let them know that they are watching them.
And to this day, Xavier Poussard, the man who originally dropped the six part series exposing the fact that Brigitte Macron was lying about her identity has never been sued for defamation because his work has been thorough.
@MYLUNCHBREAK_ - MY LUNCH BREAK
Someone's lying. https://t.co/EdOqQBgcTh
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker claims that mainstream history is a lie, particularly regarding the "Great Fires" of the 1800s. They argue that the reported death tolls are impossibly low considering the number of buildings destroyed.
Specifically, the speaker cites the Great Chicago Fire of 1871, where 17,500 buildings burned but only a tiny percentage of the population supposedly died. They suggest the city was either empty or the death toll was suppressed, and that the fires were actually planned demolitions of old-world buildings using bombs and explosives.
The speaker highlights other fires, including the Iroquois Theater fire (600 deaths), the Great Fire of London (6 deaths, 13,200 houses destroyed), the Great Fire of New York (2 deaths, 700 buildings), and fires in Paris, Texas; Toronto, Canada; and Montreal, Canada, all with suspiciously low death counts despite widespread destruction. They suggest the population worldwide was near zero in the early 1800s and that a previous advanced civilization existed before 1776. The speaker believes these fires were deliberate attacks to hide our true history. They cite the Great Fire of Detroit, Phoenix, Miami, and Houston as further examples of this pattern.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: One of two things is more likely than what they're telling us and more probable mathematically, where all of the buildings are destroyed, yet nobody had an issue getting away. So either there were more people that died than just zero point zero zero eight percent of the population when all of the 17,500 buildings were in flames than we're actually being told about, which would make a lot more sense. But this is not the narrative that we're told. And to clear this up and to give this a much clearer perspective, 1871, where people didn't even have cars yet. They had to ride their horses or run around in order to escape this fire.
The population simply wasn't 300,000 people like we're being told. And these cities were actually empty, and the previous civilization was erased. And it was time, more specifically, a planned time to demolish most of their work. And they just absolutely shredded these 17,500 buildings with massive bombs and explosives to destroy the old world civilization's construction. Buildings that would have given this entire narrative away decades ago, destroying 17,500 buildings before anyone really even started living in Chelaga again.
And this option, in my opinion, seems like the most logical answer. Because why would only 300,000 people already have 17,500 buildings in the place? I think this point alone proves that we are being lied to, that the main stream history is not truthful. Right after this eighteen seventy one fire, they tell us that they just cleaned the whole thing up, and all these other brand new buildings are magically here again. For example, like we discussed in episode 58, the Palmer House was completed just four years after the eighteen seventy one Great Fire.
So we can see that the narrative has a ton of issues and flaws. It is becoming story hour. It's not factual information like we deserve at this point, and these questions that we're asking are just opening the floodgates for the truth to come through. We also have the Temple Building to compare the great fire information to. The Temple Building was the tallest building in Chicago, you know, the building that was owned by the which still meets today.
And it also holds the narrative where the primary designer of the building and the primary representative, both of them, not one, both died during the construction, which we have seen so many times. Where we also know from episode 58 that they moved to the new in 1926 where it's time to take this up a notch and really start to put this whole thing into perspective and also go even deeper than we did in our last episode because there is so much more to this story that we didn't cover yet. When the new building supposedly replaced an even earlier venue on the exact same site. So what happened to the one? It opened in November of nineteen o three when the fire broke out one month later in December of nineteen o three.
One month later? During a performance and caused six hundred and two deaths and ranks as the number one worst theater fire in The United States even to this day. For nearly one hundred years, this fire was the deadliest fire in one building in US history, now being number one. And get this. This theater was supposedly fireproof.
One month after being opened, it burns down. This is incredible. And we have seen this exact story before from our Saint Louis episodes when they say that the fire started due to lighting the curtain on fire. So this curtain starts on fire, and the fire exits were locked or hidden, which sounds like a plan opinion. Even if this wasn't a event.
Let's think logically here. In 1871, during the Chicago fire, when 17,500 stone and brick buildings were magically burned to the ground, even though we know that stone and brick does burn to the ground from house fires, which is why you have stone and brick fireplaces inside your living room. And everyone all over the world remains extremely calm, and your neighbors don't seem to mind either. It doesn't and never will spread to their house or to the basement. It won't make your house look like a bomb went off.
And I guess I should say don't try this at home, but come on. You get the point. Do you think that it's possible that they possibly by chance might not have been able to escape their homes or they were maybe up too high in one of the buildings to escape? Do you think that a group of people may have had some trouble escaping their building? Do you think that possible that more than one of the 17,500 buildings somewhere in Chicago that looked like they were exploded might have crumbled on top of someone?
Or is it even possible that maybe a single issue might have came up anywhere like this theater did where the door was jammed? They say that the Chicago fire started at 08:30PM. Do you think that maybe some people were sleeping and didn't realize there was a fire until it was too late. Were there possibly some individuals that had a broken leg or were disabled? Was there not a hospital with people in it that possibly couldn't escape the smoke?
And if they did, where did everybody go? The fire was supposedly engulfing the roads and spreading to the next building. All 300,000 people would have been burnt to a crisp if the mainstream history tale was true. It would have been one massive bonfire, yet basically everybody survived. My point is how is it mathematically possible that one building kills 600 people, yet 17,500 buildings killed 300 people?
At which point does everyone understand that we are being lied to, and the mainstream history from only a hundred and fifty years ago is a lie. So how can you believe something that the same people are telling us about from over 1,000 ago? And how can we believe anything that we're being told by this group of people that lie constantly? Nearly every single one of these great fires happened in the eighteen hundreds right after the 1776 date, which was when The USA began. The main great fire that predates the 1776 date falls on 01/06 which is the London great fire, which is where The USA originally came from.
And I'm guessing based on all of my research that this date of one is a code and not a real event. Because I'm about to take this thing to a whole another level from this point until the end of the episode, and we are going to destroy their narrative. So I hope you all have your popcorn ready. It's time to make our own history. Here we go.
The great fire of London in one six destroyed 13,200 houses, 87 parish churches, the royal exchange, Guildhall, and Saint Paul's Cathedral, 13,200 houses. So there must have been thousands of casualties. Right? Six people died in the great fire of London, and this is when we know we have found something huge. When we go to New York, where they had the great fire of New York destroying 700 buildings.
And which year was that in again? I forget. Can somebody clear this up for me? Am I right, or am I definitely right that this operation worldwide began in 1776. The great fire of New York happened in 1776, holding only two deaths, covering 700 buildings.
Two people died in the entire great fire of New York. Two, seven hundred buildings, and only two people in 1776. So what's the total at? We have one building in Chicago holding 600 deaths. I have shown three great fires so far, Chicago, New York, and London, with a total of three hundred and eight deaths that have a total of 31,490 buildings destroyed.
This is impossible for 31,490 buildings to be engulfed in flames with basically nobody dying. Three hundred and eight deaths to be exact. If you trusted the narrative before today, this day will be the final day that it is trusted ever again. Because in 1916, Paris, Texas also had a great fire where it destroyed everything in its path besides people because it destroyed 1,440 old world buildings where only three people died, moving the total old world buildings that were destroyed up to 32,930. 32,930 buildings gone.
And could you imagine what these buildings, what these cities looked like with the mainstream narrative admitting that these buildings were all here, and now they're gone. So, again, 32,930 buildings are gone with a total of now only 311 Making this extremely clear that we are being lied to about something. Either the death totals were actually way higher than what we're being told or these cities were basically empty. I've had a lot of people comment that they want me to include Canada and incorporate it into my research, and I can't wait to do that right now. Toronto, Canada, you're up.
You had a great fire in nineteen o four, destroying over 100 old world buildings. We know these were built by a much more advanced previous civilization, buildings that would make zero sense in our fabricated main historical timeline where we are given a massive fire, destroying everything in its path with a total of zero deaths. Nobody, not a single person, not one person inhaled too much smoke for two to ten minutes. In a great fire that took down over 100 buildings in 1852, we are given the great fire of Montreal, Canada, where it left 10,000 people homeless when 57,000 people in 1852 had hundreds of buildings, which isn't logical at all or isn't mathematically probable in itself. If you think that Donkeys Incorporated saddled up in the early half of the eighteen hundreds and knocked out massive cities for only 57,000 people, I think it's time to reconsider what you've been told.
When within a few hours, one quarter of Montreal was destroyed, and yet again, nobody died. Nobody. Destroying almost half of the city's houses. In 1852, they all evacuated perfectly and ran to safety. Everybody, not a single person had an issue?
Do you understand what it would take for a fire to spread from house to house rapidly? We all understand that this fire would be massive. I know I'm being brutally honest, but a lot of people would have died. This would have been extremely catastrophic. This would not be a case of zero death.
In fact, it would have been nowhere near zero deaths, and we all know this. This narrative of zero casualties is simply not the true history of our past, where we are also told that 1,100 houses burned down. Nobody had an issue getting away from these fires, not a single person. Fires that supposedly swept the streets to spread to the next house over and over in 1852. How were they just escaping this situation?
You would think that somebody would have died from inhaling too much smoke. Now this tells us 1,100 houses burned down, but leaves out the buildings. So let's just estimate that it was around the same as Toronto, adding another 100 buildings to that 1,100, moving the total buildings destroyed from these great fires to 34,230 buildings destroyed and only 311 And remember, there are hundreds of great fire narratives that happened in the city near you. The mainstream history is suggesting that we are supposed to believe at this point that 110 buildings have to go down in flames for us to record one death. If this was one death per 22 buildings destroyed in these great fires, we would be at a much more realistic death total of one thousand five hundred and fifty five deaths, which is 1 the amount that we're being told.
When realistically, it should be flipped, we should realistically have less death today per building than they would in the eighteen hundreds since we have cars, phones, proper firefighters, and the rest. To say that zero people in the eighteen hundreds from a great fire that swept through the entire city, leaving the end result looking like massive bombs went off multiple times is mathematically impossible. This is not a realistic narrative at all. And now that we have looked into this, compared it to other situations, shown factual evidence that they are lying in all of this. I wanna give my opinion on what happened.
I think that the population worldwide was basically zero in the early eighteen hundreds, and I'm gonna go into great detail on this in an upcoming episode. The previous civilization's population around the world before 1776, I would say 100 prior to 1776 based on the condition that these buildings were in. It would put it at around a hundred years, realistically. It couldn't have been thousands of years. These buildings would have just been a mess, just from the nature growing all over it and inside.
But I believe the worldwide population in what we call the '15 or 16 hundreds was massive. I believe that the technology was much more advanced than what we have today, And we are giving back a very small percentage of this technology and told that it's brand new. And we all get excited and believe it. We are told that we are advancing when really we're just going around and around, getting the same exact technology as last time or less than the previous civilization. And this is all based on control.
The fact that they wrote these fake stories and made it so blatantly obvious that they are fake, saying that zero peep in massive fires, destroying all of their homes, all of their buildings over and over and over. It really makes me think that they were just waiting for somebody to find this information, like it's some sort of test or some strange game because it really is just so obvious once you see the lie. Now knowing what we know about the great fires, I'm going to cover a few more things. Here we have the great fire of Detroit in eighteen o five, which was twenty nine years after The USA came around, and also twenty nine years after the New York great fire in 1776. Notice, nearly all of these great fires are happening after that date, and they tell us that nearly everything was destroyed.
But yet again, nobody died. Where it starts in the stable again, and yet again, not a single Everything is destroyed. Nobody And this reminds me of the repeating narrative where they tell us that everything was built in a year perfectly over and over and over all over the world by a guy and his donkey riding team with no power tools, no machines, no training. The stone shipping company coordinate the delivery right on time. The mud trails and the rain were never an issue.
The freezing winters, they just told them to get over it and toughen up. And they get the whole building or cathedral done with no issues done in seven months. This kind of stuff is so repetitive in just a different way. These narratives hold patterns, and this is one of them. These fire narratives are all connected, and I don't personally think that they were fires.
I think they were bomb explosives. They were deliberate attacks on the old world buildings to hide our true past, our true history, which is exactly why we are all so confused as to where we are and what we're doing here. I really hope you all enjoyed learning about these great oh, oh, wait. What is this? Detroit only had 600 people during this massive great fire?
What did 600 people need hundreds of buildings for in eighteen o five? Well, the math doesn't lie, and it never will. These 600 people did not build these buildings. And I was gonna end this episode right there, but I just wanna make sure this is not a debate at all and an episode that everyone can remember. 1916 Phoenix, great fire.
80 buildings destroyed, one death. Miami, Florida, nineteen o one, 2300 and 68 buildings gone to the fire. Only seven deaths from thousands of buildings. Only seven deaths. Houston, great fire of nineteen twelve.
The fire claimed zero lives but caused an estimated $7,000,000 in damage to property, equating to $237,000,000 today, and nobody died. I hope you all have a great rest of your day. I'll be back very soon with much more. See you.
@myhiddenvalue - Not A Number
That wouldn't surprise me https://t.co/yeUffZYWa8
Video Transcript AI Summary
What if I told you that a vaccine was secretly laced with a hormone to cause infertility was given to hundreds of thousands of women and girls without their knowledge? What if I told you that a vaccine that was banned in the West for killing girls was pushed on African girls making them 10 times more likely to die? And what if I told you that the man behind all of this funding it, promoting it, has just had his legal immunity stripped in Kenya? Bill Gates through the WHO has funded programs that have been exposed as dangerous, unethical, and deadly. In 02/2013, the World Health Organization launched a neonatal neonatal tetanus campaign in Kenya claiming to protect newborns from deadly infections. But the vaccines contained h c g hormones, a hormone vital in pregnancy chemically bonded to the tetanus vaccine. What were they for?
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What if I told you that a vaccine was secretly laced with a hormone to cause infertility was given to hundreds of thousands of women and girls without their knowledge? What if I told you that a vaccine that was banned in the West for killing girls was pushed on African girls making them 10 times more likely to die? And what if I told you that the man behind all of this funding it, promoting it, has just had his legal immunity stripped in Kenya? This isn't a conspiracy theory. This did happen, and the evidence is undeniable.
Bill Gates through the WHO has funded programs that have been exposed as dangerous, unethical, and deadly. And it's time the world started asking some very serious questions. In 02/2013, the World Health Organization launched a neonatal neonatal tetanus campaign in Kenya claiming to protect newborns from deadly infections. But doctors started noticing something very strange. Many women in this vaccination campaign could no longer carry a pregnancy to term.
Suspicious, these doctors took these vials and took them for testing in independent labs. The vaccines contained h c g hormones, a hormone vital in pregnancy chemically bonded to the tetanus vaccine. These vaccines weren't just about tetanus. So what were they for?
Speaker 1: We cannot afford to trust WHO anymore, your excellency. In twenty fourteen, twenty fifteen, WHO brought tetanus eradication campaign in our country. The vaccine that was used is a different type of a tetanus vaccine that is a fertility regulating vaccine. Where they take tetanus and combine it with a hormone called human chorionic gonadotropin that supports pregnancy. And when we inject a woman with that vaccine, she produces antibodies against that hormone and therefore is rendered sterile.
We are noticing an increase in the number of infertility cases among young couples who you examine and they are normal but cannot get children. Or couples who are losing three, four, five pregnancies before they can carry any pregnancy to term. We were able to expose this, and, we have even published a paper that is available.
Speaker 0: But it doesn't stop there. Let's talk more about the DTP vaccine, the world's most popular vaccine thanks to Bill Gates and the WHO. In the nineteen eighties, the vaccine was banned in The United States and Europe after studies showed it caused brain damage and even death. While it was replaced with a safer version in these countries, the older, deadlier versions were still being distributed to children in Africa. When Danish scientists studied more than thirty years of vaccination records in Africa, they found a chilling discovery.
Girls who received the DTP vaccine were 10 times more likely to die than children that were unvaccinated. But these girls weren't dying from tetanus, diphtheria, or pertussis. They were dying from anemia, pneumonia, dysentery, and the diseases that the vaccine left them more vulnerable to. This isn't just about bad science. It's a pattern of unethical experiments on vulnerable populations.
Vaccines that were deemed too dangerous for the West pushed in Africa under the guise of philanthropy. And who's funding this? Bill Gates, the same man whose foundation controls much of the World Health Organization's budget. The same man who just lost his immunity for prosecution in Kenya. Knowledge is power, and this is why we must question the narrative, the motives, and demand accountability.
Bill Gates and the WHO must answer for these actions, and we, the people, must stand together for transparency and justice. If you believe the world needs to know the truth, share this video, and let's make this conversation so it can't be silenced.
@pa49932 - KP
@jacksonhinklle IT LITERALLY CANT BE https://t.co/xa76zuPenJ
Video Transcript AI Summary
On this episode the speaker explains that 'It takes two different tools to take it apart. It takes a Torx key and an Allen key.' After taking a shot, he outlines the steps: 'remove the bolt, remove the magazine, grab my Allen key, hit the two bolts on the bottom, put those away,' then 'grab my Torx key, remove the scope, put everything in the backpack, make sure I have everything, and make my way downtown.' He argues that 'his fine tuned motor function' and an 'extreme elevated heart rate' from adrenaline would make these actions difficult, noting 'we're not even gonna touch the topic of him assembling the rifle on top of the roof' with concerns about accuracy if reassembled. Regarding transport, he states 'the barrel broken down does not fit in this backpack' and 'the rifle stock... doesn't fit. It sticks out.' Even if placed in pants, 'these are still so long broken down that he would not be able to walk straight.'
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: On this episode of You Might Be A Dumb Motherfucker, this is my rifle. It takes two different tools to take it apart. It takes a Torx key and an Allen key. Now if I take a shot and immediately disassemble this, I have to remove the bolt, remove the magazine, grab my Allen key, hit the two bolts on the bottom, put those away in the Allen key, grab my Torx key, remove the scope, put everything in the backpack, make sure I have everything, and make my way downtown. K?
Which is gonna take a lot longer for him than it is for me, especially because his fine tuned motor function, something as simple as grabbing an Allen key to a little bolt is gonna be extremely impaired due to a dump of adrenaline throughout his bloodstream. An extreme elevated heart rate is gonna make these fine tuned skills extremely difficult. Mean, just for him to think and analyze of what needs to be done to disassemble this rifle and get away would be difficult. We're not even gonna touch the topic of him assembling the rifle on top of the roof, which if you reassemble a rifle and you take a cold dead shot, it's not gonna be a 100% accurate. K?
Or the fact that he disassembled this after taking a shot, which the rifle's gonna be hot, he found no gloves. There's just so many inconsistencies that just makes zero sense. I mean, I'm still working on this, and I have taken this rifle apart a thousand times. And now he has to put the pieces of the rifle into a backpack, and this is a gigantic backpack. Shout out, Wolfpack.
Best backpacks on the fucking Anyways, as you can see, this barrel broken down does not fit in this backpack, and this is a big boy. Way bigger than one he was carrying. Okay? I put the rifle stock in here, guess what? It doesn't fit.
It sticks out. Now let's just say for sake of argument that he put these in his pant leg and he was walking. These are still so long broken down that he would not be able to walk straight. He wouldn't be able to bend his legs. Doesn't make fucking sense.
@DisrespectedThe - The Disrespected Trucker
Is anything real anymore? https://t.co/Hia2253pFo
Video Transcript AI Summary
A breakthrough in lab-grown meat is showcased by an Israeli tech company, where a piece of meat has been printed in three dimensions. The process begins with stem cells taken from a cow, which are then cultured in a laboratory setting. These cells are fed a specialized nutrient solution that supports rapid multiplication. Once there are enough cells, they are ready to be three-dimensionally printed. A computer oversees the entire operation, determining not only the shape of the meat but also the distribution of fat and muscle. The engineers have already produced a steak through this method.
Although not yet ready to eat, the meat is described as alive in a sense: under a microscope, tiny muscle fibers can be observed moving. The timeline suggests that in about a month, this lab-grown steak could be prepared, cooked, and served on a dinner table. In comparison to traditional methods, Wagyu beef, which can require years to produce, is implied to be vastly slower and more expensive. The three-dimensional printing technology could reduce the production time dramatically, stating that the process now takes only a few minutes.
When fully prepared and served, the expectation is that the synthetic product could be indistinguishable from real meat, with no noticeable difference in taste or texture mentioned beyond the assertion that it would appear the same as conventional meat. However, the current reality is that this technology remains extremely expensive, so it is not something that consumers will encounter in stores in the immediate future. The message ends with a direct question to the audience: what about you—would you try it?
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Can you believe it? This piece of meat was actually printed in three d. It looks, feels, and even tastes like real beef. An Israeli tech company made this amazing discovery, and the process is as fascinating as the result. They start start by taking stem cells from a cow and growing them in a lab.
These cells are fed a special nutrient solution, which helps them multiply quickly. Once there are enough cells, they're ready to be three d printed. The cool part? A computer controls everything, even the shape of the meat and how much fat and muscle it has. The engineers have already printed a steak.
While it's not ready to eat yet, it's alive in a way. Under a microscope, you can see tiny muscle fibers moving. In just about a month, this lab grown steak could be cooked and served on your dinner table. Normally, it takes years to produce expensive and rare Wagyu beef. But with this three d printing technology, the process only takes a few minutes.
When it's fully prepared and served, you wouldn't even notice the difference between this synthetic and the real meat. However, at the moment, this technology is still extremely expensive, so it's not something you'll see in stores anytime soon. But what about you? Would you try it?
@HorrorGorl - Tired Peasant
Maybe this guy was telling the truth…. https://t.co/KAgWMBQZLe
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 states that the Andromedans have 1,833 individuals living underground between 100 and 200 miles beneath the surface. They have lifespans of thousands of years, are carnivorous, and are not friendly to mankind, at least the ones that are here. They eat living humans, not dead ones, with a preference for children. They claim there are other groups who say not to talk about the reptilians, but Speaker 1 says otherwise. According to the Andromedans, these beings are responsible for 31,712 children disappearing in the last twenty-five years from the United States, and these children were food. Speaker 1 adds that 3,000 children in Westchester County, New York have vanished in the last five years, asking why this is happening and why people remain in denial.
Speaker 0 asks how these beings are able to come up from underground and do this. Speaker 1 explains that they have cooling systems everywhere that are aided by the Grays, and there are groups within the higher echelon that help them acquire this. In addition, human beings abduct the kids and get them to the Grey Zoo, which in turn hands them to the Alpha drug contest, as part of the deal. They won’t come up as long as humans feed them down there. Speaker 1 reiterates that it’s about human beings selling themselves out, describing the echelon attitude as the needs of the few outweighing the needs of humanity, and that this is not right.
Speaker 0 comments that humanity will have to rise up and take a stand, suggesting people turn off their televisions, get in their cars, and fire everyone in Washington, DC who knows and does nothing. They argue that apathy must end, or the way we live will end. They emphasize that they are not speaking from a fear space, but from anger about the apathy. Speaker 1 complains that lectures try to tell people, but others want to stand up and fight; indications are everywhere, saying the truth is now an obscure thing and the lie is the norm. Speaker 0 apologizes for seeming crazy, and Speaker 1 reassures that they are not.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So the Andromanans tell you that the Alfred Garrisonians are here now. Where There
Speaker 1: are 1,833 of them that have been living underground between one hundred and two hundred miles beneath the surface. They've been here some of them have been here a long, long time. They have lifespans that are thousands of years. They're carnivorous. They are not friendly to mankind.
At least the ones that are here.
Speaker 0: Are you saying canoe is that eat humans? Yes.
Speaker 1: And they need to be they won't eat a dead human. It has to be alive at the time of the killing. Their preference is children. You know? And we've been told we've been told, you shouldn't talk about that.
You know? There are other people who say, well, you better not talk about the reptilians. Well, you know, bull. You know? Why not?
According to the Andromedans, they're responsible for 31,712 children disappearing in the last twenty five years from The United States. These children were food. And I'm supposed to just shut up and not say anything about it because people don't wanna hear it. That's tough. That's tough.
You know, Westchester County, in the last five years, 3,000 children in Westchester County, New York have vanished without a trace. Where are they going? Why are we allowing this to happen? And why should people stay in denial about it?
Speaker 0: Now how are they able to do this? How are they able to how are they able to do it? How are they able to come up out of this from underground and do it? Do they have There
Speaker 1: cooling systems everywhere that are being helped by the Grays and also there are groups within the higher echelon that are actually helping them acquire this.
Speaker 0: So human beings are abducting the kids and getting them to the Grey Zoo in turn give them to the
Speaker 1: Alpha drug contest. That's right. That's part of the deal. They won't come up as long as we feed them down there. You understand?
It's about human beings selling themselves out. The echelon attitude here, the needs of the few outweigh the needs of humanity. And sorry, that just isn't right. You know? But it's gonna have to be humanity that's gonna rise up and take the stand.
You're just gonna have to turn off your televisions. They're gonna have to get in their car. They're gonna have to fire everybody in Washington DC that knows and does nothing, and they're gonna have to do something. You know, this apathy's gotta end. Otherwise, the way we live is gonna end.
Period. I mean, that's the bottom line. You know? And and I'm not coming from a fear space. I'm really quite angry about the apathy and the fact that, you know, when people give lectures and try to tell them, people wanna stand up and fight with them.
Look at what's happening around us. The indications are everywhere. Everywhere. The truth is now an obscure thing. You know, the lie is the norm.
There's something wrong here. What's wrong with this picture?
Speaker 0: Sorry if I'm getting crazy. No. You're not. You're you're express