reSee.it - Related Video Feed

- We need to stop trusting the experts. - We were told at the beginning of COVID, don't look at any data yourself. Don't do any investigating yourself. Just trust the experts. - And trusting the experts is not a feature of science. It's not a feature of democracy. It's a feature of religion, and it's a feature of totalitarianism. - In democracies, we have the obligation, and it's one of the burdens of citizenship, to do our own research and make our own determination. - And we're gonna give people gold standard science. We're gonna publish our protocols in advance. - We're going to tell people what we're doing, and then we're gonna use data, and we're gonna publish the peer reviews, which is never published by CDC studies. We're going to publish any time that we can the raw data, and then we're going to require replication of every study, which never happens at NIH now. That's something new that we're bringing in, is that every study will be replicated.

The speaker expresses concerns about the World Health Organization (WHO) and its proposed pandemic treaty. They question the WHO's ability to learn from past mistakes and argue that giving the organization more power could lead to catastrophic errors. The speaker discusses the WHO's structure, funding, and influence, highlighting the role of external sources such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. They criticize the WHO's reliance on private-public partnerships and claim that member states have limited input in decision-making. The speaker also raises concerns about the WHO's ability to define information and determine what is considered settled science. They emphasize the importance of considering the potential costs to democracy and individual freedoms.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a missed opportunity to educate the public about scientific concepts. The speaker believes that explanations were lacking, particularly regarding the meaning of statistics like "95% effectiveness" for tests and vaccines. Different scientific methodologies were not adequately explained, leading to unnecessary controversies. The wrong people were given a platform, and only epidemiologists should have been consulted. The speaker emphasizes that scientists are not infallible, objective, or immune to influence. Instead, they should strive for honesty in a specific sense.

There is a discussion about the control of information and how false information can be challenged. Social media platforms are urged to take responsibility and partner with scientific and health communities to provide accurate information. The idea of government enforcement against fake news is also mentioned. Shutting down information is seen as impractical, and instead, flooding accurate information and relying on trusted sources are suggested strategies. The video then shifts to a description of a past pandemic, where millions of people died, the global economy suffered, and societal impacts were long-lasting.

"There's the transformative, if I might use that word, experience that we've all had now in year five of COVID." The speaker says, "The thought that we won't have another pandemic, I think is naive at best and just not completely unrealistic at worst." They add, "I'm convinced that there will be another pandemic and that's the reason why we have to be perpetually prepared to prevent the terrible impact of a pandemic."

The speaker criticizes the justification for implementing COVID-19 measures based on a high case fatality rate that turned out to be inaccurate. They argue that this rushed response disregarded ethical and regulatory norms, such as informed consent. The speaker, labeled as far-right and a conspiracy theorist, identifies themselves as a physician and scientist involved in the development of the technology behind the vaccines. They express concern about the disregard for safety and efficacy standards, as well as the lack of transparency in defining these terms. The speaker suggests that the dissemination of misleading information is a form of psychological manipulation.

The speaker believes that the COVID pandemic was a test to see how much control the government could have over individuals in a free society. They argue that the ultimate goal is to transform free and democratic societies into totalitarian ones, stripping people of their rights. The speaker urges people to stop giving their governments the benefit of the doubt and to stop complying with their actions. They emphasize the importance of speaking up and rebelling against the government's control.

There was never a scientific consensus on many topics related to COVID-19. Before the pandemic, most scientists held views contrary to the prevailing narrative. A small group of influential scientific bureaucrats took control of the public discourse, dominating media and influencing politicians. This led to a catastrophic response to the pandemic, and the repercussions will be felt for a long time.

There will be other health crises in our country, and there will be other gurus who will undermine the trust of our citizens on a large scale. Some may even target our institutions. We are here to make laws, to protect the most vulnerable, and to remind everyone of the obvious. The obvious is based on science. We can debate ideas, but we cannot claim expertise we do not have and put the safety of our fellow citizens at risk for personal gain.

Speaker 0 asserts that the design of the molecular structures in vaccines and injections has no purpose other than to injure and kill. Drawing on 30 years of experience in rational drug design, they say every component in a vial is chosen by someone with specific objectives (e.g., how quickly absorbed, how long it lasts, where it distributes in the body) and that these components are not random or natural products. They declare the ingredients to be toxic by design and intentionally harmful. This, they claim, fits with what they call “the lie” about the pandemic, arguing there wasn’t a real pandemic. According to Speaker 0, the pandemic’s purpose was to damage the economy, train people to comply under a mock emergency, and compel people to get vaccinated. They warn that if people do nothing, speak up less, and simply follow directives, they will lose their freedom and then their lives. They allege that a self-appointed group of very rich people desires a much smaller global population than 8,000,000,000 people, and they claim to be able to deduce the script behind these events. The speaker urges listeners to start talking to anyone and everyone relentlessly, insisting that this situation is not going away. They warn that without protest and refusal, people will first lose their freedom and then their lives.

The speakers discussed the lack of transparency and potential risks associated with COVID-19 vaccines, highlighting concerns about vaccine injuries, data manipulation, and censorship. They emphasized the need for truth-seeking and accountability, urging individuals to speak out against misinformation and government-led narratives. The overall message conveyed was a call for increased transparency, protection of individual rights, and the importance of upholding democracy in the face of global health crises.

The speaker raises concerns about the World Health Organization's power to declare and maintain a public health emergency, issue legally binding recommendations, control information, and lack accountability. They argue that without open debate and differing opinions, there can be no science, democracy, legal proceedings, or justice. They emphasize that if one authority has predetermined results, there can be no proper scientific or decision-making process, nor any democracy. The speaker asserts that these issues violate international law and basic principles.

The speaker discusses pandemic preparedness as a new "forever war" driven by an industry focused on collecting potential zoonotic spillover bugs for weaponization. They criticize gain of function research and highlight the authoritarian response to pandemics, including censorship and control of civil rights. The speaker suggests criminalizing gain of function research and calls for transparency. They identify key individuals to depose, including Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, and others involved in the cover-up.

The speaker claims that the pandemic response was a propaganda war orchestrated by the US security state. They argue that the public health protocols for managing a respiratory virus pandemic were ignored, and individuals in positions of power were coerced into implementing policies contrary to scientific knowledge. The motivations behind this propaganda war are suggested to be covering up the US's role in creating the virus, diverting blame to China, and benefiting pharmaceutical companies. The speaker highlights irrational decisions, such as vaccinating everyone despite knowing that older individuals with chronic conditions were at higher risk. They argue that the public health establishment was manipulated, threatened, or propagandized into spreading lies. The speaker concludes that the pandemic response has been a scam imposed on the American public and possibly the world.

The speaker discusses the committee's requirement for clearer communication of adverse side effects of mRNA injections to prevent the spread of disinformation. They claim that the COVID pandemic was a test to see how far they could go in enforcing compliance on free individuals. The goal, according to the speaker, is to transform free and democratic societies into totalitarian ones, stripping people of their fundamental rights. They urge people to stop giving their governments the benefit of the doubt and to resist and rebel against the globalitarian elite. The speaker promises to use their voice to break the psychological abuse and expose the lies of the criminals behind it.

The speaker believes the COVID pandemic exposed the failure and corruption of the global elite, who maintain power by controlling information and suppressing dissident voices. They claim the elite overhyped fear of a virus they helped create to push gene therapy and gain control, while sabotaging early treatment, denying natural immunity and vaccine injuries, causing economic devastation, and destroying lives. The speaker has assembled dissident voices who have paid a price for offering a different perspective. These individuals come from diverse backgrounds but share the attribute that their eyes have been opened.

When COVID hit, the initial lockdown was meant to slow the spread, but it led to unforeseen consequences like educational gaps and mental health issues. There was a lack of planning for reopening schools and addressing the collateral damage. The speaker emphasizes the need for a better readiness plan for future pandemics and questions the role of government intervention. They advocate for less government involvement and more reliance on science.

The speakers discuss the potential effects of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Speaker 1 explains that the idea of DNA fragments and reverse transcription in vaccines is a distinct possibility proven in vitro (in the laboratory) but not as solidly established in real-life humans. He says the machinery exists to reverse transcribe the synthetic mRNA in “these gene products” but notes skepticism about certain public figures and officials who allegedly ignored earlier communications. He cites Denis Rancourt’s data, claiming the vaccine has killed 17 million people and that the injury-to-kill ratio is 34.4. He translates this to global totals of 602 million injured or killed, with approximately 700,000 Americans killed and 2.5 million injured in the United States, describing this as an unprecedented injury-to-kill ratio in medicine and military contexts. He asserts that deadly gene products should have been removed from the market and from Florida two years ago. Speaker 0 asks whether Latipo was alerted two years ago and whether he ignored the warnings. Speaker 1 confirms that Latipo, Ashley Moody, and DeSantis did not respond to communications over the past two years, but notes that Latipo is now taking some action. The conversation shifts to how people can respond health-wise. Speaker 1 contends that health care systems and governments are corrupt, claiming the government has spent trillions of dollars to capture healthcare systems and push dangerous narratives. He urges listeners to leave the conventional healthcare system, describing it as corrupt and implying that healthcare professionals are silenced or fired for speaking out. He promotes an alternative health approach through a parallel system and mentions an emergency medical kit intended to address multiple dangerous diseases and scenarios, asserting that timely access to certain drugs is limited through ordinary medical channels. Throughout, Speaker 1 emphasizes drastic distrust of mainstream medical and governmental institutions, urging viewers to seek alternative health solutions and to prepare for potential health crises. He repeats that the traditional healthcare system is compromised and advocates a shift toward a different healthcare approach and emergency preparedness, including access to medications outside standard channels.

The speaker expresses the importance of getting answers regarding certain actions during a difficult time. Another speaker questions what information will be spread, mentioning individuals who have gathered evidence suggesting that there is no biological or statistical support for the idea of an RNA virus pandemic. They argue that the biology does not align with the theory of a virus being released in Wuhan and spreading globally. They suggest the need for an alternative explanation for the signals that led to the conclusion of a pandemic.

The speaker believes that the COVID pandemic was a test to see how much control the government could exert over individuals in a free society. They argue that the ultimate goal is to transform democratic societies into totalitarian ones, stripping people of their rights and making them dependent on a global elite. The speaker urges people to stop giving their governments the benefit of the doubt and to stop rationalizing their actions. They emphasize that compliance will not lead to freedom and encourage people to speak up and resist.

The speaker asserts that the pandemic was not simply a health crisis but an experiment framed as an emergency and a crisis. Behind the veil of fear, there was claimed to be a global-scale rehearsal, with unprecedented alignment as many countries accepted the same rules at the same time. The speaker contends that entire populations gave up their freedom in the name of collective action. What appeared to be a response to a health problem was described as, in fact, an experiment—a test to measure obedience and to determine how far humanity would follow orders without questioning. The speaker mentions lockdowns and asks, “Lockdowns, work again?” while suggesting that the next rehearsal might not involve masks or vaccines. The prediction is that future rehearsals could come through channels such as energy, food, or even faith. The central claim is that the significance lies not in the crisis itself but in how people react to it, with the reaction said to have already been observed or noted. The closing question posed is, “What do you think about that?”

The speaker discusses the impact of social media on the credibility of science during the COVID-19 pandemic. They highlight the danger of amplifying pseudoscientists in official positions, leading to confusion and misinformation. The focus shifts to the issue of public health versus science, emphasizing the need for transparency and honesty in the field.

There was never a scientific consensus on many COVID-related topics. Before the pandemic, most scientists held opposing views. A small, influential group of scientific bureaucrats seized control of the public narrative, dominating media and influencing politicians. This led to a disastrous response to COVID, and the repercussions will be felt for a long time.

The speaker claims that the COVID-19 pandemic was not a result of incompetence or lack of knowledge, but rather a planned event. They accuse various groups, including philanthropaths, scientists, NGOs, and governments, of being involved in the deception. The speaker suggests that the pandemic was used as an opportunity for control and profit, with corporations, regulators, and media playing a role. They criticize the censorship of dissenting voices and the coercion of individuals to get vaccinated. The speaker urges people not to let those responsible for the pandemic escape accountability.

The speaker discusses how quick action and isolation could have extinguished COVID-19, citing the success with SARS. They criticize political interference and the WHO for mishandling the pandemic, leading to a global crisis. Despite pointing out these failures, the speaker feels unappreciated for providing factual information.