reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The era of vaccines is over. The transcript argues that people have been vaccinating since the 1700s, when bloodletting was state-of-the-art medicine. It says that in that period, they did not even have a theory of viruses and bacteria; instead, they relied on crude practices. The transcript claims that this technology has failed. It further states that it has been revealed to cause catastrophic harms in the population. The transcript then contrasts treatments for bacteria and viruses by saying that the treatment for bacteria is antibiotics, and the treatment for viruses should be antivirals. On that basis, the transcript concludes that vaccines have no place in medicine going forward. It presents this as the endpoint: “That’s where we’re gonna get to.” The transcript also frames the near future as a period of conflict, stating that there will be “a lot of hard fighting between now and arriving at what the data actually show.” It asserts that the “data” already show the conclusion that vaccines should not have a place in medicine going forward, and that the main difference is the time required for acceptance of what it claims the data already indicate. Overall, the transcript’s main points are: vaccines are said to be obsolete (“The era of vaccines is over”); vaccination is described as having started in the 1700s under medical conditions where bloodletting was standard and there was no theory of viruses and bacteria; the transcript claims the vaccine approach has failed and has caused catastrophic harms; it asserts a division of medical treatments where antibiotics are for bacteria and antivirals are for viruses; and it ends by stating that vaccines should be removed from medicine going forward, with ongoing hard fighting until the conclusions match the data it says are already available.

The speaker expresses their opposition to being labeled as an anti-vaxxer and clarifies that they are against fraud. They state that those who did not receive the vaccine will not resort to violence, but rather it is the individuals who feel betrayed and poisoned that may become violent. The speaker predicts that the elites will eventually face consequences for their actions, as history has shown. They emphasize the importance of whistleblowing and coming forward to avoid personal harm. The speaker references the French Revolution as an example of what can happen when the elites are disconnected from the people.

The speaker expresses frustration with people who blindly follow vaccine recommendations without questioning their safety. They claim that the Canadian government lied about the long-term effects and efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine, citing a contract that acknowledges the unknowns and potential adverse effects. The speaker shares a personal experience of someone who initially dismissed their concerns but later suffered a vaccine injury. They vow to hold the Canadian government accountable and predict a rising wave of angry parents and individuals who will resist the World Health Organization's influence in Canada. The speaker concludes by asking if the audience is also fed up with the situation.

The speaker claims that an “agent’s” vaccines are “blinding the minds” of people, making them “stupid,” losing their intelligence, and that the vaccines are “killing people.” The speaker cites alleged health effects including myocarditis, strokes, heart attacks, athletes dying, and young people dying. The speaker emphasizes that the most dangerous part, according to them, is that “billions that have been injected” are “losing their minds.” They add that people are becoming “more and more controllable” because “they cannot say no.” The speaker describes the situation as “fantastic,” “brilliant,” and “nightmarish,” “horrible,” “diabolical,” and “satanic,” and says it “has got to be stopped.” The speaker argues that the brain “God gave to man” is what makes “man [be] man,” and claims that a process involves “vessels” that are very small and “clogging” them, which the speaker says “no one in the world is going to see.” They conclude by stating that Pfizer, BioNTech, and Moderna “know very well that they cannot be seen.”

When discussing the issue of vaccination, the speakers express frustration and blame towards the unvaccinated. They argue that the unvaccinated are causing problems and should be shamed, taxed, and held accountable for their choices. They emphasize the importance of getting vaccinated for the greater good of society and criticize those who spread misinformation. The speakers also highlight the impact of COVID-19 on hospitals and suggest that priority should be given to vaccinated individuals over the unvaccinated. They conclude by condemning those who oppose vaccinations and question their moral values.

Speaker 0: I don't have it because I don't want it. Speaker 1: I don't trust you. I need proof of vaccination to exist. Some of us resist the lies and pseudoscience on TV. The government abuses power, confuses and scares people. I may be wrong, but I won't complain. I'm a singer who uses my brain and middle finger. I won't take anything. Vaccine passports won't affect me. Hell no, I won't get it. Hell no, I don't trust the government. Hell no, I won't comply.

The speaker criticizes those who refuse to get vaccinated, portraying them as victims. They blame the unvaccinated for the current situation and express frustration towards their perceived lack of unity. The speaker argues that the unvaccinated are a minority and questions why they should have the same rights as the vaccinated. They suggest that the unvaccinated should face consequences such as exclusion from society, fines, and potential job loss. The speaker also warns that similar rules may eventually apply to those who are vaccinated.

The speaker argues that looking up “FDA licensed vaccines” and reviewing “6.1” in vaccine inserts on the FDA website shows that placebo trials “never” occurred, including for childhood vaccines. The speaker claims that these placebo trial details are contained in insert text that was “wrapped around a vaccine” but allegedly not shown to people due to lack of “informed consent,” and that experts may cite studies that the speaker says did not exist. The speaker further alleges that Tony Fauci lied about “six foot distancing,” and that “everyone at the CDC and the regulatory agencies” lied. The speaker also claims that Robert Kennedy Jr. stated that COVID vaccine efficacy claims about stopping transmission were lied about, referencing Rachel Maddow’s claim that if you take the vaccine “it stops with you,” and the speaker asserts “the virus stops with you bull crap” and “it does. And you heard that here,” followed by a claim that it “does not” based on what “we know.” The speaker says that FDA “has already admitted” these points and emphasizes a call to “start asking people to show their work” and to “see the evidence,” saying “Do not trust experts any longer” because “we’ve been lied to long enough.” The speaker expresses hope that a documentary will not be the last made and claims they do interviews by giving their opinions directly and not worrying about being edited “to make me look crazy,” arguing that audiences will decide for themselves. The speaker then discusses the “vaxxed versus unvaxxed” study, saying they worked to build a relationship with someone who wanted to “prove me wrong.” The speaker claims they took a risk and promised to trust whatever the study shows if it is published, and asserts that the study results will show “how bad it is when you do this study the right way.” The speaker claims the CDC has “done this study a thousand times” trying to prove vaccinated people are healthier and that it “can’t” be done, and that doing it “the right way” will reveal worse outcomes. Finally, the speaker frames the “inconvenient” study as inconvenient for panels, for the pharmaceutical industry that allegedly owns television stations, and for CDC and HHS leadership, concluding that they “aren’t going to take it anymore” and claiming “evidence like they have never, ever had before.”

The speaker emphasizes the importance of getting vaccinated, stating that those who refuse to do so are putting everyone at risk. They criticize the anti-vaxxers, describing them as a small fringe element that rejects science and resorts to racist and misogynistic attacks. The speaker asserts that these individuals should not have the power to influence government policies. They make it clear that if someone chooses not to get vaccinated, they should not expect to travel alongside vaccinated individuals and endanger them. The speaker urges others to condemn and correct these anti-vaxxers, expressing their unwavering commitment to the truth supported by science.

The speaker emphasizes the importance of getting vaccinated, stating that those who refuse to do so are putting everyone at risk. They criticize the anti-vaxxers, calling them a small fringe element that rejects science and resorts to racist and misogynistic attacks. The speaker asserts that these individuals do not have the power to dictate government policy. They urge people to get vaccinated if they want to travel on planes or trains with vaccinated individuals. The speaker encourages condemning and correcting those who oppose vaccination, and they express their determination to stand firm in their beliefs based on scientific evidence.

Unvaccinated individuals are the problem. The blame lies solely with them, not those who have been vaccinated. It's time to hold the unvaccinated accountable for the ongoing issues, as they pose a threat to public health. Vaccinated individuals are now having to wear masks to protect the unvaccinated, which feels unjust. This situation reflects a lack of responsibility among the unvaccinated, who act as if they can disregard the rules without consequence.

Speaker 0 acknowledges the belief that the vaccine is valuable and saves lives. However, they question whether those who hold this belief have been misled by the government. Speaker 0 appreciates the chance to address those who have received the vaccine and states that they understand their perspective. In response to the question of whether all those who got vaccinated are foolish, Speaker 0 simply answers affirmatively.

The speakers exchange pointed claims about vaccination status and social policy. Speaker 0 asserts that vaccinated people are the problem and that it is the unvaccinated who are responsible. Speaker 1 counters with a stance that the unvaccinated should be shamed and blamed, and asserts that it is time to start blaming the unvaccinated, not ordinary people. The dialogue emphasizes distrust of the unvaccinated, with Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 associating the unvaccinated with negative behavior and calling for punitive approaches. Speaker 1 argues that the unvaccinated include children and people acting like children, and contends that it’s time to stop tolerating “the idiots in this country” and to mandate vaccination. The speakers discuss shaming the unvaccinated and refuse to call them stupid or silly by implication, while also stating that those who are not vaccinated will “end up paying the price” and that the unvaccinated should be taxed or pay more for health care. Speaker 0 suggests treating the choice to remain unvaccinated like driving while intoxicated, implying it should be addressed with similar seriousness. Speaker 1 claims that only the unvaccinated are dying and condemns misinformation, urging shaming and shunning of those who spread it, calling for turning people away. The dialogue advocates exclusion for the unvaccinated: Speaker 0 says unvaccinated individuals should be denied entry to offices or places of business, and Speaker 1 argues that if you don’t get vaccinated, you can’t come to work. The phrase “Ew. Screw your freedom” expresses a rejection of individual freedom in this context. Speaker 1 contends that the unvaccinated have put everyone in a bad position and asserts that it is not a good place. The conversation ends with a provocative statement about freedom and power, declaring that “Freedom is a fragile thing, and it's never more than one generation away from extinction.” The closing lines add, “Ice of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God. They were wrong. Question everything.”

Our biggest enemy in America is our fellow Americans. We can't trust the unvaccinated. It's time to do what you're told, as this is not about freedom or personal choice. Walking around unvaccinated is psychotic, as it makes you an incubator for every variant. Our patience is wearing thin, and your refusal has cost us all. The unvaccinated overcrowd our hospitals, leaving no room for those in need. This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated.

Scott Adams, a prominent figure, has gained attention for his views on vaccines. He suggests that anti-vaxxers have come out on top due to their distrust of big companies and government. However, others argue that this is not a win, but rather a loss for humanity. They emphasize that everyone is a victim in this situation, and instead of dividing into winners and losers, they encourage unity against the manipulators and those who forced vaccinations. The hope is for people to awaken to the truth and work together moving forward. The question remains whether Scott Adams will change his approach in the future or continue to rely on expert opinions selectively.

The unvaccinated are the problem, period. They are the only ones to blame. This isn't shaming, it's the truth. It's time to blame the unvaccinated, not the regular folks. Anyone you come into contact with will blame you, as will the rest of us who have done the right thing by getting vaccinated because we can't trust the unvaccinated. All these vaccinated folks are gonna start wearing masks to protect the unvaccinated folks. You're punishing the vaccinated for the sins of the unvaccinated. The unvaccinated are basically saying, it's open season for me. We've been patient, but our patience is wearing thin. The rest of us are starting to get upset. It's not about freedom or personal choice.

There is skepticism towards sudden adult deaf syndrome and other claims linking health issues to various causes like Christmas trees or climate change. The speaker believes that these claims are meant to deceive and make people feel stupid. They argue that while there is a rise in unexplained deaths, the vaccine is not to blame. Many institutions and stakeholders have a vested interest in hiding potential side effects of the vaccine. Additionally, the speaker acknowledges the mental struggle for those who have taken the vaccine, as it is difficult to accept that it may have negative consequences for their health and the health of their children.

There is a discussion about how public trust in vaccination has changed since the pandemic. The speaker notes that years ago there were “five people in the world who were prepared to talk about the thorny issue of vaccination.” Post COVID, however, “half the adult population of the world are now saying, hold on, we don't trust you. You lied to us. It's not what you told us, safe and effective.” This skepticism extends to vaccines given to children, with the question, “Does this apply to all the other vaccines you're putting into my kids?” The speaker then asserts that “safety studies haven't been done,” suggesting that important research behind vaccines is incomplete or lacking. This leads to the claim that “they've created this mess for themselves.” Despite the frustration, the speaker emphasizes the moral weight of deception, stating, “it's really tough to lie. I mean, lying gets you into real trouble.”

Speaker 0 expresses clear personal hesitation about vaccines, stating that they are not jabbed and would not touch the experimental mRNA and gene therapy experiments, asserting there is a lot of concern about these technologies from many medical people. They reference political figures and media narratives, saying Kennedy in the United States will expose much of this material and that Donald Trump is keen to see it as well. Speaker 0 then recalls personal health concerns related to vaccination, mentioning friends who have experienced myocarditis, blood clots, strokes, and other problems after receiving the COVID jab, and emphasizes the idea of long-term effects being unknown. Speaker 1 counters by saying they still believe in vaccinations, but notes that no one on that side would discuss possible problems with vaccines, and they themselves got vaccinated multiple times and are now open to the idea that there might have been problems. They acknowledge the complexity of the issue and state they do not object to vaccines inherently. Speaker 0 clarifies their stance further, stating they are not a medical expert but their instinct was not to have the vaccine, and they acknowledge how difficult it was to avoid it since the state appeared to force people to receive it. Speaker 1 adds that their own vaccination status includes having been vaxxed several times, and they feel okay today, though they recognize the complexity of the situation and that long-term effects are uncertain. Speaker 0 then discusses the notion that the state and public health authorities pressured people to vaccinate, naming the NHS, Matt Hancock, and portraying the messaging as a duty to vaccinate “because you might kill granny,” mentioning Trudeau and the World Economic Forum Brigade as part of the broader narrative. Speaker 0 proposes an alternative approach: those who are vulnerable should isolate themselves. They reference Anders Tegnell’s approach in Sweden, which did not impose lockdowns. They claim Sweden’s economy hardly missed a heartbeat, in contrast to “ours,” and argue that the pandemic greatly disrupted young people’s lives and education, with knock-on effects described as huge. Speaker 0 concludes that those who made the lockdown decisions are not ready to admit they got it wrong, for a host of reasons.

The unvaccinated are the problem, period, and should be blamed. It's the truth, not shaming. The vaccinated can't trust the unvaccinated. The unvaccinated are the threat. Vaccinated people will wear masks to protect the unvaccinated, punishing the vaccinated for the sins of the unvaccinated. The unvaccinated are not behaving honorably, acting as if it's open season for them and they can do whatever they want. The unvaccinated are running around saying they don't care and are living free. Patience is wearing thin with the unvaccinated, a group that includes children and people acting like children. The vaccinated are getting upset with the unvaccinated. This is not about freedom or personal choice.

The speaker asserts that fellow Americans are the biggest enemy and the unvaccinated cannot be trusted. They state that now is the time to do what you're told, and it's not about freedom or personal choice. The speaker expresses frustration, stating that the refusal to vaccinate has cost everyone. One speaker contrasts the treatment of a vaccinated person having a heart attack with an unvaccinated person who took "horse goo." The speaker claims the unvaccinated overcrowd hospitals, overrun emergency rooms and ICUs, leaving no room for others. They call the unvaccinated "schmucks" and claim this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated and their freedom.

The speaker salutes unvaccinated individuals, calling them courageous for standing against a trillion-dollar propaganda machine and telling the government, bosses, jobs, and businesses to "off." The speaker believes everyone had a choice regarding vaccination, even if it meant facing tough decisions like losing a job, business, or family. They claim that vaccinated individuals "sold their soul" for a price, while the unvaccinated lost everything but kept their integrity. The speaker generally distrusts vaccinated people and trusts unvaccinated people. They believe that in a future pandemic, vaccinated individuals will throw others under the bus to protect themselves, their jobs, money, and titles.

The speaker questions whether the government was guessing or lying when they said that vaccinated individuals couldn't get the virus. The other speaker, who was part of the previous administration, acknowledges that there was evidence of natural reinfection during the global pandemic and that the vaccine was based on natural immunity. They suggest that the vaccine may not necessarily outperform natural infection. The first speaker then asks if the government was lying when they said the vaccine couldn't transmit the virus, to which the second speaker responds that it was more of a hopeful belief. The first speaker concludes that the government's statements were not truthful, leaving the options of guessing, lying, or hoping as possible explanations.

The unvaccinated are the problem, period. They are the only ones to blame, and this isn't shaming, it's the truth. It's time to blame the unvaccinated, because we can't trust them. They are the threat. Vaccinated people will start wearing masks to protect the unvaccinated, punishing the vaccinated for the sins of the unvaccinated. The unvaccinated are not behaving honorably, acting as if they can do whatever they want. We've been patient, but our patience is wearing thin. The unvaccinated include children and people acting like children, and the rest of us are starting to get angry. This isn't about freedom or personal choice.

The speaker believes COVID vaccine programs should be stopped. They are astounded by the number of papers critical of the vaccine or showing negative effects. The speaker claims a group of researchers funded by Pfizer and the NIH bullies editors to retract papers with negative findings about the vaccine. They assert the number of retractions is appalling. According to the speaker, in one instance where an editor resisted, Nature Springer bought the journal and retracted the paper. The speaker states that this is what they have been dealing with.