Testing 1-2, January 7th, 2025.
GigaOM Biologicals brought to you by a biologist named Jonathan Cui, C-O-U-E-Y.
You can look me up on PubMed to find my previous track record in academia.
Hello, everybody.
Hello, Mark, Solar Fire, Pamela, Zardoz, Hope, Small, Hey, Jeff, Vax Nonsense, Left-Handed Monkey Wrench, Solar Fire is the winner today.
Good to see everybody in the chat so quick.
Now, Dr. Gallo and Dr. Fauci talked a lot about isolation and purification.
Can you tell me what the difference is between the two?
Isolation, what was it?
Isolation and purification.
of the virus?
Well, you isolate a virus by finding the virus which causes a disease.
You purify a virus by making a lot of, I mean, just by purifying it so you get a pure virus.
I don't understand what the issue is.
I see.
No, it depends on how they use it.
Okay.
Can you explain the process of HIV isolation?
Well, didn't Dr. Gallo do that?
I mean, he actually isolated it.
So, I mean, why should I do all of this?
This is all textbook stuff you're asking me.
It doesn't matter much at all what you believe about vaccines until we invent really important ones.
You know, until we have a pandemic that's killing everyone, you know, and, you know, it's not, it's, you know, measles plus, you know, okay, I can tolerate what you think about measles because, you know, not that many people die from it.
It's just a big hassle in the end.
But no, when we have this new pandemic that is, you know, got 75% mortality and it's not,
There'll be no pretense of being polite in the face of these beliefs.
It'll be a moral emergency, because it has to be.
It's literally turning into a worst-case scenario.
I'm afraid that the latest data tells us that we're dealing with essentially a worst-case scenario.
I think truth is good for kids.
We're so busy lying, we don't even recognize the truth no more in society.
We want everybody to feel good.
That's not, that's not the way life is.
I think, but you can tell if someone's lying, you know, you can sort of feel it in people.
And I have lied.
I'm sure I'll lie again.
I don't want to lie.
You know, I don't think I'm a liar.
I try not to be a liar.
I don't want to be a liar.
I think it's like really important not to be a liar.
the rules protect yourself at all times follow my instructions keep it clean touch gloves if you wish let's do it sweaty palms this is so crazy like goosebumps this is so crazy i feel so nervous like what in the world man he introduced
Jonathan, who's going to talk about his latest distillation of what the pandemic means to society, to biology, to science, and to democracy, and to the whole kind of idea of empiricism and integrity.
And then each of us, this incredible preeminent panel that we have, each one of you is going to get a chance to comment
I don't care how you get there.
I don't care what you do to get there.
The goal is to win.
you
Hmm.
Good morning, everybody.
Welcome to GigaOM Biological, a high-resistance, low-noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
It's really weird with that album.
The entire album, Kind of Blue, is an album that I spent one summer, and I would have to strain in order to figure out which summer it exactly was.
Hello, my name is Jonathan Cooley.
I'm coming to you live from my garage in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
It is the 7th of January, 2025.
This is Giggo and Biological, and I'm the biologist that brings you this little show.
Kind of Blue is an album that was introduced to me by my friend Nathan.
A lot of the music that I know and love was introduced to me by him, and we spent a summer with a friend of ours named Brad,
who also was a music student and an avid, he enjoyed the exposing Jay to music thing because I didn't know anything about music when I went to college.
I was just a kid who had fished and played basketball and was outside.
And I don't really know what I was doing with my life except for playing sports and chasing girls.
And I was in the mall a lot with my friend Bill and playing video games and going to movies.
and getting in fights in McDonald's parking lot with other basketball teams.
I mean, I went to college and I didn't know who Led Zeppelin was.
I know that sounds crazy, but I mean, I grew up in northern Wisconsin and I had a dad that listened to Buddy Holly and Willie Nelson and my mom liked Julio Iglesias.
So,
Anyway, Miles Davis is this album that was like a hot summer album in Chicago and I can't tell you how I can put that album on.
It doesn't matter what track I start with or where I start or where it ends.
I'm in a hot car and the sun is hot and the heat is coming off of the pavement in Chicago and I don't have a care in the world.
So they're not sad songs for me or even blue songs for me.
They're just uh summer songs for me and so it's it's uh I save those songs.
So it's been a long.
I don't even know if i've ever used a miles davis at the start before um I just love that that that music.
Uh We are in an interesting place.
Um I actually let's see if I can do this right this time.
I actually uh
Just said goodbye to my mother-in-law.
She's getting on a plane, going back to the Netherlands today.
We had a great month with her here.
And I feel really blessed to have a mother-in-law like her.
I know that not everybody has a schoonmoeder that's so gezellig is, that is so nice, caring, open-minded, well-read, thoughtful.
also able to, you know, hang around with us for a whole month without, you know, I mean, think about that.
There's not very many mother-in-laws who can pull that off and she pulls it off in spades.
Um, and, uh, my wife is as beautiful and as sweet and as kind because of her.
I know that.
Um, and so it's a real, it's been a real wonderful Christmas.
And, uh, part of the reason why that happens is because of people like you who support this stream and share this stream.
Um, because, you know, we did spend some of our money on that plane ticket and that that's something that I'm very happy that we could still manage to do last year.
Um, you know, I mean, we didn't.
We managed to prioritize it too, but nevertheless, it's January 7th, 2025.
I'm very happy to be here and to be with you today.
Although I'm a little sad that it's 2025 and we're still kind of here talking about the same things on this hamster wheel where every couple years, sometimes every year, sometimes every two years, the same rung
in the wheel hits our paws and we think to ourselves, what in the world is going on?
I just was here a minute ago.
And if we don't start realizing and starting to be awake to when those rungs come back up on the wheel and what it signifies from the perspective of what those
what those stories, those myths, those claims, what they all mean.
Is my voice a little low yet?
I'm just going to turn it up just a tad.
Try to get my bars in the yellow there a little bit.
I hope that helps just a tad.
I think I have lower noise now with this board and so I'm still having trouble adjusting my ears to that idea as well.
We're still talking about the background and biology and we're still trying to build something here and try to go beyond this, you know, Monday meddler type stream where we're always talking about other people.
But unfortunately, right now we are at a crucial stage in history where no one else is doing that work and that work needs to be done.
We need to be very accurate and very precise about what happened in the pandemic and make sure there is beyond a shadow of it.
There's no question that an accurate historical record of what occurred and who said what when and who made what mistakes is available to everyone and especially our kids.
because they're gonna be wanting to check our work.
They're gonna be wanting to check their work.
They're gonna be wanting to have that history because of course, otherwise the victors will write that history.
The college deans will tell them what that history was.
The college newspaper.
We'll print a story about the pandemic and what happened five years ago and why the University of Tennessee has been permanently changed.
We need to take control of the narratives that our children are hearing, the mythologies that our children are hearing and replace them with the truth.
And one of the ways that I think I can break into new audiences and most importantly on YouTube is this basketball and biology idea.
that I've got going, you can find it stream.gigaohm.bio slash home and then look for JC on the hardwood.
That's over here.
And it's just going to be this biology, but then me trying to explain it while I work out at my local basketball court.
And the idea behind this is number one, to kind of force myself to have a short half an hour or less discussion about a single topic.
And number two, try to present it in such a way that's not maybe quite as intimidating as having animated slides that I've been working on for five years or me in the background on a green screen with all these.
Maybe this is too much for some people, especially
when you find yourself in the middle of this and then when you come to GigaOM Biological as a news source.
Sorry, I just thought I heard a noise, but I don't think I did.
I think it's just my feet.
Scared me for a minute.
Again, that's my microphone in this room and I apologize for that.
So anyway, I just wanted to plug this.
I still haven't gotten a new episode out yet because the edit of this one has taken a long time and I'm not making excuses.
I'm just saying this is a work in progress and I'm very happy that I found something like this and this year is going to be the year of
of JC on the hardwood.
So we are again here at COVID shots are bad.
Don't talk about 2020.
Something was released in 19 2019 and has been spreading around the world.
And we're trying to break this by very simple narratives, very simple statements that people can check us on that people can, you know, try to fact check or tell us why we're wrong.
And this is one of them.
Healthy people don't get sick.
The love of family and friends, clean water, clean food, clean environment, exercise, being outdoors.
These things all lead to people that are invulnerable to whatever sickness is.
And it becomes very, very rare in those people.
And people who live a long life like this tend to live a long, healthy life into old age because of this.
And these truths have been known for generations.
And it is, without a doubt, one of the places where our children should be starting if they start in a Biology 101 course.
They should really start here, not at genes and you are a product of your genes, or you can already see why Biology 101 is now a problem.
The simplicity and the succinctness of the message that we are trying to craft here on GigaOM Biological is very, very different when contrasted to the messages that these people in the health freedom movement have been forwarding for the last decade or maybe two decades.
And it is remarkable that in 2025, children's health defense can do no better than rise and resist people over profits, truth over fear,
or truth over lies and courage over fear.
Instead, I want to start with things like this, like healthy people don't get sick.
I want to start with the idea that intramuscular injection of medicine is dumb.
Now, explain to me why I'm wrong.
Because there are, I guess, millions of doctors in the world who have never really thought about it in that way.
Intramuscular injection of medicine is dumb.
Huh.
Interesting.
And so I think we need to challenge each other, challenge our family and friends, challenge our experts and our expert class in an effective way.
And language is how they beat us.
Slave speak is how they trap us.
If you can't use this language against them without them freaking out and just throwing back at you slave speak,
then you know you've gotten somewhere, that you've found a weak spot in their armor.
I think another weak spot in their armor is evolution because DNA, this concept that in the 50s, we found this chemical and it had this pretty picture when we shined x-rays on it, and now we understand how biology works.
And we teach our children from very early on that they are a product of their genes.
We teach them that people with certain genes, like white genes, are responsible for keeping people like you with black genes down.
That's how we talk.
That's slave speak.
And so we need to get rid of that by starting to speak in a more adult, responsible, and clear way where there is no semantic
fog around our words.
There is no reliance on slave speak.
Big words that we have to assume the listener has the same definition as us.
Racism is one of those words.
Does racism mean the same thing to you as it means to me?
And how can you know that?
Intramuscular injection means exactly the same thing to you as it does to me.
And it means the same thing to your doctor as it does to me and as it does to you.
So those words are very sharp and without ambiguity and without possibility of miscongruence.
That's why they use the words vaccine and gene therapy and informed consent instead of intramuscular injection is the single worst way to be exposed to a toxin or that RNA cannot pandemic.
And so I'm trying to organize a movement in America and maybe around the world to assemble a group of people that's interested in a new kind of biology 101 inspired by people like maybe Buckminster Fuller and others who have realized the incredible shortcomings of the DNA to RNA to protein myth.
and understand life as much more complicated than a set of physical and chemical interactions, but as a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time that may be encoded somewhere in information.
It may be encoded somehow, but we do not understand how that's encoded.
And if we have made a recent breakthrough where we understand that proteins can be encoded by chemicals called DNA or RNA, that is very separate than understanding how life is a pattern integrity with a trajectory across time and how that is orchestrated.
And the Human Genome Project may have just been a big, big, big psyop designed to create the illusion of consensus that they had achieved something,
but rather they had just announced an intention to achieve something.
An intention to achieve something that couldn't be achieved until every human being on the planet or the vast majority of them were turned from sovereign individuals into experimental animals.
And that's what the plandemic was probably all about.
And so I'm trying very hard to be very clear in the beginning of my presentations by first giving you the big picture
And I think there is a background, I think a lot of other biologists would agree that there is a background and indescribably dense and indescribably varied background of RNA and DNA signals, which we have very few means of collecting, measuring and quantifying.
But instead, like a radio, you can just kind of zero in using tools on particular signals and hope you can hear something.
But in no way, shape or form can we sample this whole bandwidth and describe to you what is there and how that bandwidth is occupied by a background noise.
Because we don't know where it's all coming from on the radio.
The background noise could be coming from all of the electricity in the machines and the electronics in your house, but also your neighbor's garage door opener, as well as the local tower.
as well as a satellite, as well as any number of cosmic events or atmospheric events, never mind the actual radio transmitters in your vicinity.
And all of these metaphors always fall very short to describing how it is that plants and fungi and bacteria
and mammals and insects all appear to have some form of packet communication or another genetic packet communication, not waste and shedding nucleic acids for the heck of it.
But nucleic acid signaling, local signaling in the brain, and trans tissue signaling in the body, and also trans con specific, that's individual to individual transmission of those signals.
And we have never, there is not one, there's really not one academic department in the United States that studies this kind of signaling.
And the last person that was really interested in it was that guy from Harvard who had got like the award from the Chinese Communist Party and was getting $50,000 a month for
for working for them and giving them his nanotechnology, which seemed to be specifically to read this background packet signaling of RNA and DNA that is ubiquitously present in our world, in the atmosphere, in the water, in the soil, that can be measured with viral detectors on the top of mountains in Spain.
And virology people seem to know this because those are publications in their own journals.
They know how many viruses are in the ocean and how many of them are associated with the microbiota of the ocean.
And yet they have painted a picture where this background is absolutely nothing except for a novel coronavirus and maybe RSV and norovirus or any of the other virus of the days.
We must awaken to this idea that this high fidelity detection of things on this infinite background of genetic noise is absurd.
And at the start of the pandemic, we were all coerced by fear, uncertainty, and doubt in order to accepting this as not even being relevant.
And so,
What they did in order to coerce people into accepting transfection as a okay alternative is they took this background, they probably studied it very well over the course of several years, and then released a molecule on that background, a molecule with a lot of homology to the background.
but maybe with a little bit of tweaks to it, so that when they used it in the transfection, they would get the results they needed in order for it to be an effective vaccine.
And that would be antibodies.
And so I've made the argument, all they had to do is add an epitope to the background, you know, like the Staphylococcin and Terotoxin B homology.
to the background and make a pure quantity of it and then put it somewhere.
And anybody that wanted to find it or was meant to find it could definitely find it.
If Shengxi Li was supposed to find it, well, she found it and she reported it.
Imagine that Shengxi Li is actually an American agent working with the American globalists or whoever they are.
coordinatedly make it so that it looks like, look what we found.
It's a novel spike protein.
But they all looked across the table and winked, because they knew that not only was this a nonspecific spike protein that overlapped with all kinds of other proteins in the background, or signals in the background, or goodness knows what they did.
But they are pulling from a background, pretending they find something significant, but with their own little trick in it.
so that when they transfect people, they're going to get a very good result that they can test that they can learn from.
It may be an epivax epitope, or maybe think about this, maybe they tried several.
And that's why they needed placebo lots, and then hot lots and the hot lots were different added epitopes to the same base protein and the base protein is based on the background.
And so there's not specific tests for the spike protein with a fear and cleavage site, or a spike protein with the staphylococcal and enterotoxin B overlap, or the spike protein with the HIV inserts.
No.
It's a general spike protein primer set that's not designed to amplify the whole spike.
That's too big.
A very small portion of it that probably has a lot of overlap with all kinds of other proteins that have nothing to do with scary SARS viruses, even if they do exist.
And so this is the point.
Whatever that background is, it could have also been a background drawn from or mapped from human respiratory patients, human patients.
And then they could have done the same thing.
Oh, look what we found.
I guess we better vaccinate people to it.
And again, they have their immunogen planted on a background.
The background is where they wanted to find it, either in China or maybe everywhere or maybe only in sick people or old people.
There are lots of scenarios where this technique could be used.
And the only requirement would be spending a few years back here characterizing that background in patients or in bats or in the air
or in the water, or in everybody that ever goes through a hospital.
And if they could find a few signals in the background that could be used, then they just did it.
And any of those scenarios fits in there all the way up to there being real bona fide coronaviruses, however you say that word.
Maybe there are real coronaviruses, but if they're always there and always in the background, then the same trick could be used.
Now, I'm not saying that they are.
I'm saying that it doesn't matter, and it never did.
And that's why it was so important for us to argue about the existence of viruses or not viruses, because then we wouldn't be discussing the fact that if there is, and we know there is, a background of genetic signals
then the most important thing to do would be to make sure that these criminals were actually differentiating something new from it.
And of course they never were.
And that would have been the effective way to attack this narrative without having to get into a debate about the existence of, the isolation of, the purification of, the culturing of a virus.
And that's why they had to have people very early in place in 2020 to make sure that people like me who were saying in 2020 that they are making no effort to differentiate this from a background.
And at the time in 2020, I was rather awkwardly still saying that, well, there are probably viruses.
The difference is, is that those viruses are pretty similar
And so they could use that background and just tell us it's spread because they don't have any data from back here.
And it was around this time in July of 2020 that my life started to take a very big turn for the worst on social media and elsewhere with all the people that started to get in touch with me and encourage me to pursue the lab leak idea.
pursue the idea that this could be way worse than you think, dude, because this could be a virus that in its next generation could kill lots of people.
And people all over the world were contacting me to make sure that I believed that in 2020.
And those are some of these people that I believe are actually meddlers that are actually part of this one big coordinated team that seems to center around Robert Malone and Kevin McKernan.
One of the best pieces of evidence that I have and you have at your disposal is November 27th, 2020, the CormanJorstonReview.com document was released.
Now, you can ask yourself why they didn't keep that website active, but the documents are still available, the original one, and then the second one that came after it.
And I think every one of those authors should be questioned.
Every one of those authors should be questioned about how that group of authors was assembled, why they were assembled, who did it, who wrote the paper, because what they did on the 27th of November is not
object to using PCR to detect the novel virus.
They did not object to the existence of a novel virus.
They did not object to lockdown or closing of schools or iPads for kids or masks and quarantine and testing at American universities.
They did none of that.
What they did was complain about the fact that Drorsten released a PCR test and the WHO accepted it after only a 24 hour review process and that seemed fast.
And also the test had some methodological flaws and some primer dimers or things that didn't seem to be optimal for detecting the novel virus.
The two most
Red flagged people on that list of authors are Kevin McKernan and Claire Craig.
Claire Craig is for sure a meddler because she before the pandemic was a person who was interested in and working for a project that was doing genomic screening of people for disease genes and thought that AI optimistically could help us with that.
Kevin McKernan is exactly the same kind of player with a pedigree going all the way back to Mark Lander
And so there's no way to explain that other than, I mean, the best way to explain it is what I've just said, which is that they have created a remnant stream with testing at universities and all over America that has allowed them to seamlessly collect the genomes of almost everyone in the United States, because almost all of us tested.
I did.
And those remnants were for sale.
And some American universities have pending lawsuits about that sale and about the fact that they had a buyer ready to go too early.
And so you see, there was no one saved by these people.
Their objection was not what we are doing now.
And it still remains the same, actually.
They haven't made any progress from this article and they did not preserve it
They didn't preserve the website even.
The other list, the other people on that author list are also very curious.
Mike Eden is on there.
Thomas Binder is on there.
Peter Borger is on there.
This guy.
There's a lot of interesting people on that list, but Kevin McKernan and that Mahaltra guy from Germany that had that little podcast with Naomi Wolf very early on with McKernan.
and Claire Craig are very, very big red flags.
And this is November 27th, 2020.
That's about three quarters of a year in.
It's about one month after they asked me at the University of Pittsburgh not to come in anymore because they didn't feel I was safe.
They didn't feel safe.
And so these are the questions that they've never asked, never framed, never suggested might be necessary to know.
What is the known background?
Is there what they call E-protein RNA everywhere or is it just in people with coronavirus?
Is there N-protein everywhere all the time, detectable quite easily depending on what primers you use and what amplicon you look at, or is it really just with people with coronavirus?
What about the spike protein?
That sequence that they look for?
Is that sequence really specific for SARS-CoV-2 spike protein?
Or is it kind of just a background signal that they can reasonably count on to be present?
What about the RNA dependent RNA polymerase?
What, what
The RNA-dependent RNA polymerase isn't just a protein with a few amino acids.
It's a bunch of subunits and stuff.
So which part of it did they select?
And is it a conserved part or not a conserved part?
Because Marc van Ronst from Belgium wanted to use RDRP as one of the universal indicators of a coronavirus presence, not a specific one.
And how do they get rid of all the human RNAs, and the bacterial RNAs, and the human DNA, and the bacterial DNA, and the phage material, and all the other noise sources that would be present in a nasal swab, or a saliva sample, or whatever they do?
How many amplicons did they look for?
This is one of the things that I have this, there's a, I'm gonna put it in the chat.
This is not an answer, this is a dare.
That link in the chat right there is to an FDA site where you can see some of, I believe not all of, the EUAs that were granted during the pandemic.
And I would suggest to you that there's a whole book, a whole podcast, a whole multi-generational pile of wealth to be made just on that story alone.
How many emergency use authorized, single amplicon, non-nested primers, never sequenced,
Emergency use authorized PCR tests were in America in 2020 and 2021.
And compare that to what was going on in other countries.
Because I think you'll actually be very surprised how many private firms in very specific geographic locations and very single geographic regions were present in 2020 and 2021 using their own test sourced from China
that are all now gone.
They just closed up shop after buying a half a million dollars worth of PCR machines, designing a single amplicon non nested primer test, ordering a bacteriophage with a control RNA or DNA in it.
and getting an FDA approved EUA to run those tests for maybe, you know, all the cops in a California city or county.
And those companies are all gone.
And yet their data provided the CDC with the numbers that they used.
Those numbers were also part of how they used to model the projections into the future.
And all of these people that are now speaking out of the shots have long forgotten that 2020 and 2021 were, there were billions of dollars in testing spent.
Products were made, plastic was thrown away, swabs were packaged, unpackaged and resold as remnants.
And Robert Malone never said one word about PCR testing.
Ryan Cole never said one word about PCR testing.
The diagnostic pathologist, Claire Craig, told us that PCR testing was a trade-off.
If you want to get accuracy, you're going to need, it's going to be slower and more expensive.
Trade-offs like food in a restaurant.
That's what she was telling us at the end of 2021.
And so this lack of transparency, lack of informed consent about what happens or doesn't happen when you use PCR as a diagnostic was also required.
because on an academic bench in an academic setting, if you're trying to publish in nature, you use many amplicons, you do it in triplicate, you use nested primers and you check the sequence of the amplicon that gets amplified to make sure it's the one you predicted and not something that just happens to overlap well enough with your primers.
And now make no mistake about it, if you make primers
that are specific for this book, and they are primers that encode the first sentence and the last sentence of this book, those primers will not work on this book.
And if you make a pure library of this book, and then say, hey, we got primers for this book, and they work really well on this book, and they don't pick up this book, so they're very good primers, that would be bullshit.
Because in a real library, there are millions of books.
In the real world, there are billions of books.
And again, once again, as usual, the metaphor or the analogy always falls woefully short of the irreducible complexity in the background that these people have purported to with a single amplicon, without using nested primers, and without needing to sequence the amplicon that they amplify, have a high specificity for testing for this novel virus, with the exception of when they over-cycle.
Stop lying!
And that
is about as good as I can do it.
You want to help me win?
Take this link that I just put in the chat and start looking at the EUA tests that have a single amplicon and when they were rolled out.
And know that I've talked to the guy in Canada
He's a guy with a speech impediment, he stutters a little bit, who ran the testing in Canada and he admitted it straight up.
One amplicon, no nested primers.
Sometimes two amplicons, but always no nested primers.
Nested primers is an absolutely
gold standard on the academic bench, just like multiple amplicons would be a gold standard, and just like sequencing the amplicon you get would be a gold standard.
And none of those, none of those, none of those things were followed in America, especially in 2020 and 2021.
I don't care what they're doing now.
And there were 200 different ones that never got tested, just got a signature.
Many of those were using tests and equipment and controls and reagents that were produced in China.
How did these people have a China company contract ordered ready to go in April of 2020 to test all the cops in California?
That's why this former Human Genome Project employee and Research and Development Director
was on the Danny Jones podcast telling you how they had three amplicons to test for COVID, and that's just a lie.
There may be tests like that now that are very specific for something, but that's not what you'll find on that link that I dropped.
It's not that what you will find if you actually search for the individual records of these individual EUA documents that are also out there, just look for the PDFs.
You will find single amplicon tests without nested primers.
And this guy could have explained that to us and given us informed consent in 2020 about what they were doing and what they weren't.
But instead what he did was it says that the who's test is crap.
And maybe this virus was around in 2019.
It might not be quite as novel as they say.
So I'm testing the pot to make sure.
There's no other explanation for this guy calling me chemtrail retarded in 2023 after being on my stream in 2022, after streaming with me and Jessica Rose and Stephanie Seneff and John Bodwin in March of 2023.
There's no excuse.
There's no explanation.
other than he's participating in this.
And it is his spectacular commitment to these lies that is making people forget that it was the PCR tests that did it, that justified it.
And we spent money on those things.
Warp Speed spent money on PCR tests, and those companies are all gone.
UltimateDX, LLC, SomethingSomethingDX, LLC, they're all gone.
And while we spent five years arguing on X and arguing on social media with these people, watching these people go on podcasts, while we did that, that time all ran out.
That clock all ran out.
And guess what they did?
They collected genomes from college kids for two years straight.
They're done.
That's already an accepted thing now.
They can make those tests as specific as they want to now, because now the remnant stream is there.
Now the kids are always gonna test.
And if they're told to test, they will test.
And now they got more remnants.
Anytime they need them.
And these people helped set that up.
These people helped establish that narrative of a novel virus, then illusion of consensus about it or about something.
that never got us out.
Otherwise, my videos would be on the Panda Rumble channel.
Otherwise, my presentation to the Doctors for COVID Ethics that Mike Palmer is the head of would be on their Rumble channel.
Otherwise, I'd probably be still working for CHD, and they would be letting me teach my own biology class every week.
and paying me well for it, and not telling me what to say, but just encouraging me to keep talking.
But we are not there.
We are in a place that they brought us.
We are only here because of them.
That's why no one talks about the population pyramid, even after I've said it since 2021, no one says it.
Not even to mention that, oh yeah, he's got a point about that because this point is not just a point, it's gigantic.
It's the whole explanation.
They needed to manage this problem.
In a lot of Western countries, it's even worse.
I was just told that I need to look at New Zealand and Australia.
and a few other countries, because it's much worse than in America.
And that could be the case.
If that's the case, then again, you got to ask yourself, why aren't any of these people doing it?
Why isn't Jessica Rose doing it?
Where's Kevin McKernan or Dodd or Nick Hudson, the actuary on these numbers?
They're nowhere because that's part of their job.
That's why no one's ever gonna challenge Nick Hudson about intramuscular injection being dumb and why he just started saying it after I was on the Germ Warfare podcast and not before.
And then when he started saying it, he started talking about it like, again, it was always an old idea and it's not.
It might be an old idea, but it's not an idea that anybody that I know has been saying since the start of the pandemic.
Transfection also is just ignored.
That's why you can't have my videos on the Panda Rumble channel.
And finally, RNA cannot pandemic, nothing.
And that's why Kevin McKernan won't start with this slide.
That's why Kevin McCarran won't start with this slide.
And that's why all the other people just ignore, like I don't even exist.
That's why Jessica Hockett went from sending me all kinds of cute voicemails once or twice a week to just vanished.
And she's still running around on social media with Jonathan Engler and Nick Hudson talking about things kind of, sort of, but not really.
That's why these people tried to get me on one of those stories already way back in 2020.
And now all those same people are the Health Freedom Movement MAGA in 2025.
It's just laughable.
And all you have to do is look for people that were pushing the fear and cleavage site.
Look for people who are sure the spike protein is toxic or are still sure that the spike protein is toxic.
Look for the people who focused on censorship in 2020.
Look for people who could have said, the vaccine schedule's criminal and we knew it before the pandemic.
They could have said that, but they didn't.
And instead they said lab leak, flying AIDS, or they said no virus at all.
That's really what's funny.
There's two kinds of people that had an anti-vaccine book before the pandemic.
And then they either were no-virus people at the start of the pandemic, or they were gain-of-function flying AIDS people at the start of the pandemic.
Nobody, neither of them said that the vaccine schedule's bullshit, and we knew that before the pandemic.
Don't let them fool you now.
It's funny, right?
It's like, why wouldn't you start there then?
If they had, I might not have given my Freddy all of her shots.
But unfortunately, they didn't start there.
Isn't that funny?
Isn't that weird?
Well, it's weird until you realize that we've been played.
It's weird until you realize that we've been played.
And so I wanna go to the International COVID Summit number one in Rome, Italy with Bobby Malone.
And I wanna see what Bobby had to say because I really think that listening to what Bobby Malone has to say and his wife, Jill, Bobby and Jill, I think are really the key to understanding what's happened to us and how this freedom movement is being coordinated, manipulated.
And I don't care who's a witting participant and who's unwitting, who needs the salary and who doesn't need the salary.
I don't care anymore.
The bottom line is the health freedom movement and MAGA is being manipulated and used.
It's just a populist movement that's been hijacked.
And we really need to extricate ourselves from this illusion.
So this is from September of 2020, 2021, and it is Robert Malone talking to the Catholic Militant, which is some kind of online news source for Catholicism that I was not familiar with before the pandemic.
And so I just think it'll be very instructive to listen to this.
I might put it at a slightly higher speed.
Now that I think about it, I will.
Because I really don't want to waste too much time.
133 is usually a pretty comfortable one for everybody, even if you don't like things at full or at higher speed.
Thanks very much for joining me, everybody.
Good to see you here.
55 viewers is great.
Sorry, church, church.
Welcome to your home, Dr. Malone.
Thank you.
It's such a privilege and a pleasure to meet you and to be interviewing you for Church Militant.
Church Militant has been reporting extensively on the COVID-19 vaccines and I can think of no better person to interview this morning than the father, if I may call you that, the inventor of the mRNA and DNA vaccine technology.
Thank you.
Now, you are internationally recognized as a scientist with expertise in the fields of immunology, virology, and molecular biology.
You have over 100 articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals, very prestigious journals, and you've been cited over 13,000 times.
And yet,
You have provoked monumental controversy by becoming a knight in shining armor for conscientious objectors all over the world who are battling with the tyranny of the COVID-19 vaccines.
So, Dr. Millard, who are you, hero or villain?
I'm overwhelmed by your introduction, thank you, and thanks for the opportunity to be here and to share my thoughts with you and with Church Militant.
It's a pleasure and an honor, and also a great pleasure to be here in Rome.
This is my first time in Rome, and I've just been warmly embraced by the community.
It's been an amazing experience.
So who am I?
I'm a physician and scientist.
I'm licensed in the state of Maryland to practice medicine.
But I primarily focus on solving complicated problems, particularly in the areas of biodefense and outbreaks, infectious disease outbreaks.
I am a vaccinologist for 30 years.
I did have these
discoveries, findings, when I was very young, between 1987 and 1989, that gave rise to a series of patents that issued and have become the foundation for the technology platforms that are used in these current mRNA vaccines, which has certainly brought the attention of the world onto this technology in a way that it never has before because of the nature of the threat and all the fear associated with this disease.
I was catapulted into this, for me, very unusual situation of international attention and serving as a spokesman.
partially because of my background as a virologist and vaccinologist and contributor to the technology, but also because of a chain of events that happened where I took a strong position relating to the bioethics of what I saw happening.
And I objected quite a bit to what was being done as inconsistent with what I'd been trained, how I'd been trained and taught for years and years and years as a clinical development specialist.
And so as somebody who's involved in clinical research, we have to go through rigorous training and periodic refreshment concerning fundamentals of bioethics and medical products.
And what I saw happening, particularly in Canada at the time, was a series of governmental policy decisions that I thought violated fundamental precepts.
of medical ethics as I've been taught, and as the West has agreed in a consensus going back to the Nuremberg trials, Helsinki Accords, and in the United States Development Report that analyzed these things and responded in part to the transgressions that happened in the American African-American community with the Tuskegee experiments that were performed essentially by CDC.
So these things were captured in federal law in the United States, in what we call the common rule.
And my sense was that many of the precepts of the common rule were being violated.
This was all catalyzed by a long phone call I had with a practicing Canadian physician who's actually here at the conference.
So we're here for the International COVID Summit, which is why I have traveled to Rome.
And Ira Bernstein, a prominent Canadian family practice practitioner, who's treated thousands of patients, but also had many, many patients vaccinated.
had been on a phone call with me until midnight one Saturday evening, and telling me what was happening in Canada with the coercion of children to get vaccine and all of this propaganda and information that was being pushed out and social pressure that was being applied to people taking an experimental vaccine.
And I had to finish the call by saying, Ira, my heart goes out to you, but I'm not a Canadian.
I don't understand Canadian regulatory affairs.
I don't know what I can do to help you.
And then I went to bed, wake up in the morning and had a brainstorm and I said, oh, I know what I can do.
The real problem here is that they're disregarding fundamental bioethics principles.
And I can write an article about the bioethics and put it in a lay press vehicle called Trial Site News.
And that, my sense, my belief was, you know, naïve, I had faith that placing an article that would speak about the underlying bioethics and how it relates to how governments were behaving at the time would spark
What I like about Trial Site News is that I think it was last year around August they did an article where in this article it was something about Australia and a hearing that was happening in Australia and they had a video of Kevin McCairn followed by scrolling down one page and then there is a video of Kevin McKernan.
And so from my perspective that was just an absolute admission on Trial Site News that they're the same network of
of performers.
And Kevin McCarren was presented as an expert in the spike protein's ability to generate amyloidosis or prion disease.
And Kevin McKernan was presented as a guy who knew all about the DNA contamination.
And not very surprisingly, Kevin McCarren and Charles Rixey, of course, are very happy that Kevin McKernan praised Rixey as the guy with the story.
And so these are all admissions, ladies and gentlemen.
They're all absolute admissions that Robert Malone is part of a little team of meddlers.
I don't know who pays them, but it feels very much like they kept our eyes off the ball on testing.
And more importantly, they kept our eyes off the ball with regard to the generation of remnants from testing.
And of course, that would have definitely also been happening in Israel.
where they have all the medical records of all those people, and they force them all to take the Pfizer.
That probably also happened in Japan, where they have their medical records, and in the UK, where they have a nationalized system.
And now you see why they had to do it at universities because there they can also kind of coerce those kids with the university health system and they have some records on them.
They can even request their medical records at certain, you see what I mean?
And so people like Claire Craig and Kevin McKernan, who have been well aware of this general need to collect this data in order to help have any progress in having the data that a future AI will be able to use to learn anything.
And there are admissions everywhere right in the last five year timeline, including the latest one where Robert Malone shared a video from an anonymous mouse
was made by Charles Rixey and Kevin McCairn of me and the crack pipe story.
It's all one show and quite a bit of them have in different sub teams been rolled out against me and sometimes against me and Mark in order to try and separate us or get me to doubt one person or another.
Don't talk to him.
Don't talk to her.
And I've been played like that many times and often.
The funny part is, is often they go on long before they realize that I already knew they were full of shit.
And so I have all of those DMs, I have all of those private messages and all of those emails that underscore this meddler's network.
and how they continued to empty the bench over five years to try and convince me that no, no, that's okay.
He's bad, but I'm not.
And that guy's bad, but she's not.
And she's not bad.
Well, I understand.
I don't trust him either, but you can trust me and you can trust him.
And the latest that that happened, but the last time that that happened was Jessica Hockett and Nick Hudson and, and Jonathan Engler and, and Martin Neal.
when Jonathan Engler and Martin Neal were supposedly writing some book from their substack and they were gonna write a virology chapter and they wanted my help.
It's all one big show, ladies and gentlemen, and it is coordinated by liars.
Liars that are willing to come to your house and lie.
Liars that'll bring their wife and kid to your house and lie.
Liars that will fly you across the United States for a vacation and lie.
liars that will give you a job editing a book until you stop lying and then they fire you I guess or something or until you wake up and realize that you've been used and then they fire you.
I was incredibly naive both as a biologist and as a father and as a citizen of the United States at the start of the pandemic even though I knew
and was considered a conspiracy theorist by most of my friends for already my whole life.
I was so naive.
I would be willing to bet at this time in September of 2021, I still thought Robert Malone was a good guy.
I'm pretty sure I did.
Oh, sorry.
discussion, and at least give some comfort and some structure to the vague sense of uneasiness that many people were experiencing.
I had no idea what would happen with that when I hit and sent it off, but it went viral.
And I think what happened there was that there widespread, really, not just in Canada and the United States, but throughout the world, there was a sense of unease of what was happening.
This didn't feel right.
It didn't feel correct.
The propaganda, the pressure, all the messaging, the coordinated press, the censorship, all of these things
was we're generating a sense of unease in many people.
And what was the unease about?
The way it's supposed to be.
But they didn't have a voice.
They didn't have an intellectual frame.
See, that's what's weird.
What is the unease about?
Is it about the virus?
Or is it about the shot?
Or is it about the urge of the shot?
Or the fact that people like Jordan Peterson just said, let's take the shot and get it over with?
What is the unease about?
Because I have an unease about the PCR test being used to distort a background into something that could allow them to give them an excuse to manage a population pyramid problem.
work to express these vague notions that they had internally, you know, in their, you would say in their soul, they knew in their soul that something wasn't right, but they didn't have the words or the intellectual structure to kind of process it.
He says you would say, make sure you hear that you would say soul.
able to express it.
And I think that just putting out this very clear, simple couple pages, this has been Western consensus about how we should handle the ethics of experimental medical products, and particularly the rights of the individual in this context.
The rights of the individual to have full information about risks associated with an experimental product, that those risks should be communicated in a simple language that they can understand, not in technical language.
But what's weird about that is it's impossible to describe all the risks of transfection because they are, in theory, combinatorially big.
It's a combinatorial list.
It's like, well, depending on how unlucky you get, that's the reality of it, right?
That's the reality of intramuscular injection of a combination of substances every time you do it.
Depends on how unlucky you get.
And this is what gives them so much space for plausible deniability with regard to what injuries and permanent damage is done by this technique.
and why they needed someone like Robert Malone and someone like Kevin McKernan to be able to bamboozle us with the details and get all these terminologies there.
So in the end, we would, we would be trapped in their slave speak.
He's not saying anything useful here in September of 2021.
I don't think he said anything useful yet.
I mean, it's particularly bad in Canada.
Apparently, apparently American university students are not that in danger, but Canada, it's pretty ugly.
COVID, he still says here, and that's wonderful.
Vaccines versus experimental vaccines is another thing that he said.
That's slave speak.
Vaccine is a slave speak word.
It provokes a guaranteed dumb meaning in everybody that uses the word.
You can't use the word without it using that meaning, that very universally dumb meaning.
And so when he says vaccine and experimental vaccine, he is, he is in chant.
He's reinforcing that enchantment.
Vaccine has a definition and you know it.
And Robert and Bobby knows it.
Bobby Malone knows it and you know it.
And that's why he can use the words vaccine and experimental vaccine and everybody's brain all does the same tone.
And we have to break out of their slave speak.
that has to do with vaccines and public health and climate change and the dollar.
The Amaro is coming, ladies and gentlemen.
I just figured it out.
The Amaro is coming.
I forgot all about the Amaro, but the North American Union is what Trump and J.D.
Vance are going to bring to America.
That's my call.
You heard it here first.
Certainly in the Western world, we've expressed that this is a fundamental human right to choosing whether or not to accept a medical procedure.
We have become so used to what you've said in terms of ethical understandings of medicine.
We have adverse effects so clearly explained to us.
Every time you go to a physician, you're asked.
Do you have allergies to penicillin, for example?
That we've taken this for granted and therefore the introduction of a new technology that does not permit this anymore, obviously it's not the technology that's not permitting this with the powers that be, makes us wonder what is so strange, so different, so intimidating in a sense about mRNA technology.
Could you give our viewers a very short layman's introduction to mRNA vaccines?
Sure, and thank you.
So let's just be very blunt and clear about it.
The injection of a combination of substance intramuscularly in order to augment the immune system, in my best estimate, was already done before the pandemic.
And that's the reason why the movie Vaxxed could exist, the reason why the movie Vaxxed 2 exists, and the reason why Laura Bono had to try and find somebody to help her start Children's Health Defense.
That's also why Laura Bono had to have Mary Holland step in front of her.
That's why Laura Bono has retired from CHD last year.
Wake up and apologize to your kids.
for the opportunity.
It's really not that complicated, but I think you've hit on a fundamental there.
It's not the technology, it's the communication and the rollout, the way that this has been handled.
It is not the technology, it is the communication and the rollout.
That's it in a nutshell.
September 21,
Robert Malone says it's not the technology.
In May of 2021, I said it was the technology.
In January of, sorry, in December of 2020, I actually said it was the technology.
In October of 2020, I actually said it was the technology and it was that reason because I was yelling at people about that in the hallways of the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine that they asked me not to come back.
I yelled at my primary investigator, Brian Hooks, in the hallway in front of the elevator about how dumb he was for learning all of his biology from the New York Times.
We're gonna win, ladies and gentlemen.
They might not like it, but we are definitely gonna win.
and very autocratic.
It's been very paternalistic.
And you're absolutely right.
People find it intimidating.
It seems foreign.
And this language, mRNA, is in and of itself seen as intimidating.
So let's break it down.
It's pretty simple stuff.
So just to start with, what is mRNA?
So to start with, right, as I said, combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system injected intramuscularly was already done before the pandemic.
That's what I've learned in the last few years.
And so a combination of substances with the intent of transfecting cells in your body in order to augment the immune system is another stage of dumb.
Because it doesn't work on principle.
It is essentially like trying to say that dropping more gears into the back of your pocket watch is a great way to augment your and increase the accuracy of your wristwatch.
But you, your newborn child is not a wristwatch.
And this is a vaccinologist of 30 years.
30 years vaccinology experience, the father of mRNA vaccines, and the nature of this threat is the reason why everything is so confusing.
He's coming out because of the bioethics and because he's a bioethicist, not an inventor, but a bioethicist.
And of course, where did he learn his bioethics?
Where did he cut his bioethical teeth?
being the pseudo whistleblower for the Jesse Gelsinger case and making the career of a New York Times reporter.
Again, this is all work done by Mark and myself and people that are actually trying to figure out what happened and not chasing the coattails of these military representations of reality.
Not really sure what to call them, but they're definitely not real.
Biology, we have something called the central dogma of biology, which is that DNA makes RNA, RNA makes protein.
I like to use the, so mRNA is one type of RNA.
It's the message that goes from the DNA to the machinery that manufactures the protein.
There are other types of RNA, for instance.
Now, it's funny because here there are several enzymes, right?
Here there are ribosomes and those are pretty gosh darn special micro machines that are actually made of RNA and protein.
Many subunits are and ribosomes can be different in different tissues and definitely in different animals.
And there are enzymes that do this as well, right?
And then there are enzymes that repair here as well.
And then, of course, proteins are post-translationally modified by sugars and folding and other chemical modifications.
And, of course, DNA can also be methylated, which may be turning it on and off.
And that's also something that happens separately here.
And then, of course, we also have microRNAs, small interfering RNAs.
micro-regulatory RNAs that are all small RNAs sometimes that are complementary to coding RNAs that can help regulate them.
And these small micro-RNAs are a complication that we only just found recently and nobody really cares or wants to talk about that because it's an almost inestimable kind of noise that if it has a real function would be a real problem.
And so he's talking about the central dogma, very simply, DNA, RNA, to protein, without mentioning any of the already well-known, for decades, layers of complication that make that not that simple.
And now remember, my contention is that modern bad biology 101 ascribes the use of RNA,
or a single-stranded DNA, and the copying of these things, plus and minus, all that is virology.
None of that is part of this central dogma that governs human biology.
That's this part.
All that other magic chemistry is outside of us, and that's all virology.
And my contention is that that is not possible because none of these things are pattern integrities.
They can't be.
They're just chemicals.
And that's the trick.
That is the big trick here.
Thank you very much.
There's ribosomal RNA, which is a different form that is used to serve as a scaffold for assembling the protein manufacturing machinery in the cell.
I like to use the metaphor of a computer or your tablet or even your cell phone all apply.
But if we can think of a computer or a laptop as a metaphor for the cell.
And imagine the cell that forms your whole body is composed of cells mostly.
If you imagine a cell like a fried egg.
So we have the yellow part of the egg and the white part of the egg and the crunchy stuff on the edge of the thing when you fry it.
So you can picture that as a cell.
The DNA resides in the yellow part of the cell, and it's akin to the hard drive on your computer.
It's the place where the information is stored.
The protein manufacturing equipment resides in the white part of the egg.
And you can think of that as little tiny biorobots that are able, like many other computer-controlled robots, they can manufacture many different things.
They can manufacture a car.
They can carve wood.
They can do many things, a modern robot, manufacturing robot.
So in this metaphor, those biorobots are called ribosomes.
And there's many, many of them that live in this cytoplasmic, or the white part of the egg, part of the cell.
But in order for them to do their job and make things, they need to have information, signal.
Just like in the computer metaphor, the biorobots that build cars or whatever that we've all seen are connected to computers by cables that transfer information from the computer hard drive and the programs on the hard drive out to the robot.
So in the cell, this information that's exchanged between the hard drive, which is the DNA that's in the yellow part of the egg,
out to the robots that manufacture protein is called a message.
And the chemical structure that's used for this signal that goes from one to the other is called messenger RNA.
And the abbreviation for that is mRNA.
The RNA part is ribonucleic acid.
So that's the big word.
This is messenger ribonucleic acid.
And what it is is a single-stranded copy of parts of the DNA that gets processed so that it's proper for conferring information to the robots.
It goes from this yellow part out into the white part and then instructs those biorobots, the ribosomes, to manufacture whatever is encoded by that RNA.
That's really all it is.
It sounds very complicated, but when you boil it down, it's simple stuff.
Continuing with the metaphor, we actually have two forms of genetic vaccines.
People are focusing on the mRNA, and I've heard people say, well, the other vaccines, the Sanofi or J&J, depending on where you are in the world, Oxford is another word that's used for one of the adenoviral vector vaccines.
Those are also genetic vaccines.
So what is this term, genetic vaccines?
And some people say, are these actually vaccines, or are they something else?
So let's kind of talk about that for a minute.
there's language in various regulatory authorities' statements that a vaccine has to have components of the pathogen that it's vaccinating against.
And so people say, well, this mRNA is not a part of these viruses.
It's not a part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
And so here he is establishing the idea that the important question to ask is whether or not these qualify as vaccines, as opposed to already being classified as a technology a long time ago called transfection.
and you can use naked DNA or lipid-coated DNA or lipid-coated RNA to transfect things.
In fact, on Jimmy Dore in this year, the same year, 2021, he gives Jimmy Dore a script and Jimmy Dore reads it and Jimmy Dore says that he is the inventor of transfection technology.
But here you see that he is very
This is a very clear working of the narrative under trying to understand what the objective is.
Where are we trying to go?
How are we going to get there?
What tools do we have to get there?
And this is very different than saying it's transfection technology with new lipid nanoparticles.
Which is what he says later, right?
Because it's Peter Cullis's fault that he ever took the shot in the first place because Peter said that they had something new and special and that it stayed in the muscle.
This is the level of disingenuous lying that is required.
It is a spectacular level of commitment to lying that is required to play on this team.
That's why there are only a few of them.
That's why Jessica Rose is on stage with him all the time and Meryl Nass and his wife.
And unfortunately, Ryan Cole has been on stage with him way too often.
Not to have realized by now that he's being used not to really can't send me a message Write me a handwritten note that says we need more people like you and I love what you do and not realize what I'm saying now and That all these people are ignoring me.
He can't believe both of those things one of them's got to be a lie and I I'm sorry, but He's not playing for our team
And neither is Robert Malone.
Robert Malone may be the ultimate cat wrangler here.
Him and Kevin McKernan may be the people that meet with these people off camera and explain to them what's going on.
They both have connections all the way back to then when this illusion was seeded with regard to the Human Genome Project and with regard to HIV and AIDS.
Yes, Robert Malone goes all the way back to HIV and AIDS just like Judy Mikovits does.
Personally, I find that a little disingenuous and a little contrived because, in fact, the coronavirus uses RNA as the way that it carries its genome.
So it uses RNA, not DNA.
And that RNA is being taken, copied,
And many copies are being made synthetically.
And they're engineered slightly, but it's absolutely a part of the virus, the mRNA of the virus that's going into the mRNA of the vaccine.
And in fact, what the mRNA vaccines are doing is taking a piece.
What he is arguing now, and understand that this is, again, what I just said,
He wants you to believe that the question is, are these vaccines or not?
And he is making the argument that they are vaccines because the virus uses RNA and these are RNA.
He is making the argument on the church militant interview in September of 2021 that these are vaccines because the virus uses RNA and these are RNA viral sequences in the shot.
the way that it carries its genome.
So it uses RNA, not DNA.
And that RNA is being taken, copied, and many copies are being made synthetically.
Many copies are being made synthetically because that's the only way you can do it!
The only way you could make a lot of spike protein RNA is to synthetically make it using standard recombinant methods that every manufacturer of a biologic before the pandemic has all the equipment to do.
And people like Brian Artis know this and that's why they're so inept in their messaging about venom.
They can't quite get to the stage where they can say that, you know, all the RNA and all the DNA virology that's done is actually starting with a synthetic starting point, which kind of begs the question of whether any of these things are really significant in the wild and whether or not any of these experiments in the laboratory recapitulate any natural phenomenon at all.
And so they have people that have been saying this, but in such a compartmentalized and an inept sort of way that it creates a limited spectrum of debate that you can never actually get out of.
And all of those people are the only ones that rose on social media.
And so everybody else was shouting into a tin can.
And if you can't see this as absolutely damning evidence of this guy not being a good guy, not being on our side, and the fact that Jickie Leakes never challenged him, the fact that none of these people have ever really worried about Robert Malone is evidence for the fact that they're all in on it.
If you were on stage in Romania with Robert Malone and Jill Glasspool Malone and Steven Hatfill in November of 2023 in Romania, you are in on it.
If you were on a cruise off the coast of Turkey with Robert Malone and his wife for a week, you are in on it.
If you have a picture with these people in a hot tub, you are in on it.
And if you have a book with them and you're not saying it was a mistake, you're in on it.
And they're engineered slightly, but it's absolutely a part of the virus, the mRNA of the virus, that's going into the mRNA of the vaccine.
And in fact, what the mRNA vaccines are doing is taking a piece of the genome of the virus that codes for the protein spike.
Remember I said that, so it's the information that's necessary to make those biorobots manufacture spike protein.
And it's taken out of the virus, and it's put synthetically into a broader context that makes it work better.
What kind of bullshit is he talking about here?
This is like he's selling it.
He's selling it right now.
It's a great technology.
It's awesome.
Super cool.
Totally qualifies as a vaccine.
Sabatuj.
S-A-B-A-T-U-J.
Rancourt 2.
So let's just do the timeline of Denny Rancourt really quick on piece of paper so you can see what I'm talking about.
So Denny Rancourt was in November of 23.
He was in Romania.
And in Romania.
Romania.
I think that's how you spell it.
In Romania he said there was no spread.
And he said 17 million people have died of the shot.
Okay, that's what he said in Romania.
There's no evidence of spread in 2020, which is the stuff that he came out with, and no evidence of excess deaths in 2020.
That's all the stuff that he came out with in May of 2020.
So he started his presentation with that in Romania, and then he said, the only evidence of excess deaths starts when they roll out the shot, and that's when it starts to go bananas.
That's actually Denny Rancor's presentation in November of 2023.
And when he came back in December, I was going bananas on the web because all of these people that were on stage with Denny Rancor came back to their, their podcasting.
And what did they do when they came back?
They said that 17 million people have died from the shot.
I saw this really incredible, um,
this really incredible presentation in Romania.
And it was this guy, Denny Rancor, and he says 17 million people have died of the shot.
And I was going bananas as an employee, staff scientist of CHD.
I was going bananas saying, well, Denny, don't let Robert Malone promote you on his sub stack without correcting him and saying there was no evidence of spread in 2020.
Denny Rancor responded by a DM saying, I'll do it when I'm ready.
And then it became 2024 and he kept not saying anything and he kept not saying anything and he kept not saying anything.
And we are now in 2025.
And since having presented this data and having Robert Malone and Jessica Rose and Kevin McKernan all promote his 17 million number, he has never bothered to correct them and say, by the way, you forgot to mention the first half of my talk.
So I think he might not be playing for us, to be honest.
I think he might not be playing for us.
But, you know, you do your own math.
mRNA, this is part of the work that I did back in the 80s to find these elements and made these discoveries and figured out how to make large quantities of it and purify it and all that kind of stuff.
So you're just taking the genes, a gene, out of the virus, putting it into a construct that will make it work better.
making large quantities of that, and then putting it back into your cells.
That's the way the mRNA vaccines work, and we can talk about the technology that enables that, but that's the essence of it, is that you are introducing a genetic fragment from the virus, by way of this process, into your cells, so that your cells, and it only has to get into the cytoplasm, the white part of the egg, so that it can get to the ribosomes, the biorobots, so that your cells then actually become the manufacturing facility for the vaccine.
And he has to say it that way to make sure that you don't think it might integrate into your genome because that would be scary and might result in a long-term expression of the protein or something like that.
The truth is that the antigen, the part that stimulates your immune response, is not made in a factory.
It's made in your cells.
So your cells become the manufacturing plant.
Now that has a lot of other derivative information that's important.
derivative information or compounding irreducible complexities that neither the manufacturer nor the inventor could ever expound on enough to result in informed consent.
There's no way that he could explain it in enough detail so that you would understand how risky it was on the short term or the long term.
And we still don't know how many people are going to drop dead like my friend Nate did.
It could eventually be all of them, for all we know.
If that happens five years from now, will there be anybody on the planet with the guts to say it?
Will there be a control group left?
Or will everybody have been transfected by then?
Will the vast majority of the population have been coerced?
Maybe when Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
gets the data and we have safe vaccines, everybody will be forced because Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
isn't against mandates if they're safe vaccines.
And that's a completely different question.
And he said that exactly.
And so he's nowhere near orbiting around the idea that maybe intramuscular injection is just generally speaking, dumb.
No, no, no, no, no.
He still thinks that the Wuhan cover-up book is a pretty accurate historical document.
And also an accurate biological one.
And it's not.
because which cells, for how long, how much protein, all those kinds of things become important to understand.
And unfortunately, we don't understand them completely.
Now, the other vaccines, there are truly traditional vaccines being made in India and China and Russia and other places.
But here in the West, we primarily only have access to the mRNA vaccines and the adenovirus-vectored vaccines.
So the adenovirus-vectored vaccines are also taking a gene out of the virus, the gene coding for spike,
But they're putting it into a cold virus.
It's a DNA cold virus, a virus, adenovirus, that would cause, you know, is associated with some symptoms in humans.
And it's widely circulates as a variety of different types.
It infects chimpanzees and various other species.
But it's a DNA virus.
So, the adenovirus technology was explicitly originally designed for gene therapy purposes.
It was designed to produce high levels of protein for a very long time.
Now, one of the leading, the Johnson & Johnson product, one of the leading products, uses, does use a cell line, this is important to your audience, does use a cell line called Percy 6 for manufacturing those.
In other words, you grow the cold virus, the recombinant cold virus that has the SARS-CoV-2.
Oh, this is gross.
You know what he's going to tell you?
He's going to tell you that the Johnson & Johnson, the Johnson & Johnson uses a human-derived cell line.
So technically speaking, the Catholics shouldn't take this one.
They should take the mRNA.
Don't take the adenovirus one.
The adenovirus one's bad.
spike protein inserted into it.
You grow that in a cultured cell line.
And that cultured cell line, per C6, is derived from human fetal tissue.
That's true.
So let's just get that controversy out.
And so that gets to church directives about whether or not one is facilitating or enabling a technology that is discouraged by the church, that being using human embryonic tissue for other purposes.
So that's the J&J product.
adenovirus technology and the mRNA technology are explicitly gene therapy-based technology applied to vaccines.
With these technologies, you can use them for a variety of purposes.
The idea that I can engineer your cells to produce a foreign protein could be used to cure or treat cancer.
Potentially, it was originally envisioned as a way to correct inborn errors in metabolism.
This is pediatric genetic disease, like muscular dystrophy, etc.
That was the goal.
Unfortunately, for the gene therapy application for either mRNA as a drug or for adenovirus vector technology, the foreign genes introduced into your body are seen by your immune system as foreign, as not part of you.
And our immune systems are all excruciatingly well designed
He is excruciatingly inaccurate and imprecise when talking here.
So let's just go back a couple seconds to hear that again.
Vector technology.
The, uh, foreign genes introduced into your body.
Foreign genes introduced into your body.
But what actually happens supposedly is that when you're transfected, you express the protein, which is not the gene.
A protein is not a gene.
Even if, even if you,
Even if I try to argue with him, I'm immediately stuck arguing with him with the slave speak because I'm using the word gene.
Instead of saying a genetic sequence, or instead of saying this, this DNA sequence or this RNA sequence is introduced into a cell and a protein is formed.
He's using the word gene.
And then I get stuck using the word gene when I'm trying to argue with him.
And that's how slave speak works.
are seen by your immune system as foreign, as not part of you.
And our immune systems are all excruciatingly well designed to enable the detection of foreign material, particularly foreign nucleic acids, foreign DNA and RNA.
One of the illusions of the immune system that we need to revisit is this idea that we make a unique memory, a unique molecular memory for every pathogen that we encounter.
That is a very, very enticing narrative that the NIH and the NIAID and the Human Genome Project would love you to believe.
But there was a whole other wing of immunology that has basically been snuffed out by not funding it.
that focused more on damage-associated molecular patterns, damage-associated molecular patterns, molecular patterns that caused damage.
And then the immune system focused on those non-self damage-associated molecular patterns and made molecular memory to them.
And that allowed the immune system to more frequently generalize across threats and identify threats not based on novelty, but based on whether or not they fit into a category that was causing damage.
And then if you think about your immune system functioning that way, that's just another sort of light bulb that you can pull the switch of in your mind that will make you realize why intramuscular injection with the idea of augmenting a system that doesn't even learn specific memories but tries to generalize across molecular pattern threats, well, it becomes instantaneously dumb and monumentally uninsightful.
to try and augment a system like that by intramuscular injection.
And so it is even just the slave speak, the little assumptions that you make about what we understand about the immune system has already trapped us and funnels us into using their terms to argue with them.
And that's how slave speak works.
What that does is it provokes an immune response, an innate or adaptive immune response, so antibodies and T-cells and things like that, that will attack any cell that's producing these foreign proteins.
So the whole concept, noble concept, that Ted Friedman came up with in the 1970s, that we could cure these genetic diseases, pediatric genetic diseases, using this kind of gene therapy approach, turned out to have a major flaw, which is your immune system.
One of the key epiphanies for me, when I was a young graduate student at the Salk, when I, you know, was involved in some of the first experiments that made it clear this was a key problem, was that this problem that would limit the use of these technologies for gene therapy could be, I like to use the metaphor, you could make lemonade out of the lemon.
This technology that didn't look like it was going to work for its intended purpose could be used for eliciting an immune response, a vaccine.
And so that's what launched this whole genetic vaccine idea.
Now, why is it different?
And why is it so scary, kind of?
Well, the technology, both technologies, involve transferring foreign genetic material into your cells and causing your cells to manufacture these proteins.
Now, there's another thing that does this.
that very efficiently transfers foreign genetic material into your cells and causes your cells to manufacture proteins, and it's called viruses.
Which is why most of the gene therapy technologies, like the adenovirus, are based on viruses, because this is what viruses normally do.
Viruses are non-living parasites.
They're basically parasitic DNA and RNA that can't replicate itself unless it gets into your cells.
And so that's when we think about this and we think, oh, this is so scary.
It's putting foreign genetic material into ourselves.
Well, the truth is that's what the SARS-CoV-2 virus does too, or the adenovirus, or respiratory syncytial virus, or influenza, or any of these other viruses.
That's exactly what they're doing.
So it sounds very scary and foreign.
But even if you believe that mythology about viruses putting their genes into you and hijacking your cells to make copies of themselves, they do it at a barrier.
Whoa, that's too much.
They do it at a barrier.
A barrier.
They do it at a barrier.
No, a little bit more.
They do it at a barrier.
They're not doing it just randomly.
They do it in your lungs.
They do it in the epithelium.
They do it in the mucus.
They do it in the lining of your gut.
They do it in bacteria.
The only accepted, across all narrative curators, existence of viruses are actually bacteriophages, and we never talk about them.
Even though I'm so surprised how many of these PCR tests in 2020 that were manufactured in China actually shipped with a control that was a bacteriophage that expressed the spike protein, or the N protein, or the E protein, or whatever proteins they were testing for.
Their control was a bacteriophage expressing the same DNA.
It's nuts!
Technically, it is creating genetically modified organisms out of all of us.
This is true.
I find it fascinating that the European community isn't up in arms about this, based on their historic position on genetically modified organisms.
But in fact, that is what we're doing, but it's also what the virus is doing.
And the virus, the native virus, SARS-CoV-2, does it much more efficiently than the mRNA does.
So when we're- Wow, the SARS-CoV-2 virus expresses itself much more efficiently than Peter Cullis's mRNA product.
What an extraordinary thing to say!
What an extraordinary claim to make!
Holy balls!
When people are having these fears and anxieties, which I don't discount, I don't wish that in any way,
denigrate anyone who is having these anxieties about this unknown technology.
We are 59 minutes into this video.
Is that really true?
Are you clear yet as to whether or not he thinks that people should take it or not take it?
What about your healthy grandmother?
Should she use it or not?
What about, you know, your kid, teenager going off to college?
Should they take it?
What's his message right now?
Who has he saved?
It's useful to remember that if you get the virus itself, the virus is putting this same gene into your body and doing it even more efficiently.
Now, the logic here is that we can insert just the gene for spike into your cells and provoke enough of an immune response that when you get infected by the virus, you get exposed to the virus, you won't get infection, replication, and disease because your immune system will be ready to attack the virus as soon as it arrives.
So that's the, if everything was perfect, and we lived in a perfect world, that's how this would work.
Unfortunately, everything isn't perfect, and we don't live in a perfect world.
But that is the noble idea behind this.
And then we can speak about the real world of what's actually happened.
But I hope that helps both alleviate anxiety about these technologies.
He wants to alleviate the anxiety associated with these technologies.
and clarify some of the language and the underlying technology.
Thank you Dr. Malone for that prodigious sweep of mRNA and DNA virus technology and thank you for enlightening our readers.
This clarifies a lot of misinformation that has been spewed, particularly by people who defend vigorously the mRNA vaccine and say, well, it's not genetic therapy.
Of course, there are those.
And literally, you have a straw man saying that you're not going to turn into a genetically modified individual.
And I'm very grateful to you for clarifying this.
That's incredible.
It's absolutely incredible.
Thanks.
that he's actually saying that we live in a time in which these labels he's actually saying that he's clarified something that that for a long time people were saying that that we would be genetically modified and now some of this this worry has been put to rest thanks to Robert Malone that's really remarkable it's really remarkable
are cast about indiscriminately.
And certainly I've been labeled as a purveyor of misinformation or disinformation.
But I suggest that using these labels to oversimplify complex topics doesn't help us as a community.
I think that we would be much better served by
being a little more open-minded, a little more kind with each other in our communication, and recognize that diversity of opinion and perspective is a healthy thing.
Absolutely.
That's what science has been about for a very long time now.
But your discoveries in mRNA non-viral delivery systems are considered the key to the current COVID-19 vaccine strategies.
Your work has resulted in over 10 patents and over 7,000 citations in peer-reviewed scientific journals for this work alone.
A scientist whose work is pivotal to the vaccine ought to be nominated for the Nobel Prize.
But when I do a Google search on your name, I find you fact-checked and discredited as a fraud.
The Atlantic, a left-wing publication, labels you as the vaccine scientist spreading vaccine misinformation.
Just talked about that.
And according to the Associated Press, that bastion of truthful journalism, I'm being sarcastic, you claim to have invented the idea of mRNA vaccine technology, but you were not involved in developing COVID-19 vaccines.
The hit job on you is pretty thorough.
Your enemies are attacking the very foundations of your scientific credibility.
Obviously non-specialists are not going to read your peer-reviewed articles, and yet you have well over 350,000 followers on Twitter, including some of the world's top doctors and scientists, reading and tweeting your misinformation.
So what's been fascinating for me, and I try not to get radicalized by the experience,
is this coordinated campaign of smearing individuals because they are speaking in ways that are not completely consistent with the approved narrative.
And I take comfort both in the support of many all over the world, including yourself.
There's great kindness that I experience every day.
So in the face of these smear campaigns, the kind handwritten letters that I receive, the people that hug me on the street, the physicians that thank me for speaking out and recognize and applaud my attempts to provide leadership in this are very comforting and a bastion against
damage to my heart and my soul that comes with this type of tactic.
Lots of handwritten letters here.
Let's also become clear to me as this strategy, coordinated strategy in the press of these demeaning statements and personal attacks, ad hominems, derogatory language, et cetera, that's used.
Bad jacketing.
The piece is fascinating for that because it starts... He called it bad jacketing at some point.
Very dismissive, using kind of classical yellow journalism techniques.
by the way, written by a young gentleman with very little background in journalism and not really trained in journalistic ethics, which is a characteristic of most of these fact checkers, is they're funded by these large corporate entities like Facebook and Google.
And nobody asks who funds Robert Malone.
Everybody just assumes, I guess, he's tapping into his retirement like Mark Kulak is.
But I don't think that's the case, my friends.
I don't think Jessica Rose is falling back on her retirement early.
I don't think Pierre Cory is falling back on his retirement early.
I don't think Peter McCullough is falling back on his retirement early.
I don't think Meryl Nass retired early because, you know, she put in 30 years of hard work.
I don't think Mary Holland is falling back.
on her savings right now.
She's getting $250,000 a year to fight for children's health for the last decade and got nowhere.
She still promotes James Lyons Weiler, the fear and cleavage side guy.
Their next conference, he'll probably be on stage just like he was at every other one.
It's one big show, ladies and gentlemen, and all the groups are sabotaged.
There's a lot of money at stake.
There's a lot of money.
There's so little money is necessary to do these tricks.
It's just hotel rooms and flights.
Some of these weaponized piles of money can just scrape that amount off the top.
Some of these money laundering operations deal with billions of dollars.
What is this, a couple million dollars to do the international COVID summits over the last five years?
A couple million dollars to keep somebody like Jessica Rose on Substack and surfing?
A couple million dollars to keep somebody like Brett Weinstein shut up when they already gave him a half a million dollars in 2017 for doing nothing?
They're willing to give Joe Rogan $200 million.
So I mean, come on, ladies and gentlemen, this is a joke.
This is about for all the marbles.
This is about the coming multi-generational ruling narrative and establishing it right now.
These people are playing for all the marbles.
And so a little extra flame tickets, a few more years, this is still what they must stick to.
You cannot let them forget that they haven't always been where they are now.
And when they could have spoke out, when they could have spoke out and saved college kids in America, they did not do it.
And college kids, you need to see it.
CHD didn't save you.
ICANN didn't save you.
The Vaxxed movie didn't save you.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
didn't save you.
Trump didn't save you.
Robert Malone didn't save you.
Meryl Nass didn't save you.
Mary Holland didn't save you.
Nobody saved you.
and nobody's saving you now.
The Zuckerberg Chan Initiative, which is also Facebook Money, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which is the largest, I think, one of the largest shareholders of Johnson & Johnson stock.
So there are these, and then Bill and Melinda Gates.
We are more than an hour in, and we have not talked at all in September of 21 about the massive PCR fraud.
We have not talked about it from a financial aspect.
We haven't talked about it from an EUA aspect to an irregulatory aspect.
And we haven't talked about it from the perspective of what kind of illusion could be created with that level of malfeasance.
Not at all.
In September of 21.
which Bill has bragged on video about the enormous return on investment he has received from his vaccine stock investment.
So we think of Bill and Melinda Gates as this philanthropic foundation that undoubtedly must be losing billions and billions of dollars and joining the worldwide fight to
overcome the effects of SARS-CoV-2 in the global population.
Well, in fact, he's made an enormous profit off of this, okay?
So the atmospherics versus this controlled media and propaganda and fact-checking smear operation are fascinating just to watch.
I mean, for me, as, you know, kind of taking an academic perspective and looking at this, I find it fascinating.
It's as if the hand of this globally integrated
system that we now have with the Global News Initiative, integrating all of the major public news publications, integrating with these large tech giants.
Time for an independent bright web.
I'll be one.
I got you.
I'm your first member of the independent bright web.
Maybe Mark is the second.
Maybe Joe is the third.
I don't know, but I'll be independent forever.
I'm going to be as objective as I possibly can be, no matter who gives me money and who donates.
And hopefully it'll just be a bunch of people subscribing at $10 a month and keep me objective as possible.
I hope that, you know, it never turns out that I've got to explain how I have one or two or three donors that gave me three years of funding and now it ran out.
Nope, I've been funded month by month for five years.
My wife has tolerated month by month financial stress for five years because she believes wholeheartedly in what we're doing for our kids and for our grandkids.
And that's just the way it is now.
It's just the way it's gonna be until we win.
There are media outlets and the video press, it's, you know, CNN and these.
It's been fascinating to watch this integration.
I think one of the most clear-cut examples has been the smearing of ivermectin as horse taste, right?
So this is a WHO-approved drug that has been given out by Merck, so given out by Merck over many years.
In fact, Vincent Ratagniello's wife worked on ivermectin for Merck for 20 years.
Stop lying!
in philanthropy to literally billions of doses, used for years to treat river blindness quite successfully in Africa and many other parasitic diseases.
And it's so strange, right?
Because if you can treat somebody once for a parasite with an insecticide, that's very different than using it prophylactically to prevent a respiratory disease.
Just like I think it's very different, something that supposedly cures cancer is probably not going to be good for healthy people.
Something that's used as an insecticide or an ant poison or a larval poison is probably not going to be good for healthy people to just take prophylactically.
And yet somehow or another, something that can cure cancer also can cure respiratory disease in healthy people.
And these doctors somehow or another don't seem to see any problem with that.
Would a chemotherapy drug be great for, let's say, AIDS?
Oh, it would, wouldn't it?
In fact, the most toxic chemotherapy drug currently on the market would be great for AIDS, wouldn't it?
AZT.
Come on, guys, you must be able to see it by now.
So this all happens, and Merck, who happens to be developing their own drug, their own antiviral for SARS-CoV-2, comes out with these statements that ivermectin is toxic.
If it's toxic, why are they giving it to billions of doses and millions of Africans?
And in fact, it's on the WHO essential medicines list.
But we saw this coordinated attack in the United States press on ivermectin as a horse drug.
And the reason was is because people, out of desperation of not having early treatments available in the states,
have started turning to the only source of ivermectin that they can get, which is to buy the horse pace that's available in feed stores.
So I can go on and on about this press campaign.
It's fascinating.
It's interesting you mention this because a friend of mine on the Isle of Man ordered ivermectin last month from India when he was visiting England because he couldn't find it there.
And a week ago, his wife got the COVID from him and his daughter all had COVID.
and they took ivermectin.
They didn't go to their local GP, and they have improved drastically as a result of taking ivermectin.
It's an extraordinary level of testimony that was going on in 2021 about ivermectin.
Alexandros Marinos would not talk about transfection on Twitter, would not talk about murder on Twitter.
He just had to praise Elon Musk and talk about ivermectin.
And he blocked me when I suggested that maybe it was time to drop the ivermectin bullshit and start talking about murder, start talking about transfection so we can save some college kids.
But that clown didn't have any more principles than Brett Weinstein did and didn't save anybody as a result.
And the list goes on and on and on because they all contacted me.
They all came to my house.
They Zoomed meeting with me.
They called me.
They signal chatted with me.
They hooked me up with a group of their friends or put me in their Bitcoin chat in order to subject me to illusions of consensus, you know, just like the Steve Kerr steering committee.
with Stephanie Seneff and Kevin McKernan and Peter McCullough and Jessica Rose and Matt Crawford and Mark Giraudeau.
but here to alter it from India, where it has been given to thousands of people in a number of states, and the COVID seems to have disappeared.
Same in Mexico.
I had dinner last night with two Peruvian physicians that routinely use ivermectin, and in their case, they're forced to buy the animal powder and reformulate it for humans in formularies.
But that's what's going on across the world, and yet there's this concerted effort.
So, getting back on point,
What is my experience with these attack pieces, and you mentioned the Atlantic one, which is particularly egregious, because it used these yellow journalism euphemisms in introducing me, and yet at the end it kind of paradoxically counteracts all the logic that it was building before and acknowledges that I'm a candidate.
acknowledges that he's a candidate for the Nobel Prize, smiling the whole time he's been on this show.
As far as I can tell, nobody's in really big danger.
Nothing's really under threat.
And the Western world, for the most part, is pretty safe.
Except for in Canada, it's kind of bad, he said.
Closes with this fascinating line from a colleague of mine, Stan Gromkowski, who took a job in the company after I left, that basically states Robert should stop speaking out because it places the potential Nobel Prize at risk for being outspoken.
Stop lying!
Stop!
And I find that actually flattering, because it's true, there was the moment with the Bret Weinstein podcast, as Steve and Bret and I sat down at that table, before we started videoing, we all acknowledged how much we were putting at risk.
And in fact, Steve Kirsch has lost his job as the chief executive officer of the company that he had founded because he's been slandered in the press in the same way.
I do not believe that for one second.
And I don't remember that being part of the Brett Weinstein podcast with Steve Kirsch.
I don't remember it at all.
You can go review it and fact check it.
But I think that's as big a bullshit story as I've ever heard.
Oh, he lost his company.
yeah right vaccine denier and vaccine skeptic brett weinstein has been de-platformed from youtube which means that he's lost the majority of his family's income brett weinstein has been de-platformed from youtube he lost the majority of his family income what was he making on youtube in 2020 he just started his podcast in late 2019 because his number eight podcast
And he started it with his wife, actually, number three, the live stream was already with the mask.
So he had the eighth podcast, the Dark Horse podcast, which was just him interviewing people, not with his wife.
And the eighth one, December 19, was with Sam Harris talking about the next deadly pandemic that would kill 70% of the people that had infected, and we wouldn't be able to tolerate anti-vaccines anymore.
Anti-vaccine people, this guy's now telling you in September of 2021 that you should feel bad for Brett Weinstein, who got a half a million dollar settlement for resigning from his post.
Not sure if his wife also got that.
I didn't get any settlement from the University of Pittsburgh for being fired for speaking out against transfection or being riled up about a lab leak.
I didn't get any compensation for that at all.
Brett Weinstein lost all of his family income.
His dad was the IP lawyer in the department of justice during the original Kennedy administration appointed by John F. Kennedy, working under Robert F. Kennedy.
Bret Weinstein had Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
on his podcast at the end of 2021 in November, a month after this or two months after this, and didn't release the interview with Bobby Kennedy until February of 2023.
It was one of the reasons why I thought Bobby might not be bad.
He might just be completely surrounded by traitors for his whole life.
I'm still struck by the fact that Bobby never really lied to me.
Bobby had me on his podcast and called me Jonathan.
Maybe when he had me on the Defender podcast, he still didn't know.
Maybe they've prevented him from realizing still.
But I mean, that's being naive, right?
A lot of people say that's naive.
Leo Biddle says that's naive.
Leo Biddle from Panda just said today on X that he thinks it's really crazy that I went to work for Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
because he always knew Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
was a bad guy.
But how do we change the world if we don't try to give someone the benefit of the doubt to see what they do?
And what I did was try to get the truth into the book.
And when I got it into the book, nobody cares.
Everybody's ignoring the fact that the Tortura Bavari paper is in the book.
Everybody's ignoring the fact that at the end of the book, I say they would never even need a virus.
That the only way they can do this is with making infectious clones, which is really just synthetic manufacturing like Robert Malone just said here.
And Leo doesn't seem to want to accept that Nick Hudson doesn't have any of my presentations from Panda on the Rumble channel, and that is a problem.
Leo won't say it, that maybe you could just tell Nick to put my videos back up.
Maybe that would be a start.
If you're my friend and ally.
He also said on Twitter that he doesn't like to do it publicly, he likes to do it in private.
But I don't think he's ever challenged any of them using my words.
Asking them if Jay's wrong about intramuscular injection being dumb or that transfection is what he should have called it right now.
And back then.
And now.
And that the vaccine schedule in America is particularly criminal if you compare it to, say, I don't know, the South African vaccine schedule or the Dutch vaccine schedule.
None of them have managed to say that.
Not Brian Hooker or Mary Holland or any of these people.
Merrill Nass, none of them.
All these very easy goals have never been kicked.
And somehow or another, a lot of us have been led to believe that this guy was a hero on a white horse, because that's what he said he was.
But then when you listen to his words, there's no white horse.
There's no message.
He's got no flag.
He's walking the fine line between speaking out and still remaining eligible and in consideration for a Nobel Prize.
Thank you very much.
And I've been slandered in the press and attacked.
But in my case, and I think in all of our cases, but certainly in my case, the warm embrace of the world community for my being early in giving voice to these concerns about the ethics of what's happening far outweighs any damage in my heart from these kinds of attacks.
But what I've learned in talking to others now that have experienced the same pattern, same precise pattern,
is that this is almost a script, this method of attacking and demeaning and labeling.
I mean, we first saw it, if you think back, we've seen it for years with Bobby Kennedy and labeling him as a vaccine denier.
Now, what most people don't appreciate is that Bobby, there's a good chance that Bobby is actually vaccine damaged.
If you ever hear him speak, he has this problem with laryngospasm and this is one of the most common effects of influenza vaccine in adults, adverse events, is this exact problem that he has.
It's such a common thing that the only person that I know that has that problem is Robert F. Kennedy Jr., right?
Interesting.
I think that a little temperance in labeling our colleagues and peers would be well-served.
I think that this, you know, I guess it sells newspapers.
I guess it's profitable to take these positions.
I think it's more than selling newspapers at this stage, because I tell my friends, Josef Goebbels would be proud and take correspondence lessons indeed for, you know,
It would be hilarious if his sister had it.
Oh my gosh, that would be gross.
In a lot of these cases, because you have Justin Trudeau pointedly questioned on the efficacy of transmission and safety of the vaccines, and he just repeats almost like a magic mantra, vaccines are safe and they work.
And this seems like a talking point that has been given to people to parrot.
So the propaganda is so immense, and sadly, the Vatican has bought into this propaganda and has now become one of the biggest engines of this propaganda.
At the Rome conference, which I was at yesterday, I'm privileged to hear you speak, you spoke about your meeting with Cardinal Peter Turkson, who is president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.
Now under Pope Francis, the Vatican has turned into one of the most zealot
vaccine advocates ever.
And ironically, it's the Pontifical Academy for Life under Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia.
who has been leading the charge of the vaccine brigade and inviting, shockingly, notorious pro-abortion scientists, doctors, medics, to address global audiences.
Judge Militant has covered this extensively.
And we've repeatedly asked them, a month ago, for example, we openly challenged them and asked them to invite a wider spectrum of scientists so people can at least understand that
the nature, the debate is contested in peer-reviewed medical journals on COVID vaccines.
So in your conversation with Cardinal Tutson, our readers would be very, very curious to know about this conversation.
And for example, did he give you an assurance that you might be invited to speak at a forthcoming vaccine conference to talk about your invention, your contribution, your views?
So I was very grateful for the cardinal's willingness to meet with me.
It was very generous, and it was on very short notice.
He did not provide it, nor did I ask for any ongoing role.
I was grateful for the advocacy of numerous people within the United States community that believed that it would be useful to have me have an informal conversation with the Cardinal, and particularly with this Cardinal.
Their belief was that he would be more open and highly influential and receptive to listening to this alternative point of view.
It should be noted that this Cardinal Turkson has been promoted in the media as a possible worthy successor.
And so that was my objective, was not to strongly advocate for any change in position on the part of the Church.
That's not within the scope of my mission and my role in the world.
What is your role in the world, Robert Malone?
Tell me what your, what is your role in the world, Robert Malone?
Really, where, what do you belong?
What are you trying to do, Robert Malone?
What's your role in the world?
Tell us.
What I can do and seek to do is not to try to fight or have conflict with others, but to provide information and encourage others to think, and give them the information that
demonstrates that we don't have to have this dichotomy of pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, that there is middle space between those two extremes that makes good sense scientifically and good sense ethically.
And my goal in speaking with the Cardinal was to share with him
a different point of view that he and the church might consider, not as a radical change to their current position.
Not as a radical change to their current position, which is currently being one of the most zealous advocates for the uptake of the vaccine around the world with connections to so many million followers, it's hard to count.
We wouldn't want to make any radical changes to that.
But as an opportunity to consider a modification in their position, a subtle modification that I believe would help the church stake out a moral position that I think would serve the church well over time.
One of my gifts is that I am able to see trends and patterns.
Chris Martenson also says that one of his gifts is seeing patterns.
It's just, I don't even know what to say.
Bobby is so full of shit.
Before many others do.
This is just how my mind works.
And so in this outbreak, as in all others, I'm always trying to think forward.
What do things look like in six months?
What do they look like in a year from now?
And so what I shared with Cardinal Turkson was some observations and ideas around this middle ground, where it's not only vaccine for everybody or no vaccine because vaccine is bad, but rather a middle ground position.
A middle ground position on this could be allowed them to selectively invert people from sovereign individuals into experimental animals whenever the population pyramid managing
required it.
That's what I think.
And I am aware of how important this meeting was, and the importance of my being a responsible messenger.
I was very careful in my wording, and he was very careful in his listening.
To his great credit, he took extensive notes in his notebook concerning the key points I was making.
and then shared with me his own experiences from his standpoint, both in the Church and what the Church had done, and the Church's early attempts at advocating for equity in the vaccines, and their leadership.
I hadn't been aware of the importance of the Church's leadership,
in the initiative that had sought to waive intellectual property rights.
The church was involved in the effort to waive intellectual property rights on some of these products so that the poor nations would be free to manufacture them without the burden of having to pay royalties.
To ensure wider accessibility of these products in less economically advantaged countries.
he's very aware that the position that the WHO has taken, that what we're seeing functionally is the back.
Can you hear the siren?
It's like they're sitting in a hotel room with the window open.
I heard that at the beginning too, and I saw a question in the chat, but it feels like they're in a hotel room with the window open and they just have hung a green screen.
Scenes are, you know, in a very practical way, one could make the case they're being hoarded by the Western nations.
and access to vaccines.
They're being hoarded by these bad Western nations.
We need the poor nations of the world to beg for vaccines.
In emerging economies or less developed nations and cultures is far from optimal.
And this was consistent, so he was reacting to some of the points that I had made in a very favorable way, in acknowledging that this had been the initial attempt by the Church, and also the Church had advocated for loan forgiveness so that these countries would have more capital so they could purchase vaccine, because they are bound in a position where they're constrained financially by these large loans that they have to service.
They don't have the capital to go out and purchase vaccine on the free market as much as in this competitive landscape that we've set up, which has resulted in Western large economies largely dominating the vaccine acquisition and availability.
So my information that I shared with him very much related to this and emphasized that
that the risk associated with this disease is not uniformly distributed.
It's almost exclusively in the very old and obese and others with certain pre.
So there is a disease.
It is spreading everywhere.
Everybody is vulnerable, but the risks of the disease are different and their age stratified, which is something that I had all kinds of fancy slides for in 2020 and 2021 was all in on that.
And of course, making that argument that not everybody being vulnerable is not the same as everybody being in danger already accepted the novel virus that potentially put billions of people in danger.
And the worst case scenario, as Kevin McCarran said, could be seven or eight billion people dead.
That's the magic of what's going on here.
That's the enchantment that you hear.
The question that he says is important is who's vulnerable and who's really at risk?
And that question presupposes the existence of a spreading novel pathogen based on RNA that spread from a mud puddle and might be gain of function.
Stop lying!
Existing risk factors.
And it's for the general population and the healthy population, the risk is infinitesimal.
It's really quite modest.
The scare propaganda that is pushed on us almost incessantly, that we all have this risk,
those of us in this room and most of the audience, and that the children have these risks.
This is not supported by data.
The information that I'm aware of, for instance, in the United States, there's been less than 400 deaths from this disease in the pediatric population.
This is up to the age of 18.
And virtually every single one of those deaths had major preexisting.
And of course, none of those kids needed managing except those with preexisting conditions.
They're not part of the population pyramid problem.
So this is a totally safe narrative.
It's a totally safe, limited spectrum of debate, most likely gamed out in part of the SPARS pandemic document and then developed on from there.
It's a very obvious limited spectrum of debate that doesn't question the presuppositions of the narrative.
Medical conditions.
So this means that the risk for the healthy child.
They called it COVID for the same reason they called AIDS AIDS, because the disease had to be differentiated from the cause so that the disease and its manifestations could be argued about separately from the cause.
And so you accept the cause by arguing about the disease.
Talking about COVID in hospitals accepts SARS-CoV-2, the virus.
Talking about AIDS in hospitals and in gay men and in pregnant women presupposes the existence of the HIV virus and actually avoids questioning it, assumes that the HIV virus causes the AIDS, even if there's no testing and it's only antibodies, you see?
is almost non-existent.
In contrast, deaths to children from influenza in the United States are often much higher, often 600 deaths per year or more.
So this is an example that illustrates that we're constantly bombarded by all of this information suggesting that all of us should be afraid and we should be sequestered in our homes in a state of fear is false.
If I may ask, was he aware of the contested nature of the debate?
I can't say what my sense is that he had
significant awareness of many aspects of these things, but not awareness of the latest information that the vaccines are not able to prevent infection, replication, and spread, and the degree to which they're not able to prevent infection, replication, and spread of the virus.
So now, at the
one hour and 23 minutes in, 34 minutes left, it says here.
He's saying that it doesn't stop spread or replication or something like that.
Again, calling them vaccines instead of saying, well, it looks like transfection to the spike protein is failing at what it does.
He says that the vaccines, he's already, you don't need to talk about how they work or differentiate how they work from other things and nothing anymore.
It's just that they're vaccines.
So we can talk about them like vaccines.
And they're not doing what they wanted them to do, which he hasn't really clarified as to whether that means they're failing or not.
And with the Delta strain.
So this seemed to have been new information to him.
And so the logic, I think it may have been new to him to hear this logic, which is really breaking based on the latest data.
that I've been trying to share through these various vehicles, like you've noted, so that people are aware of this information.
I don't think he was aware that the vaccines... I know he was aware of the controversy concerning the vaccine risks.
And I don't wish to breach the confidence of the communications, but he did share with me some examples.
H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS, is like saying, you know, Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
It's really a statement of faith.
And that's what Carrie Mullis qualified it as.
That's what Dr. Milner qualified it as.
That's what all these people who spoke out against AIDS qualified it as.
But Robert Malone doesn't qualify it as that.
He believes in AIDS as vigorously as Robert Gallo does and as Tony Fauci does.
He believes in all the same viruses that Peter Daszak does.
And so we're not being rescued by these people.
These people are reinforcing the exact mythology that they would like us to teach to our children so that they can be enslaved by it.
of vaccine adverse events that had been experienced by the church.
So there is awareness of that risk side, but I don't think there was full awareness that the current vaccines with the current strain cannot get us to a position where if we were to all accept vaccine, we would cease to have the risk of the virus and the virus disease and the virus infection and the virus spread.
The idea that the vaccinated are perhaps
between 40 and 60 percent protected relative to the unvaccinated from infection and that the levels of replication, if they are infected, are at least as high, if not higher, and that they are also able to spread virus.
I don't think this concept was in his mind before our conversation.
And now I can see exactly why I got sucked in because I had to learn this stuff and understand this stuff and then try to square the circle with these different ideas before they would come and not mesh.
Because I didn't have the requisite knowledge to know that these people were full of shit in 2021.
I was doing the work in 2021 to figure out that they were full of shit, but it was my gut
about the diffuse proposal that got me in trouble.
It was my gut feeling about the diffuse proposal that got me the attention of Drastic to the point where they sent somebody to my house, to the point where they gave me a book deal with Robert F. Kennedy, to the point where they tried to hire me as a staff scientist and make me work on doctor records.
I see it now, I hope you can see it too.
We have to break this now in January of 2025 and make sure that this history is accurately recorded and that these traders are accurately documented and the list is accurately curated so that we can move on.
Write a new biology textbook and write a textbook or sorry, a historical document that can replace this Wuhan coverup book as a real historical accurate document about what happened during COVID.
during the plandemic, during the inversion of our sovereignty to experimental animal status in hopes of finally starting the Human Genome Project in earnest.
Of the morality of the situation, and I suspect that this may be where the Church's position may derive, that it is
the logic that one would receive vaccine as an act of potential self-sacrifice.
And charity to one's neighbor.
Precisely.
Charity to one's neighbor, I think, is the bedrock of where the church is coming from in their advocacy, based on my communication with him.
And what I shared with him was that this concept, while noble and laudable, and I fully support the underlying morality,
that sacrificing for the common good is a fundamental tenet of
commitment, personal commitment to ethics, right?
To being an ethical person is a willingness to suspend one's self-interest in favor of the interests of the broader community and one's fellow human.
I mean, this is, your listenership is Christian and fundamentally committed to Christian principles, and this is one of the strongest positive things, is this commitment to community.
I find myself saying it too, but I think we should start trying to reorient our language and stop using the word human to describe us.
I think we should talk about people.
And the reason why is because I think people means person, and then person means individual, and then individual means unique, sovereign individual.
Unique, sacred, sovereign individual.
I don't think we should use the word human anymore.
I think they're hijacking that word to try and make our kids think of themselves more as animals instead of as definely anointed caretakers of creation.
I want my child to grow up with a responsibility on his shoulders, or her shoulders, to leave the world in a better shape than they inherited it.
and to feel some reverence for the sacred.
And I don't think calling each other humans is the way it's gonna work.
I think calling each other people is the way it's gonna work because there are different peoples.
People have culture and people have languages and people make mistakes.
People are vulnerable and people can be misled.
Humans just sounds dumb.
Lemming, sheep,
We are better than that.
We are more than that.
And each of us is endowed with a responsibility more and greater than any squirrel in our backyard, for goodness sakes.
where the church is, my sense from speaking to the Cardinal, is that this is the foundation of the church's position, is grounded in this idea of self-sacrifice for the greater good.
And as I say, I strongly support that.
If we don't have that, we all end up as economic units in Klaus Schwab's world, right?
Which is my big objection, is that we've chosen to define the human condition.
I think it's really interesting that he brings up Klaus Schwab, because one of the myths that I was told by none other than Merrill Nass in person,
was that she insisted that her and Mary Holland went to Robert Malone's farm and stayed there for two nights in order to vet him before they decided to support him and publish his book.
And during that two night stay, he was informed of the existence of and the role that the WEF plays in the current predicament that humankind is by Mary and Meryl.
He didn't know that beforehand.
They didn't even know who they were.
He wasn't even aware.
It was in that same conversation that she also got really pissed and insisted that he took two shots.
And I said, well, then he's either lying or he's dumb.
And she got up and stormed away from the table saying, well, not everybody's as smart as you, Jay.
And that happened at a CHD dinner the night before Bobby announced in Boston in 2023.
And Mark Kulak was sitting at the exact same table and heard it all.
using the language of economics.
I strongly object to this.
We do have a moral and we do have souls.
And there is unique fire within each one of us that should not be reduced to an economic calculation.
We degrade humanity by doing this.
And so I fully support this logic.
And in fact, I'm living it.
I'm sacrificing my career.
I'm sacrificing my income in order to try to do what I believe to be
serve the common good through my communication and my own personal skills and knowledge, sharing this with the world to advance the common good.
So what I'm trying to say is I applaud the position of the church as it comes from.
Cats will never be blamed.
I assure you if they blame anything, they're going to blame dogs.
Kevin McKernan owns giant cats.
Luigi Warren has cats.
All these people are posting cats because cats is the opposite of mice, you see?
And they're all in on it.
this point of view.
But what I shared with the Cardinal was that this is based on false information, and that what is being asked of your community, or our community, really, it's all of our community, is self-sacrificing to a false endpoint.
And you can catch the language there about where we're going.
I don't want to talk about the golden calf, but we are in a position where we are believing
that we are serving a common good by accepting a product that does not have the necessary characteristics.
We cannot get to this point of blocking death and disease and recovering our economy using... And so he's really making a very obtuse argument about why we should be skeptical, and he's not really saying anything very clear about what decision we should make.
It's just that we shouldn't insist everybody take it.
which is an interestingly close position to what Bobby Kennedy often attempts to articulate, that he's not against vaccine mandates.
It's just that you can't mandate something that hasn't been proven safe and effective.
So that's why Steve Kirsch and Brett Weinstein suggesting that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
is going to get the data and prove that whether vaccines are safe or not, or test them to prove that they're safe and effective, underscores that my prediction is probably right.
They're not going to usefully attack the criminal vaccine schedule in America at all.
They're going to change it to the new updated vaccines.
And they're going to use this proven, you know, they at least they worked when they worked right for the pandemic.
It's all the story that we predicted in 2021 already when they were doing nature papers about how these technologies were just serendipitously coming together at the right time when the world needed it.
We said in 2021 that they were covering up a population pyramid problem.
We said in 2021, they were using a non-specific PCR signal to converse people into accepting transfection and that transfection would cause autoimmunity in healthy people and it was stupid.
And in 2021, this, whatever he's been saying for the last hour is what he was saying.
these vaccines because they are not perfect.
And of course- But are the previous vaccines perfect?
According to Jessica Rose, for the first two years of the pandemic, there was no noticeable signal in VAERS before the pandemic, but there was a big one now.
Kind of subconsciously implying that there was no problem with the vaccine schedule before the pandemic, but there is one now, even though there was a vaxxed movie and a vaxxed two.
And Laura Bono started a CHD that got taken over by Mary Holland.
Someone to love their neighbor, exhorting someone to love their neighbor is slowly morphing or it has already morphed into, I'm gonna force you to love your neighbor because I'm going to force vaccine mandates as President Joe Biden has just done in the last week, putting hundreds of thousands of people out of work and in a very Kafkaesque manner.
Putting people out of work.
threatening 80 million Americans.
Now, where is this going?
That's a good question, and my only answer is it's going to a very dark place, and we'll see how this plays out in time.
I don't think, if this is a political calculation, I don't think it is going to serve him well.
What I see
And this has been a fascinating journey for me, is I've been embraced by religious communities all over the world, and particularly in the United States, and particularly by mothers and people of conscience that have become very alarmed.
Also in Europe, many communities in Europe
intellectual communities are very sensitized to this fundamental question.
How did things go wrong in the 1920s and 1930s?
How did this happen?
Here in Italy, this is something that's very much in the Italian psyche, as it is in Germany.
How did things go so wrong?
It's so funny, isn't it?
It's hilarious.
It's not tragic or scary or terrifying.
It's funny.
In the church community in the United States, what I'm hearing, which is part of the church community in the United States that he is touring right now at this time in 2021 with Urso and Cole and Lee Min Yan.
Stop lying.
Stop.
It's beautiful, ladies and gentlemen.
It's beautiful when you can see it.
Just step back and breathe it all in.
Why they've advocated that I speak with the cardinal so strongly is this sense of creeping authoritarianism.
And in your world, you might call it secular authoritarianism.
Which sadly is being endorsed by the church.
And this is what I keep telling my priest friends.
The church in Nazi Germany, sadly, was on the wrong side of history with notable exceptions like Dietrich Bonhoeffer.
And the church is going down that route again, and this is what we are alarmed about.
So, I really try hard to stay focused on trying to be centrist, balanced, calm, and empathetic.
So, I infer
that the Church's position must derive from this fundamental commitment to love thy brother.
And giving them the benefit that this is really truly where they're coming from.
Because the Cardinal is very aware that in these times there's a long history of
along the whole economic chain of opportunism, let's say.
He's aware that there are major financial interests in play with the pharmaceutical industry and many of these others.
May I pause you there for a moment?
May I interrupt?
I apologize, because this is something that is, again, very worrying.
For the last 40 or 50 years, the Church has taken a radical social justice position, almost against capitalism.
uh with the jesuits being at the forefront of liberation theology but for the first time we see that the church is all virtually on the side of big pharma who are pumping hundreds of millions into the fda we've written about this the church militant the fda is hand in glove with the church the fda is hand in glove with the church he said the fda is hand in glove with the church boy we got to go back to that one
who are pumping hundreds of millions into the FDA.
We've written about this, a church militant.
The FDA is in hand and glove with the church.
And you've talked about the poor who are, you know, the church, particularly the poor in third world countries, the church has taken a preferential option for the poor.
But here we see a kind of collective madness that seems to mitigate against everything the social justice wing of the church has been fighting for.
So my sense is that we must assume good faith.
particularly with the church.
My willingness to extend good faith to Pfizer corporate leadership is a little small.
Pfizer going to go under the bus still, ladies and gentlemen.
Pfizer and BioNTech, definitely.
History of corporate fines and misbehavior, okay?
But this is not the case with this pope and this church, in my opinion.
If anything, the criticism has been that they've gone too far in the other direction.
So I agree that this is a paradox.
And when you see that, my inference is that this must reflect other forces or other logic.
I cannot intellectually, I can't allow myself to go intellectually to a position of the church having been compromised by the financial interests of the large pharmaceutical industry.
I just, I can't allow myself to think that.
If I go there, then I despair.
What happens if Robert Malone is compromised by the financial interests of the pharmaceutical companies of Israel, for example, or Palantir, or Absolera?
or Moderna or NIH or DITRA or any of the other private contracting firms that work for any of those organizations or would be employed by any of those organizations.
What if he's responsible for coordinating Rixey and McCairn and McKernan and recruiting McCullough and Corey and Bowden, finding doctors that would stick to the alternative repurposed drug narrative and never usefully question the existence of the virus?
That's what they wanted me to do.
Lab leak, lab leak, lab leak, DNA contamination.
Jay, just go along with it, would you?
I have to imagine and believe that the church is grounded in
deep fundamental commitment to morality for all humans.
And I share your sense of alarm that there seems to be this paradox.
I think that getting the benefit of the doubt that this must derive from the logic of community sacrifice.
His tie is definitely lions.
I can see it clearly, it's lions.
This being a noble cause and this should be the appropriate stance to take.
what I've tried to share and continue to advocate.
And it's not only, I believe, the moral position, it's also the scientifically sound position.
It's such a strange tie, if you think about it.
All the ties that you could wear.
Why would you choose a lion?
It's kind of gay.
is that the universal vaccination strategy, which would be noble and appropriate if we had very effective vaccines that would stop the spread and didn't have... Oh, it could be a Harvard tie.
It kind of looks a little bit like it's a Harvard tie.
That's possible.
That's a good call.
That could be a Harvard tie.
We don't have those.
You got to look up to Harvard.
I know that it has a little books.
And so the books could be the eye of the vaccines.
I wish we did.
OK, so we have to live in the real world.
And this idea of self-sacrifice for the good of the whole.
And he didn't go to Harvard, but he attended a workshop or a summer thing called a clinical global
health scholar or something like that, so he might have a master's degree from Harvard that he spent half a year on.
It fails in that you're sacrificing for something that will not get us to the objective.
Seculars might call this social contract.
I'm pretty sure it's a Harvard tie because it's got three books, right?
I didn't Google it, but I think it's got three books that are open.
And so it kind of looks like that.
I think that if you make this sacrifice to society, then we will all benefit because we will be able to rekindle normal activity, normal interpersonal activity, travel, economic activity, and our daily lives coming together as families and humans will be freed from the burden of this virus if we would only all accept vaccine.
But that won't get us there.
And what's happening- But remember that about a month before this, it was proposed on
the Bret Weinstein podcast by Steve Kirsch and Robert Malone and Bret Weinstein, that if they just could give everybody ivermectin and silicoxib for 60 days, this would be over and we would get back to zero COVID.
Don't forget, that was only a month before this.
now in the states, and I think there's a gradual awakening, is the realization that this is a false precept, that these vaccines cannot get us to that objective, yet the authorities have told us that they will.
So now what's happened is the authorities have compromised their moral position, their authority position.
their legitimacy as authorities by advocating these simple things, and you were speaking of Mr. Trudeau, that are not consistent with the facts, not consistent with the data.
And as you point out, the church has its fundamental strength is in morality and moral leadership.
It's not in science and technology.
So they've been dependent on the information that they've been receiving from the audiences that have, the communities that have very aggressively sought to control the information that the church has available to process.
And I think this is what I hope is significant about my being able to speak to the cardinal as a dissenter, a gentle dissenter saying, no, these things that you've been told that are truths are not truths.
These are the data, this is the facts.
And so what I've advocated with the cardinal
is aligned with the WHO position, that it is much more ethical to make vaccine available globally for the elderly.
Oh my gosh, why didn't I see it before, Mark?
The whole reason why Paul Cuttrell was claiming that he was a doctor was because he was enrolled in some kind of program at Harvard.
It was probably the same program that Robert Malone was enrolled in.
And that's why he was calling himself Dr. Paul Cottrell, that he was enrolled and he was taking a train somewhere.
Remember?
Holy shit.
Elders of all cultures.
It's important, I think, to recognize.
Bus rider MD was going probably to the same program that he went to.
That those that are dying represent the cultural memory, the leadership, the elders.
from each of these communities.
Anytime a village loses its elders, this is a huge tragedy, right?
This is the accumulated wisdom of that culture, whether it's a village, a city, a nation, a community of any kind.
If we're losing the wisdom and perspective of those that have lived long.
Michael Jordan used to call one of his teammates short bus because he couldn't remember the offing.
This is truly a major cultural loss and we should protect these people carefully.
They should be our primary focus because those are the ones at greatest risk of death and disease from this virus.
It's not the pediatric population.
Oh, so this is really right up the alley of the
of the Barrington Declaration people, right?
Because they're saying the same thing.
We should save the vaccines for the old people.
And we should make the old people locked down in misery.
It's not the young adults.
But Dr. Malone, this is precisely the groups that have been targeted.
And when you speak of sacrifice, you speak of loving your neighbor.
wise in the church seeing that the vaccines are causing, are actually resulting in sacrifice, not the kind of sacrifice we would like to see, but the sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of people.
Databases, all government databases all over the world are showing this evidence of adverse side effects.
and a significant number of deaths.
In fact, more people have died from this vaccine than all the previous vaccines put together.
That is asserted.
So we have to be careful here because we'll be fact-checked on this.
So the counterpoint to that comment is that that is based on these flawed self-reported databases that
Oh, and so now we can run in that hamster wheel for five years.
But Vares is self-reporting.
Vares never gets checked.
Anybody can file a Vares report.
So you never know.
None of those are any good.
And guess who helped him curate that for almost four years straight?
Team Robert Malone main starting lineup member, Jessica Rose.
are notoriously misreporting, but the truth is that what's been documented before this outbreak was that they grossly under-report those events.
And so if one takes, if one accepts the logic that these flawed self-reporting databases, the raw data coming... The church militant is that logo down there.
out of them, indicates, as you suggest, and then you say, well, if we go back in the historic literature, before all this happened and all the propaganda and spin, how much was that underreporting?
It varies depending on the variable that's being underreported, but it's in the range of 10 to 100-fold, not 10 to 100%, 10 to 100-fold.
Okay, so then when we say, you know, it's this number of deaths that have reported into this database from this country, certainly in the United States,
We have to also consider that that represents a gross underreporting of the actual number.
So what is the true number?
Unfortunately, we can't get that because of the way that the governments have elected to roll this out.
No, because of the way that lifelong vaccinologists like Robert Malone have completely absolved the public from even being able to comprehend the possibility that intramuscular injection in general is stupid.
and should be expected to damage more people than it helps.
And that likely the only way they get away with it is a massive placebo campaign, which would be so stupidly cheap and hilarious to everybody that participated in it.
going on tv talking shit about how we need vaccines and we need vaccines and knowing all along that the vaccine schedule can't exist without massive amounts of placebos that allow all kinds of doctors to think that they're not hurting anybody because they're not when they inject saline and i think that that um that logic
I think what we have is a situation where historically, this goes back to mid-century, mid-20th century and before.
It's based on the thinking of Plato, and it's referred to as the Noble Lie, the logic that there is a cadre of elite that have the true knowledge that is so complex and so nuanced that
And so he's going to make a populist argument here that the elite against us, the elite against us, very, very similar to, to Steve Bannon's elite against us, a populist argument.
It can't be shared with the average person.
And that the average person should merely accede to the wisdom of the leaders and the empowered, and that it's acceptable for those leaders and empowered to speak myths, truths,
or lie, hence the noble lie, in service of the common good.
And we have this captured in federal.
And it can't be him.
You see, that's the thing that they don't want you to understand, that the noble lie is not told by noble liars.
The noble lie is actually that limited spectrum of debate that is sustained by coordinated lying on both and all sides of that limited spectrum of debate, as described by Noam Chomsky and Edward Bernays.
law in the Federal Register, ironically, in 1984, in the context of a polio virus campaign, in which the government clearly states that any information which would cause vaccine hesitancy or resistance, whether true or untrue, shall be discouraged.
It shall not be allowed.
Okay, so this is federal policy, and I think this is, this
historic logic that's been accepted worldwide, that it's okay to mislead people about the truth because it's for their own good.
And then we had the H1N1 swine flu outbreak with all of that kerfuffle.
It's not for their own good.
It's because that's how we are governed.
And that's what he's not usefully opposing.
We are governed by mythologies that are created by the priest class and regurgitated by the political class.
and learned and recited by the slave class.
And that's us.
And if we don't stop learning and reciting what they tell us to learn and recite, like what he's doing right here in this hour and a half discussion about what we should learn and recite, we're not going to escape and neither will our kids.
This is the slave speak.
And these are the people that curate it, that teach it to us, that define it for us and make sure that we get it exactly right.
Government in the US and then as US being leaders in health, much of the world has followed the logic that it's okay to speak mistruths for the common good.
And this has been justified.
And I feel like what's happened.
And these myths, mistruths include the narrative about RNA being able to pandemic, about transfection being a,
a form of an investigational vaccine, and that intramuscular injection is a great way to administer medicine.
These are all lies.
They've kind of dug themselves into a hole, and people love my colloquialism, so the first rule of holes is when you're in one, stop digging.
And the governments, I think, have not heard that rule very well.
You're in a hole, and the only tools you have to dig are the shovels they gave you.
The only tools you have to get out are the shovels that they gave you.
That's why you keep digging.
What you got to do is drop the shovels.
They gave you a shovel labeled pandemic.
You got to throw it away.
They gave you a shovel labeled the best vaccine schedule on earth.
You got to throw it away.
They gave you a shovel that says evolution because DNA, you got to throw it away.
They gave you a shovel that says you are the product of your genes.
You got to throw it away.
They gave you a shovel that says DNA to RNA to proteins.
You got to throw it away.
And get out of the hole, indeed.
And they continue misrepresenting information, including this rule very well.
And they continue misrepresenting information, including this information about death.
But getting back on point regarding the Cardinal, what I tried to share with him is that
There is strong data coming in supporting the logic of Gerd von den Bosch, another leading virologist.
Gerd von den Bosch!
You mean the guy that you worked with at Solvay for a few years?
Wow!
You mean that guy who got into a big argument with me in a Zoom meeting about T-cell immunity being there or not?
The guy that I was told was the leading aspect of the, you know, the virus might evolve to get away from the vaccine.
And I was led to believe that that was a good argument, that guy.
The policy of universal vaccination that is based on some flawed assumptions also has the risk of creating super viruses.
Super, super viruses.
They could create like really the most dangerous virus in history that could be like the worst case scenario.
And so it's bad science in that what we're doing is compromising individual rights.
We're going down this authoritarian path of mandating someone accepting a medical product that is, no matter what you want to say, it is far from perfect.
It is associated with adverse events.
It is associated with the risk of death.
And we can have an arm-wrestling match about whether the risk-benefit ratio justifies vaccinating 2-year-olds or 8-year-olds or 18-year-olds or 80-year-olds, right?
Now, I'm in the camp that for those over about 65, vaccination probably makes good sense, even though it has risks.
but the risks of the virus are greater than the risks, significantly greater than the risks.
And if you're an 80 year old, like Mr. Biden or Mr. Fauci, the risks, or Speaker Pelosi, the risks are quite high that if you contract this disease in the absence of vaccine, you will die.
Wow.
I mean, there it is right there.
We got to manage the population pyramid.
This is how we're going to do it.
And we're going to convince these people, but for them, the novel virus is an incredibly risky thing to just go into it without help.
If you have a comorbidity,
In Mr. Biden's case, it's senility.
I agree.
There's the appearance of a conflict of interest in certain age cohorts that are having to be making decisions.
We can leave it at that.
But in the case of the Cardinal, he shared that the Vatican has all been vaccinated.
He's received vaccine.
What I found fascinating, so the logic is, let's save the vaccine globally for the elders that really need it.
Not give it to everybody so that we don't generate these vaccine-resistant virus mutants, these superbugs, like we do with our over... So again, discussing about superbugs.
Suggests that there are superbugs also with with bacteria that get enriched because you know, they become antibiotic resistance But there are rivers in India that are filled with antibiotics that haven't generated superbugs yet that I know of Actually full of antibiotics from the upstream manufacturing plants They have all kinds of weird stuff and foam and whatever growing in them But they don't have like superbugs that have killed everybody that lives around that village yet
And so again, what I think you have here is just a reinforcement of the mythology that he knows he's there to reinforce.
Make sure you don't forget that there are all these other biological realms of possibility that I'm an expert in that you have no clue about.
It has all been vaccinated.
He's received vaccine.
What I found fascinating, so the logic is, let's save the vaccine globally for the elders that really need it, not give it to everybody so that we don't generate these vaccine-resistant virus mutants, these superbugs, like we do with our overuse of antibiotics, and make early drug treatments available with these imperfect
You know, speaking of feedlots, Pamela, the other thing that they give to all those animals is selenium a lot.
It's very, very interesting that no one ever talks about that.
Very powerful combinations that are being discussed actively in the conference that's being held here.
The first international conference bringing together physicians and scientists from all over the world that have pioneered these treatment protocols that are saving enormous numbers of lives using very inexpensive, largely off-patent drugs.
You know the pharmacist Pfizer can't make a big profit on those and neither can Merck But people encourage our viewers to watch this and we put the link below so they can watch the conference live Apparently there are over a hundred million views already on the streaming for this for this meeting So in any case what I encourage the cardinal to consider is
100 million people saw his COVID summit, then 100 million people were led to believe that there was a mystery to solve.
At the heart of the mystery might be a lab leak.
At the heart of the mystery might be an imperfect product that is being overrepresented as being more effective than it is.
In September of 2021, Robert Malone saved no one.
that the church could modify its position a little bit, not be anti-vaccine, but be pro-vaccine equity.
So don't be anti-vaccine, be pro-vaccine equity.
For more global access to vaccines for those that need it most.
more global access to vaccines for those that need it most.
We don't have enough vaccine to saturate everybody and it's bad science to do so.
Advocate and endorse the idea of early treatment interventions so that those that do get infected that haven't accepted vaccine, their risk of hospitalization and death, their already small risk, is further reduced by early intervention.
which is for some paradoxical reason prohibited in many countries, and that we also make available tools so that people can self-assess whether or not they have been infected with this virus as opposed to the rest.
We also make tools so that they can self-assess whether they've been affected by this virus or another virus.
which underscores the very big point I've been making very well over the last few days, that while these people speak out against the COVID shot, none of these suckers have ever come out against PCR as an illusion.
PCR is a weapon.
PCR is a lie.
PCR is a remnant generating supply chain to sequence entire populations multiple times over multiple months or years.
Not one of these people is talking about that fraud and that remnant chain generation.
None of them, even though they are for sure a part of it.
There's incisional virus or influenza or rhino or we can go on and on, right?
And so they can call their doctors and say, hey, I did a home test.
It shows that I'm virus positive.
What do we do now?
And then the doctor can take them under treatment like the Hippocrates group has done through an amazing volunteerism.
I mean, if anybody deserves a Nobel Prize in this environment, as far as I'm concerned, it's groups like Hippocrates who are working selflessly to save lives.
And we can argue, the scientists among themselves, about who discovered this, that, or the other thing, but just like the MSF award, the heroes, I think, are these groups of physicians and physician leaders that have pioneered these early interventions that are saving so many lives.
So now he is pushing Pierre Kory and Peter McCullough and what, Zev Zelenko for zinc?
Peter McCullough for hydroxychloroquine.
Zev Zelenko for hydroxychloroquine.
Ivermectin he mentioned.
And of course that's Pierre Kory.
Remember Pierre Kory, the one that advocated for supplementary oxygen, high flow oxygen, the lack of ventilators, the fact that everybody's pulse ox was falling.
It was crazy.
And he provided, of course, a legal affidavit testifying that George Floyd definitely suffocated and didn't overdose.
Stop lying!
Then I think that people need to have access to early diagnostics.
And there are tools that can be put onto your iPad or your cell phone that would allow you to put in your own information and get back a calculated information about what their true risk is.
He has made a cell phone app that will allow you to put in your information and then get a calculated risk of your risk for COVID.
Holy shit, I forgot about that app.
Did you forget about that app?
He's plugging that app in September of 2021 as something that he's done to try and help things.
Wow, I forgot.
I mean, I really forgot.
With their own medical history, I don't advocate that that data goes to a central database, right, because that could be exploited.
But I think that allowing people to have tools to self-assess their own risk and make their own decision about whether or not to take vaccine is a key part of this logic.
And where that comes from is my personal strong belief that has
So you should test yourself using all the products that I've helped design and all the products that I've invested in and all the products that I bought into in order to assess whether or not you need it and when.
run through this whole thread, is the rights of the individual to control their own body.
And I believe strongly that we must respect the rights of the individual to elect to willingly accept a medical procedure or not.
This has to be fundamental.
This is what I most object to now.
And when I started on this journey, I thought that this would be a discussion about bioethics.
Then it became a discussion about the vaccine technology and the adverse events and these kind of small things.
And what it's turned into is a discussion about fundamental morality, freedom for the individual, and the power of these global organizations to control information.
and to suppress dissent.
And this has been a personal journey for me, and I think for all of us, perhaps for you also, is we become aware of the power of this new media and this integrated global media to control our very ability to think by controlling the information that we have access to.
And that, I think, is the transcendent issue that cuts across all of this.
He said it changed.
I hope, I'm actively seeking that the one global moral authority that I'm aware of, that being the Catholic Church, becoming engaged in providing moral leadership globally and making it clear
that these ideas of equity and integrity of self are fundamental, and that it's not okay to manipulate information and people in these ways.
And so I hope that this perspective, that I was, I hope that I was effective in communicating these ideas to the Cardinal, and that the Cardinal might be effective in sharing this point of view with church leadership, because I think we desperately need
moral leadership in this time.
And we don't seem to have any global unifying body that can provide that other than the church.
And so this is why I disrupted my schedule.
I've so passionately sought out an opportunity.
I'm not a member of the Catholic community.
That's not been my world.
But I very much respect and appreciate the advocacy by members of that community, including yourself, to try to help me to share this alternative point of view.
And from the private conversations that the Cardinal shared with me and some of his own observations, having to do with experiences concerning some
more naturopathic remedies that he's aware of in his own country that have been developed that are quite potent.
And he shared some examples of that.
He seemed to be indicating to me that he appreciated the logic that there are early interventions that are not the approved, patented, pharmaceutical, marketed products that were generating so much revenue for these large pharmaceutical companies.
There are many paths to protecting people
And I shared with him that I firmly believe, and as is shown in this conference, there are many agents, largely anti-inflammatories, including traditional medicines, such as the Chinese use.
The Chinese have two approaches for treating COVID.
One is more traditional pharmaceutical.
One is based on more traditional Chinese medicine.
Both are effective.
And so in India, a state experimented with Ayurveda, the ancient Indian medicine, rooted in the Vedas.
And that was so successful that people from other states were coming in and getting the COVID medicine.
So there are naturopathic Chinese Indian medicines out there.
And your conference has dealt with the Western medicines out there as well.
So I think that the data show
that we don't have to fear this.
We've been taught fear.
The fear has just been relentlessly promoted.
Why?
I, you know, we can speculate, and it's not, it's above me, clearly.
It is to make sure that everyone on all sides of the aisle accepts the existence of a novel virus, the existence of a crisis, the potential threat of gain of function, the mystery of a lab leak, and the
the corruption of America.
That's what they want.
There are large forces at work.
And I think there are large forces that have seen this as an opportunity to advance their own initiatives and interests.
They may not have started off thinking that way, but they are behaving in ways that suggest that they are perceiving an opportunity.
But I think that I'm confident that the Cardinal recognizes that vaccines are not the only solution from his casual comments.
And I just, in speaking with you and speaking through this medium, I'm very grateful to have had his respect and his attention.
And I deeply respect his comments.
And I listened to them very, very carefully.
And I was received with respect.
And he listened to me very, very carefully.
So for those that have asked that I serve as an emissary in this... I wonder who asked him to serve as an emissary.
I wonder who he's a messenger for.
Ditra?
I'm confident that...
the information and the message was heard in terms of what their action items are going to be.
This is beyond me.
I have no idea, but I feel like I have fulfilled my mission here, and I'm very grateful for the advocacy of particularly the U.S.
Catholic community, as well as yourself, in supporting
this attempt to reach out to the Church in its role as a moral and theologic leader in the world in this incredible time.
And may I, on behalf of our viewers, say bravissimo to you.
You've been a voice in the wilderness.
You've been a prophetic voice, a light in these dark times.
The Bible tells us you spoke of fear, and the Bible tells us 365 times, fear not.
And I think as we stand up to the tyranny of these times, or the looming tyranny, your words to us are going to be not only a source of massive information, a goldmine of information, but also looking at your own example, I think, of real inspiration.
So thank you so much, Dr. Robert Malone, for giving us your very valuable time.
And for appearing on Church Monitor.
We're immensely grateful to you.
Thank you.
God bless you.
Ladies and gentlemen, they created this illusion of consensus by sticking to a limited spectrum of debate.
I think you could hear it very clearly there as Robert Malone tried to outline it.
In September of 2021, they were still pretty off script and still didn't really know for sure how to say it.
But they were going around making sure that nobody really usefully questioned the existence of a pandemic, a novel virus and the spread of it.
And in fact, this illusion of consensus is now being morphed into something about processed food and seed oils and
and health freedom, and we're never ever going to talk about GMO anything.
We're not going to talk about intramuscular injection as medicine.
We're not going to talk about remnant sales.
We're not going to talk about GMO insects, nothing.
And it's all by design, ladies and gentlemen, because again, it's a limited spectrum of debate.
And that's exactly what happens on social media.
These militarized representations of reality are created by coordinated liars.
that agree to disagree about certain things that reinforce the presuppositions of the illusion.
That's what social media is.
It's a military program with participants that work against you.
And Noam Chomsky knew it.
Edward Bernays knew it.
This has been GigaOM Biological High Resistance Low Noise Information Brief brought to you by a biologist.
I'll see you again tomorrow.
Thank you very much.
Pamela, I hear you objecting to the not playing of your music and it's noted.
Love you.