Well, everybody.
There will be an examination on this.
Yes.
That's that's it, Steven.
Steven loves IT, Richard. He's very good.
Oh, yeah, absolutely. Love it.
Well, I always I always chuckle when
I can't get something to work and I work with the anti-matter cameras
and then people look at me and, you know, what's the issue?
And I have to explain that it's probably self-evident to an elementary school
student, but I'm not an elementary school student.
So, you know.
Yes.
That's very good.
Well, everybody, in my opinion, that is why God invented 11 year olds.
I thought that's parents did that.
OK, go ahead. Thank you so much.
Well said, Rima.
All right, everybody, welcome.
I'm Charles Kervesh, your moderator.
This is Stephen Frost's Medical Doctors for COVID
Ethics Meeting.
It is about ethics.
I'm Australasia's passion provocateur.
Here's my red jacket, red for the colour of passion, Richard.
And we've had Richard before.
It was a wonderful presentation.
It's wonderful to have you again, Richard.
There's lots of professions here.
There are doctors, journalists, engineers,
writers, researchers, nurses, data processors, lawyers, ex-lawyers.
And we are here.
In a true spirit of operation of exploration and discovery.
Most of us understand we're in World War Three.
That's why we're here. Stephen understood we're in World War Three.
So that's why he created this group.
We go for two and a half hours, Richard.
You're most welcome for the full two and a half hours.
But we know you have tight time limits.
So you present, we ask questions.
And when you have to go, you go.
After two and a half hours, there is a telegram video chat
available for you to go to a less structured format.
We don't have censorship, but we have proper moderation.
Free speech is crucial to this group.
But that doesn't. But we have proper moderation.
So just because you have you don't have unlimited time to speak,
unlimited time to talk about whatever you want.
That's what moderation is all about.
So I tried to apply the rules of Parliament.
Now, one of the elements of this, Richard speaks.
There are other speakers who speak.
And the challenge for each one of us in this exploration
is to understand your beliefs, how they impact on what you hear.
And I urge you to be aware of that.
We welcome all new members, all new attendees.
Sorry, if this is your first time, welcome.
Please introduce yourself in the chat.
We are interested in the development of science and necessarily,
as Richard, you as a scientist know, that means there's going to be
disagreements and we try our best to keep those disagreements
in true exploration of science.
We come from love, not fear, but we come from tough love.
So we do care about humanity.
We wouldn't be doing this if we didn't care about humanity.
It's much easier to be asleep and go along with the government narrative.
None of us are doing that.
And so have an open mind.
Enjoy the journey. Question and answer.
If you put your hand up for reactions after Richard speaks.
And Richard, we welcome you and we look forward to sharing your genius with us.
And before you start, Stephen, is there anything else I've forgotten?
No, that was pretty comprehensive, I think.
Beautiful. Richard, over to you.
Now, how long have we got you?
Just so that, you know, when do you have to go?
Actually, we have an hour because I get notified yesterday or the day
before that there is an event going on here in Dallas.
Unbeknownst to me, somebody, I guess, General Flynn had posted a video
that included part of my deposition that got taken down immediately.
Somebody else who's a film producer then put out a small video clip with me
at the very beginning.
And so now, interestingly enough, the people in Dallas want to actually
see me in person. I'm not sure why.
But the goal being to really promote the movement here going forward
on these indictments that we have been working on, these grand jury indictments.
And so if I can get any person to fulfill the tenletters.org approach,
which is to go online to tenletters.org, it's a fairly simple approach.
I mean, it's really designed for the United States.
But I temper it with this statement.
One of the considerations that we had in doing all of this was not only
recognizing that these are crimes against America, but these are crimes
against humanity.
And while a number of nations have been actively involved in this,
we recognize and I recognize as a scientist physician that this was my
responsibility to have prevented this type of thing.
And it got by me.
And I take that on a very personal note.
I very seldom have.
I take that on a very personal note.
I very seldom share my personal thoughts because there's a lot of people that want
to do that. And the clarity of science is is tantamount to what I'm doing.
But so the purpose of making these statements is that somebody had pointed out
that there was an Australian clip where the people with lockdown were raising a
question. Where are you, America?
And the answer is we're here.
And we are going to be coming for the rest of you as soon as we get this kicked
off in this country.
This is not just about us taking out the criminals in the United States, but it
will be then coming to help our our friends in other countries to deal with
the criminals in your countries that have abridged your rights and harmed you.
I am very clear and crisp and concise.
I would like to think in my approach to this, I know that there are a lot of
things that people have concerns about, whether it's medical freedom, the
practice of medicine, the quarantine and the vaccines.
But all of this, everything that has happened is the result of a single series
of activities that are criminal in nature.
And those are the deliberate, intentional and knowing development of viruses that
are being a function viruses.
These viruses, when PCR is done correctly, it turns out that we have found at least
three gain-of-function biological weapons that were built by Ralph Berrick from the
University of North Carolina and Xi-Zeng Li at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
The PCR data looking at some eight to 10 segments of three different viruses that
I have documented and others have documented, paid for by the U.S.
military, paid for by NIAID, Anthony Fauci, paid for by NIH, violate the
Biological Weapons Convention Treaty.
They violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
They violate the Declaration of Helsinki.
They violate Nuremberg, which is in standing in the U.S.
because a Southern District of Texas federal judge in the case of Jennifer
Bridges versus Methodist Hospital defined that she could not win the defendant
Methodist Hospital because Methodist Hospital was not a government, i.e.
governments, including ours, the United States of America, are criminally culpable
in U.S.
federal courts for Nuremberg violations, which they have done.
Everything else that has happened.
The quarantining, the shutting down of businesses, the shutting down of schools,
the shutting down of churches or synagogues or whatever your religious
practice is, the interference with the practice of medicine, the use of vaccines
that I'm still just stunned that so very few people have actually read the
emergency use authorization documents, which clearly show no statistical benefit.
I don't know of too many patients, although I should temper that.
I know very few patients who if I told them I'm going to give them a drug, but it
won't make any difference and if I don't give them any that they would take the
medication.
Now, unfortunately, when I first asked that of somebody in a group, they said,
well, of course I take it because if you told me to take it, I take it.
And where I was somewhat pleasantly delighted that they thought that much of
my instructions, I was also a little struck by the fact that they would still
have said yes to that.
So our goal now after two and a half years and what this is now month eight.
So we've got seven plus twenty four thirty one plus months and counting is to
hold these individuals criminally accountable.
And so ten letters dot org is a campaign that we've launched less than a week
ago.
That is a you simply go to that site.
If you're in the United States, you can or if you're a citizen of the US and you
have citizenship in any state, you can enter your name, your address, your state.
It will put a cover letter together for you directed to your attorney general that
you can then download along with the letter for indictment.
And the letter for indictment doesn't provide all the evidence because it's it's
too there's too much evidence to do, but it provides links to the evidence to
show that the individuals in question of which we're fairly focused, we focused on
Anthony Fauci, on Collins, on Gates, on the people in government positions that is
is relatively focused that points out not only the the treaty law that has been
violated, so therefore the US Constitution under Article six, but also the state laws
and very specifically points out that these crimes amount to amount to murder,
attempted murder, manslaughter, reckless manslaughter, false imprisonment, assault,
battery, coercion and perjury and and in some cases treason.
If you've taken a note to uphold an independent constitution, the purpose is
for everybody to go to that site, download a cover letter, download the letter for
indictment, which is no longer signed just by myself.
It is signed by Kevin McCarran, who's probably one of the premier neuro biologist,
animal biologists in the world with his knowledge of prion diseases.
It is signed by Charles Rixie, who is an MA and former US Marine weapons of mass
destruction facilitator and instructor.
It is signed by Johanna Deiner, who is a German physician who's been dealing with
this in Germany, and it is signed by Andrew Huff, who was the former vice president
of EcoHealth, who has firsthand knowledge and information on the grants that were
supplied, written by himself under the authority of Peter Daszak at EcoHealth to
Anthony Fauci and others in the US federal government.
The evidence is clear.
These individuals have violated these treaty laws and have violated state criminal
statutes. They need to be held criminally accountable.
Everything else that has happened, while I know it brings a strong response from
people, all of those actions occurred because of these gain of function
biological agents.
Now, the evidence suggests that these agents probably accidentally got released.
And this does not release these people from their criminality.
In fact, it doubles down on their criminality because they had an option at that
point in time to come clean and say, as I told people, if I were running the
program, look, people, we developed these weapons, OK, we thought it was the right
thing to do. We did it for X, Y and Z reasons.
All the people that are going to attack us and we have to be ready to attack them.
But you would have come clean on that.
And the fact that they did not meant that they doubled down and covered up their
criminal actions, which holds them even more culpable.
And if you watch the panicked emails, if you read through the panic emails, if you
listen to the panicked depositions, Anthony Fauci before Senator Dr.
Charles Rand Paul in the U.S.
Congress, if you watch their behaviors, they are the behaviors of men and women who.
Are struck by the fact that they have lost control.
And anybody who thinks that we are coming out of a dark tunnel at this point in time
is not paying attention to what's been going on around the world or in the United
States. Now, all of you have firsthand information on what's going on in Australia,
New Zealand and other countries.
But here in Dallas, Texas, the CDC, about two weeks ago, wanted to turn this into a
red zone to reinitiate masking.
I can tell you going into my shops, places of business, I frequent people are beginning
to wear masks again.
I can tell you that the Nuclear Threat Initiative shows that they are playing the
game of testing the waters to see what it takes to get the response that they want,
which is a no regrets policy where countries, including the United States, will simply
yield and say, look, you tell us there's an emergency, we will do what you tell us to
do. Now, these games have been played before and very successfully, except that now they
are watching and playing it around to may have accidentally been released.
And you can argue with me about whether you think it's accidental or intentional.
I would argue that makes no difference.
Either way, they developed biological agents that are criminal actions.
It's what they're doing now that tells us that they are proceeding forward, whether
it be monkeypox or control of nitrogen for agricultural purposes or controlling the
products on the shelves and the prices going up.
The direct manipulations of every one of these components of our lives is an effort to
put pressure on people to recontrol the population in all countries.
And my argument right now is quite frankly that we have less than 90 days to do this.
We have less than 90 days to turn this around.
We have less than 90 days, in my opinion, to get these grand jury indictments moving
forward, to stop them in their tracks because they have demonstrated that they will continue
to push forward, whether it's masking in Dallas, whether it's masking of the public
school children in the state of California after three cases of COVID were admitted to
hospitals, whether is the legislation occurring in California right now where they are giving
the authority to parents, or rather not to parents, but to schools, they have the authority
for the schools to vaccinate children in the absence of the approval of their parents.
There are many laws that they are attempting to pass right now.
And I would argue that the newest thing that was just passed by the House with this, let's
fight inflation nonsense, where they put together 87,000 new IRS agents to go after
the people that are making minimum or moderate wages is nothing more than an attempt to
recontrol the people and to install fear.
If you're afraid of something, you are not reacting clearly and concisely.
I used to tell students that I used to train for emergency scenarios, that when you walk
into or come into an emergency situation, the first pulse to check is your own, because
if you don't have control of your own emotions and behavior, you cannot possibly save
somebody's life unless you're lucky.
And luck is not the way we want to be going about this.
We need to do this in a very controlled manner.
And with that, with appreciation for the fact that I only have an hour and I want to make
sure I answer questions, my plea is for people to get out there to make people aware of
this. Ten Letters.org.
The idea being that you fill one out and you submit it to 10 other people for them to
fill one out and each of them submit it to 10 others to fill it out.
And we produce an overwhelming effect.
And the campaign, the little video that was put on that was the Harry Potter video where
they were trying to get Harry into a wizard school, Hogwarts.
And the owls were delivering letters and it was my youngest son, who's 28, so not that
young, but who came up with that idea and said, you know, Dad, this is the type of thing.
And it's the motivation that shows that if we inundate these individuals, these attorney
generals in the United States, they will have to listen to the people.
And we, the people in this country, still are supposed to be running it.
And once we once we address this, we will be coming.
I will be coming.
I make this promise to you.
I will be coming to your nations to help you get your criminals indicted and arrested
and tried and imprisoned at a minimum.
Well said, Richard.
We in Australia will welcome you.
We will welcome your strategies.
And I'm sure many other countries will as well.
We have numerous countries represented here.
Now, traditionally, Richard Steven asks the first questions as the founder of the group.
As you know, I remember that.
Yes. And then anyone else, please put your hands up using the reactions tab for.
Questions.
Richard's we've got Richard for another 35 minutes.
So that's excellent.
Plenty of opportunities for questions.
So, Stephen, over to you.
Dr Fleming, could you so if Simon, the UK and there are people all over the world on this
call now.
And of course, there are all the others who are not here who are members of the group.
So we've got 1300 members and they're all recommended.
So it's quite an army.
So I could.
So what about all the.
So can the foreigners, i.e.
the non-Americans, write to write these letters or are you suggesting they write to their
own attorneys general?
So one thing I would recommend the way that the cover letter is set up is that if you
enter your address and it has your state, it will give you an attorney general.
But there's also the option of not having your address put on the letter if that's
applicable to you.
So I would argue both.
This is not a one or other choice at this time.
This is a let's act solidly across the board right now.
So if you are outside of the United States and you would like to send these letters,
you know, again, it's snail mail, but it's hard for them to ignore snail mail.
And we've talked about getting emails, but we know that there's a tendency for them to
kind of ignore or deflect those types of things.
But hard copies are hard to get away from.
So if you have a certain state that you think that it will be particularly advantageous
to, please click down as your address for that state, get a cover letter sent with your
name and anything else you want to put on it.
Download that cover letter along with the letter for indictment.
And please send those in to the United States, because this will, again, the impact of
letting these people know we're no longer going to sit back and tolerate what's being
done, that we understand that crimes have been committed and we demand that these people
do their job that they have been elected to do.
And I would also suggest that you do that in your own countries as well.
You can take the format of you have my blessing to take my my letter for indictment,
put a cover letter to your people and state this is what's being done in the United States.
And these people are with us here in the UK, in Australia, because we are.
I am. These other the other four people that I mentioned are.
We are determined to hold these criminals accountable.
And if we can do that by you sending it to your people as well, please do, because we
will be coming.
We were going to get our indictments in this country.
We will probably also be coming for our enemies, you know, in the sense that even our enemies
who have been put to test and suffer need our help at this point in time.
This is the best opportunity humanity has to actually maybe become humanity again.
Yeah. And so.
And looking at the current situation, I think we're going to have to look at the current
situation. Looking at the criminals, as I'm sure you are doing, do you detect signs that they are
losing their nerve or they feel that maybe they've gone a step too far this time or too quickly
so that they've actually got our attention, not just our attention, but many, many others around
the world in a way that they wouldn't have got our attention had they not gone so quickly and
done such outrageous things.
Yeah, no, I do. I think that the fact that this accidentally occurred, and it's one of the
arguments for being accidental watching their behavior, I think the fact that it accidentally,
they accidentally leaked out, you know, and some of the video presentations I've done explain the
fact that they, in September and October 2019, while they were worried about a computer failure
and being hacked, they were also busily trying to change their incinerator systems and their
air duct systems in an emergency mode. These are people that were panicked about something,
and this is what was going on at the time. So I think it is a blessing, if we can take it that
way, that this occurred in less of a controlled manner than they wanted. I think it exposed them,
but again, it's taken two and a half years. Right now, I think they are doubling down
with every step, because if you look at it from the perspective that I think they are looking at
it from, criminals doing criminal actions, and they know it's being raised on accountability,
there's a point in time that you either have, I mean, there's no place for them to run now.
They either defend their positions and turn us around, potentially turn us against each other,
or they're going to be caught and held legally, criminally accountable. I had somebody attack me,
I don't need to mention the name of the individual, but said, Dr. Fleming wants blood.
Make no doubt about it, I want blood. These are criminals that have killed millions of people,
have harmed many, many more people, and have manipulated everybody on the planet to their own
gain. Imprisonment and or blood, depending upon their role in this, is exactly what I'm going
after. I didn't call this originally Operation Blutern by mistake. Blood Eagle has a specific
meaning, which it was saved for people who committed the most egregious crimes,
unacceptable to humanity. And let's not forget that in Nuremberg, blood was paid for blood that was
due. Sure, seven doctors were hanged on the 2nd of June 1948 for human medical experimentation.
Yes. And I was so, very quickly, if the so-called cost of living crisis, BBC I believe,
and food shortages, inflation, the energy crisis in the UK, I don't know whether other countries,
well, Germany, I think is going to have this. But so that to me is all part of what's going on.
So are you going after just the people who are responsible for the vast array of Covid crimes,
or are you going after the related crimes? Because ultimately, I think the financial
cabal, if you like, is responsible for the whole thing. Are you going after the hidden guys,
or are you just going after the obvious ones? All right. Well, I know everybody wants,
everybody who's done something wrong to somehow pay a price. The way this is done legally,
now I'm putting on my JD hat, is we want to go after the people that we clearly can prove
have committed these crimes. From a JD's perspective, the real fun begins once the
indictment occurs, because then you get to ask questions, then you get to get documents,
then you get phone records and everything else. And anything that you pull out with that information
now exposes new people to new crimes. It's the ability to start digging into these records and
see just how deep and harmful this has gotten. We have to go after the people that we can prove.
And once we start that, all the rest of the information that comes out,
and the people who start throwing each other into the bus, that starts to expose new crimes.
And then those people, now there's evidence that has been brought forward that cannot be ignored.
And that's the way you dig into this. You start with the people that you have the data on,
that you know you can prove it, that you can show to a grand jury. See, a grand jury is only about
crimes. It's not about civil litigation. Civil litigation, any attorney can file on behalf of
anybody to any court. But criminal requires that prosecutors, either federal or state prosecutors,
take the evidence, go to a special group of people that are called a grand jury. They're
sequestered. They're put in a separate room and they're provided the evidence and they're asked
to question, does this evidence demonstrate that these people, these defendants, have actually
committed crimes? And if that's the case, then the jury indicts them and says there will be a trial.
And now all the evidence begins. But that is one of the major differences between civil and criminal
processes. Just because you're an attorney, you can't file a criminal case. That requires a
federal attorney or a state attorney, an attorney that works for the government,
including state governments, to file that. Now we know that we have several state AGs that are
very interested in what we're doing in the United States. We know the federal AG right now is not
going to file that. However, elections are coming up. And with the elections coming up, a new era
in the United States, I think, will emerge. But we have a 90-day window to get this going. And the
first indictment puts a new light on what is happening. Because once an indictment occurs,
just imagine this, an indictment occurs in any of the 50 states against Anthony Fauci and the others,
there will be mainstream media coverage. Anthony and the rest are not going to get on a plane
and come down to wherever we're at. But they won't be able to come to that area
without being arrested if they don't come to court. So now we have a brand new scenario
where they are now on the defense. And no battle was ever won on defense.
Battles were only won on offense. Chamberlain is the classic example. And I hate to say it,
I know, I mean, here in the UK, but it's a good example. Chamberlain came back and he said,
waving from his paper that he had secured with Adolf Hitler that he had brought peace
for the generation. And it wasn't, I mean, I don't remember how much, but it wasn't very long before
England was in the war. He had not secured peace. Defensive postures don't secure peace.
When people attack you, defensive postures do not encourage them to stop their attack. The only way
you stop them is to take the battle to them. And that's what we're doing. We're taking the battle
to them. Yeah, appeasement doesn't work. And to win a game of chess, you have to attack in the end,
even if you defend most of the match. So can I just ask you very quickly,
because there are other people who want to ask, who are you aiming to indict? Or who are you kind of?
Oh, I knew you'd want that. It's not like I actually keep this list here. Let me...
Okay, the specific people that are listed. Again, keep in mind, this is the original list.
These are the ones that we can prove. And from there, it opens up. So I will read from top to
bottom. Lloyd Austin, Secretary Department of Defense. Xavier Becquerela, Secretary of Health
and Human Services. David Franz, former commander of Fort Detrick. Alejandro Marcos, Secretary
Department of Homeland Security. Chris Hassel, Chairman of the HHS P3CO Review Committee.
Rachel Walensky, Director, CDC. Janet Woodcock, U.S. FDA. F. Fleming-Krimm, Chief Operating Officer
of National Science Foundation. Bear in mind, Fleming's not the last name, but even if it was,
if this guy did it, I put him on there. Francis Sellers-Collins, Director of NIH. Anthony Stefan
Fauci, Director of NIAID. Peter Daszak, EcoHealth. Ralph Berk, University of North Carolina.
Shixing Li, Wuhan Institute of Virology. William Henry Gates III and the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation. Yeah, and can we see that list anywhere, Richard? So it is actually...
If you can either go to FlemingMethod.com and go to the indictment letter page or you can go to the
10letters.org page and you can go on the links and find the affidavit
Actually, what you do is you find the letter for indictment and it's the third listing on the
affidavit, but in an effort to provide you with that actual... Let's see if I can do this.
Do you want me to do this? Yeah, I think you can.
Let's see if I can do this.
Do you want to share something, Richard? Yeah, where's the chat?
Because, Richard, don't you think it'd be a very good idea for all of us to share this list
everywhere so that they know that we're coming for them? Oh yes, absolutely. Did I send that?
Did that go through? Because as soon as they even suspect that we've got ourselves organized,
we understand what's going on and we're going for an indictment, that is going to really put a spoke
in. It hasn't come through yet, Richard, on chat. Okay, what am I doing wrong? So we have that.
You have to add the, you know, the add a document or adding a connection. Right, I dropped it.
So I dropped it on there and it looks like it wants to go through. Everybody, it's actually on
your site. It's really easy. It's listed as a document. Don't spend time on that. We'll find...
You got the two websites. Avery, can you get the link? Copy and paste the link into the chat?
Yeah, I will. Yeah, I'm going to actually... If you don't mind, I'm going to gmail you right now,
the link. No, I'll try to put it in chat. But I mean, I'll go around and paste it in the chat off
this iPad. The websites are easy. Let's keep moving. Stephen? Okay, I finished, Charles.
Excellent. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you. They're also listed on the 10letters.org
letter for indictment. They're specifically listed. Can I just ask one last question? Sure.
So this list you have, I think it's really... I don't know whether you agree, but I think it's
really important that we send this list around the world to everyone we know for the reasons I've
just stated. Do you agree or not? No, clearly this is out there. I want these people to know.
I've put this out. It's hard for me to be any more exposed than I am at this point in time.
And I want them to understand that there is evidence. I mean, there's an affidavit on my
website that goes along with this, that lays out. It's an affidavit. I mean, I can't file a
complaint because I can't be the attorney because this is a prosecuting attorney. So I've laid out
an affidavit, signature signed to it. I have provided deposition on the internet under oath
on these individuals. I have provided the book, is COVID-19 a bioweapon, laying out the details
of these people and their crimes that they have committed. It is time for them to know
that the world is aware that these individuals have been criminally conducting gain of function
research that has resulted in all of this harm. And there is a day of accountability that is coming.
Yes, share.
Exactly. So just to give a point for the people in the UK and in Europe, where jurisdictions are
similar, I'm going to send this list and the evidence that you prepared to my MP. It's a
pretty simple thing to do, but I'm sure that will get shared by him with others.
Good.
Very good, Stephen. Excellent. Okay, we've got five hands up. Richard,
speed of your answer will determine the speed of handling questions. Matthew Crawford.
Hi, Richard. Thanks for talking with us today. Question, what is your understanding of
the approximate date of the actual origins of perhaps virus circulating? And when I say virus,
perhaps more than one, perhaps there's a viral cloud. And did it include Omicron from the start
or did they possibly escape from several places and were both circulating for some time before
the official start of the pandemic? Right. So it's very clear that they were working on these
viruses for the better part of 20 years. The actual, I'm just opening up this up so I can
give you the dates. Omicron is just a specific, no, I do not think that this existed some time
ago. I think part of what we've seen here is with the vaccines, what we have seen is pressure
selection across the board. And it did a great job. We demonstrated that like antibiotics used
indiscriminately, that the utilization of these vaccines have in fact resulted in the ability
to put pressure selection on these viruses, the consequence of which is now we have 28 variants,
including six Omicron variants that have occurred in a year and a half, which is somewhat unprecedented
when you think about the fact that the influenza viruses typically will mutate sufficiently to
require a new vaccine a year under the old school approach. If we look at the likelihood
three, when I'm doing this simultaneously scrolling here to try to find these,
if we get a rig on, if we look at three potential different gain of function variants, which
the PCR data matches for what's called CoVRS SHC014, SARS-CoV-MA15, and SARS-CoV-RS3367.
If those three and all three of those regaining function viruses that we've got the documents
showing the papers showing the research over the last several years that Berrick and Xu-Zhang Li
were working on, three viruses getting out all at once and they would have been all in the same
containment system. And again, the activity in September and October, November of 2019
at the Wuhan Institute of Virology showed they were panicked. They weren't just worried about
computer preaches. They were worried about incineration methods. They were worried about
the air filtration systems. They were a mass turmoil, particularly for a facility that was
relatively new, that was built with the assistance of the French and as soon as the Chinese got what
they wanted, they kicked the French out. And so we have all three of these viruses in this area
that look like they simultaneously escaped, maybe more. But when you take three different viruses
like this leaking out at the same time under pressure selection and exchanging genetic codes,
which is what it looks like they did to get to the Omicron variant as a result of this pressure
selection, you can see how we've ended up with 28 variants of what we're calling SARS-CoV-2
in a year and a half. What do you mean exchanging codes? The Omicron has so many more mutations on
the spike protein that it would have surprised me that if it were like a sudden selection pressure
event, it looked like something very different from the other ones. But I want to hear
your thoughts on, you know, are you talking about homologous transfer with other viruses
or other organisms or? I think primarily, yeah, I think primarily with the other variants that got
out there. Now, there's with each one of these variants, there were new changes that occurred
and the variants are not just changes in the spike protein, although by and large, that's the largest
region that has the changes, but the nucleocapsid and other ranges, the open reading frame 1A and 1B
show these same types of changes. But what we've of course picked up on is the spike protein
differences. It is true that the Omicron seems to have substantially more, although not enough to
suggest that it's an independent virus that had been manufactured and released, because tracking
through the changes, it looks like probably what happened is there were exchanges with the other
variants and there's several different sites that are out there that provide the data for the specific
site point mutations, whether it's spike protein or something else in a wet location and which
amino acid got changed, hence which nucleotide base changed. And even though Omicron seems to
be dramatically different than the others, there's enough reason to believe that it is the end result
right now of all these mutational changes that occurred and viruses, whether they're naturally
occurring or man-made, are very well adapted at figuring out how to survive and their goal
is to not kill the host. Their goal is to, I mean obviously if they kill a host, they die. So their
goal is to find that niche that allows them to have a distinct advantage, both infectivity,
pathologically, but not so pathologic as to kill the host. So I understand your question. I just
think that looking at when all the variants are looked at, there's enough overlap that you can
start to see similarities between alpha, beta, lambda, mu, all the other variants that are just
numbered and even the omicrons. Did you see the paper that suggested it? Charles, can I just say,
Charles we've got four very interesting questions remaining. Matthew, it's not a conversation,
it's a question. We've had a couple. We just got to keep moving. Matthew, if there's a chance at
the end you can come back. Charles, so we've got 14 minutes and we've got four questions.
And I'm, Stephen, I'm on to it. Okay, Lars. Yes, thank you very much. I came in a little late,
so I apologize if my questions have been commented on earlier. My first question,
I have two brief questions. Have you looked at and made an assessment of the process that Dr.
David Martin is running in the U.S. and the background data that he is presenting in his cases?
Okay, again, Dr. Who, because you flipped that out at that point. David Martin. Okay. He's a PhD.
Right, he's a PhD in business. So I've looked at a lot of the, I won't say I've looked at all,
because I know he listed quite a few patents. The fact that there's patents that are out there
doesn't mean that there's a crime that has been committed. I think that one thing I emphasize to
people is that when they look at a patent, don't look at the name, don't look at the information,
look at the claims, because the claims are what the patent is being issued for. And the two patents
that are critical, I think, for this particular scenario is the patent that shows that Ralph
Berrick received a patent for altering the spike protein of coronaviruses. So that's a patent that's
significant. And the other one is recognition that if you're in Cleavage site, the PRA patent
was granted to the United States government. Those are the two that are critical. There's a lot of
other information that's out there in patents, but it's really what do the claims state, not is there
technology discussed in the patents?
So are you suggesting that he is off the mark a little bit, or is it a productive process?
Well, I think that anything that raises questions in a world where nobody's raising questions is
probably good, but I think that by and large, the vast majority of the patents are not applicable
to a crime being committed. There's simply recognition for work that's been done.
Okay, my final question. Have you been working with Anna de Bissere? She's been a participant
in these meetings. She's not here today, I think, but she is an expert in the war
conventions and how what is now going on is actually war crime globally. And if you are
not working with her, she's a sharp lady and you should be working with her.
I would be happy to get communications to try to discuss with her what we can do. I have not had
an opportunity to work with her. I can put you in touch with it, Richard.
Perfect. Please do. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Lars, Glenn.
Hi. My name is Glenn Macko. I'm the chairman of a non-profit group, Unity Against COVID. We have
substantial international known doctors, including Dr. Urso, Dr. Cole, and Dr. Cat Lindley
on our board, as well as association with Mary Holland, Jerry Brady, Leslie Manoukian, and Laura
Logan. One of my past cycles was being heavily involved in getting comments into the FDA
starting in October, again in February, and again in June, where we achieved well over 100,000
submissions of public comments for which clearly the FDA ignored everything. But part of our intent
is to engage the public and to move them forward. And so there's different areas where we'd be
interested in both partnering with you or aligning in the same path and motivating the public.
My first short question, and then I have a longer one. My first short question is,
relative to the historic origin, recently Todd Callender has been making a strong case around the
contracts and association, and much of the origin of the genetically designed COVID-19 started with
the DOD. So I was wondering to what degree you've reviewed his recent material and found it to be
well aligned with your findings. So I'm not sure I've seen some of the material that you're talking
about. What we do have is a tremendous amount of data on the DOD. Those people who don't know much
about my background, I'm originally a physicist, and Fort Detrick did reach out to me last year
wanting to know if as a physicist I would be interested in working with them on infectious
diseases funded by NIAID. Andrew Huff as well as Charles Rixey have additional documents to support
and corroborate my documents for the involvement of the US DOD in the development of these biological
weapons. Okay, my broader question is you've highlighted this 90-day concern. So a lot of
people would have said, gee, we're likely to have a turnover in the election, and that can cause a
lot of change to start occurring with the next US Congress in January of 2023. I have concerns also
around whether or not we actually survive until that point. So could you elaborate on where you
think the faults are that will, why 90 days is so crucial, and other thoughts you have besides
this kind of court case that might lend itself to help engage more the public? In particular,
do you have any thoughts toward impacting the US legislature prior to next year's recession?
Mm-hmm. So we have communicated with certain individuals in the United States Congress
as well as individuals within specific states. The 90-day proposal is something based upon the
rapidity of the change of activities that I saw going on around the world as well as the United
States. I think that if the individuals that we're concerned about have the ability to
re-quarantine and re-lock down society, that we won't need to be worried about a new set of
elections actually occurring or having the types of effects that people would like to see them have.
Um, interestingly enough, that does bring us into a pre-election period of time. That was not my
focus when I picked that date. It was simply watching the speed at which things were accelerating
around the world. While many people were saying, gosh, things are opening up, I was watching
behaviors in other countries and even in the United States, changes that showed that there
was a doubling down. And the Nuclear Threat Initiative was certainly one of those
precipitating events that I saw. The other one was the WHO, a vote that occurred on infectious
diseases. And while the United States, based upon the treaties that we've signed, is not bound,
given the understandings and reservations that were made, the result of that not passing was that
the WHO did two things. They shortened the rapid response time from 24 to 12 months,
which as a cardiologist, I would tell you rapid response in my brain doesn't hit 12 months,
it's more like 12 seconds. But then they also funneled things out into committees where it
would be more closer to and less well known as to what's going on. And I would argue as somebody
who's been involved in this world that you carry out scenarios that you're looking for responses
well in advance. And the fact that some of this has already leaked out shows that they've been
working on it for a substantial period of time. If I were to be asked how I would have run the
scenario that's been happening with a leaked virus, I can't think of too many major things
that I would have changed compared to how they've been doing it. So the behaviors
in my brain and my experience gave me a 90-day limit for that.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Glenn. Nick and then Charles and then Richard will let you go.
Nick, go. I'll have to. Yeah, let's go. Thanks for inviting me on the call, Dr. Fleming. Thanks
for the work you're doing. So my question, I don't know if you're familiar with the former
feds group. When I was in conversations with them, they have successfully in the past initiated
lawsuits against war crimes. And one of the components of their success was that they set
up a whistleblower system or framework where as they turned the heat up, they were able to capture
those whistleblowers to help strengthen their cases and blow more doors open. Have you guys
thought about that? Is that something you're thinking about doing? Already activated. Okay,
awesome. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Nick. Very efficient question. Richard.
We've already activated.
Thank you. Thank you, Nick. Charles. Hello there. Thank you very much. Can you hear me?
Yes. Yes. No, I just wanted to make a comment that I entirely agree with you on the focus
on the crime here. I'm in finance and I've been involved with the Conservative Party. I've been
battling away behind the scenes with the Telegraph and the Times and various people and also talking
to my MP and we've been involved with the various sort of interested groups behind the
advice to the UK government. I think there's a huge danger and I do agree with you that one can get
sort of a slightly, it's like mission drift here and get thrown off course with these other
issues around inflation and ID cards and sort of personal control and all this other political
nonsense. The experience that I've got dealing with government and dealing with people at the
moment is that they are all prepared to hide behind plausible deniability. The doctors that
I've seen and spoken to and the politicians as well. What I would ask is from this group
and from the information and the activities that you're involved with in Texas, if there is any
accurate and specific information of a scientific and legal nature that you could distribute it
back to us because we can use it as a sort of a weapon to bash the people who are responsible,
that would be very helpful. Who by the way Charles, in my opinion, think they're not in
danger at all and they're very much in danger. But we do have a problem and there's now too
much information out there and if we do have some real specifics around court cases and
evidence that's being presented that would be really helpful. So on the letter for indictments
that goes along with this 10letters.org campaign, in the letter for indictments there are three links
including the affidavit. The affidavit I haven't updated in some time, I haven't needed to because
it lays out the details sufficiently for what happened. But I think those three links, the
affidavit, the deposition video, and the book. I'm not promoting my book, I don't promote books,
I don't do that well. I get grief from the publisher and I just I'm not very good at that.
All of those have the data that everybody needs. I mean the book was put together for three reasons.
First off, to make all the data available to the general public. Secondly, to make the data available
to any juries. And thirdly, to try to keep me from being killed because once you get the data out
there, killing the guy doesn't do any good. It's almost an insurance policy in some ways.
It's like, okay so you kill me but the data is still there. So not really a win-win for you,
not a highlight for me, but not a win-win for you on the other side. So, c'est la vie.
As everybody knows, I'm a pure blood Viking, a bloodline descendant. I have no problems taking
this on. I didn't do this, they did it. I just have no plans of sitting around and watching them
muck up the planet like they have been doing. And if you've got to go down, I'd rather go down for a
good cause than stupid causes. Great, thank you very much and best of luck. Thank you, well you're
all in it with me. So to all of us, okay with that I apologize. I have to take off before I get yelled
at because I get yelled at by a lot of people already. I don't want to add the list. So I am
delighted to have been here. Thank you for the invitation. Please pass the word around on
10 letters. Thank you. Thank you Richard. Brilliant. Thank you.