So Charles, I don't know if you've heard in Australia, but I read one email today.
I don't know whether it's true, but apparently Ursula von der Leyen, who she has announced
that they're doing a backtrack on the climate change nonsense as far as the EU is concerned,
because we must listen to the farmers, mustn't we?
I don't know whether she put the mustn't we, but she did say we must listen to our farmers.
Yeah, right.
But why didn't you listen long ago?
Are you muted, Charles?
You're muted, Charles.
We can't hear you.
Oh, gosh.
Sorry, everybody.
Yes, in Australia, Stephen and everybody, the farmers are.
There was a big demonstration in Canberra yesterday in front of Parliament House.
And the destruction of good agricultural land with solar facilities and wind turbines is
absurd.
So the revolt has started.
So that's an interesting comment by...
But what amazes me, Charles, how can it be that in this so-called democracy, which the
EU purports to be, that Ursula von der Leyen can just issue a decree, as far as I can understand,
that they're not going to follow the things that they were going to follow previously,
presumably for good reason.
They're not going to follow them anymore, but no explanation.
Crazy, isn't it?
Except we must listen to our farmers.
I saw a picture, I don't know whether you've seen, there was a picture in Paris with, you
know, about five miles away or five kilometres away, you could see the Eiffel Tower, iconic
Eiffel Tower.
So it was Paris.
And they'd got bales of hay stacked up as high as buildings, like, you know, 70, 80
feet, maybe 100 feet.
And it looked like a fun yard.
It looked like a fun yard in the middle of Paris.
No, that's AI.
Stephen, that's AI.
That's not Paris.
I thought maybe I was thinking as I was speaking then, well, you don't know, do you?
You didn't see the picture I saw.
Yeah, I'm sure I did.
Yeah, anyway, so send it to me then, Mark.
Send it to me, Mark.
By the way, by the way, we'll get started.
But AI is such a wonderful defence, because if any of you get caught in a compromising
picture, you just say it's AI.
When you haven't seen the picture I've seen, how can you say it's AI?
I don't understand that.
I agree with Mark, actually, because I've seen the one that Mark has seen.
I'll send it to you.
But the thing is, it doesn't detract from the story, does it?
So the farmers would be well advised to make Paris, the centre of Paris, look like a farmyard
and then we might get something.
Yeah.
Well, and the demonstrations in Germany, Italy have been great, in Netherlands, in Australia,
farmers are awakening and we have to support them.
All right, let's get this show on the road, everybody.
Welcome to Medical Doctors for COVID Ethics International.
In today's discussion, this group was founded by Dr. Stephen Frost during the darkest days
of the COVID scam with a desire to pursue truth, ethics, justice, freedom and health.
Five pretty big principles, we're about truth, ethics, justice, freedom and health.
Stephen has stood up against government and power over the years and has been a whistleblower
and activist.
His medical specialties, radiology and Stephen has also been fighting hard to support Julian
Assange.
I'm Charles Covets, the moderator of this group.
I'm Australasian's passion provocateur.
I practiced law for 20 years before changing career 30 years ago.
And over the last 12 years, I've helped 13 years, I've helped parents and lawyers to
strategize remedies for vaccine damage and damage from bad medical advice.
I'm also the CEO of an industrial hemp company.
We comprise lots of professions here, including doctors, lawyers, homeopaths, journalists,
scientists, filmmakers, professors, peacemakers and troublemakers.
And we're from all around the world.
Many of us thought that vaccines were okay.
Now many of us proudly say, and I'm one of them, we are passionate anti-vaxxers.
If this is your first time here and we have a number of first timers here, welcome, special
welcome and feel free to introduce yourself in the chat and where you're from.
If you publish a newsletter or podcast or you have a radio or TV show or you've written
a book, put the links into the chat so we can follow you, promote you and find you.
Jerome and Jacob, if you can put your substack details in there please so that people can
follow it.
And Jerome, put your website, you've got a great website.
The rest of you, just keep putting it in every time you are here so that it becomes easy
to find your genius.
Most of us understand we're in the middle of World War III and that there are various battle
lines as part of this war.
This is not just a medical scientific debate.
That's just one of 12 battle lines.
Most of us understand the development of science and that the science is never settled.
Some of us believe that viruses exist, some of us believe that viruses are a hoax and
some of us are on the fence.
This meeting runs for two and a half hours after which for those with the time, Tom Rodman
runs a video telegram meeting.
Tom puts the links into the chat if you're able to join.
We will listen to Jacob Nordengard, our guest speaker for as long as Jacob wishes to speak,
for as long as you wish, Jacob.
And then we have Q&A and Stephen Frost, by long established tradition, ask the first
questions for the first 15 minutes.
There's no censorship.
It's a free speech environment with appropriate moderating free speech is crucially important
in our fight to preserve our human freedoms.
And I remind everybody to go back and look at Archbishop Vigano's New Year's statement
and he says, our job, and this keeps this, I keep seeing this 16 minute message, such
a powerful message, is to shine a light on the perversion, the corruption, the pedophilia
of the minority evil elites, what I call the MEEs.
We have to speak up.
Staying silent is not an option.
If you're offended by anything, be offended.
We are genuinely not interested.
We reject the offence industry that requires nobody to say anything that may offend another.
We come with an attitude and perspective of love, not fear.
Fear is the opposite of love.
Fear squashes you.
Love on the other hand expands you.
These twice weekly meetings are not just talkfests, an extraordinary range of actions and initiatives
have been generated from linkages made by attendees in these meetings.
And Jerome Corsi announced earlier the two books are going to be published as a consequence
of these meetings, as one tiny example of what flows.
So don't just think this is a talkfest.
And each one of us is responsible for fighting for our freedoms.
And what that means is it's not up to Stephen and me to organise stuff.
Each one of you make linkages in this group, take steps.
Every step helps.
If you have a solution or a product or links or resources that will help people put the
details into the chat, the meeting is recorded and is uploaded on the Rumble channel.
Now, Jakob Någengård, are you Jakob or Jacob?
Come on, what do you prefer?
I think it's best if you're not Swedish, it's better to say Jacob.
And Nordangård.
I say Jakob Nordangård, but I know it's kind of hard to...
Jakob, we thought you were Jakob.
Thank you.
Yes, yes.
Jakob, again, you presented is presented to us previously, wonderful material.
I love your substack and thank you so much for giving us your time, wisdom and insights.
And thank you, Stephen Frost, again, for creating this group and for organising Jakob to speak
to us.
And for those of you who don't know, Stephen, your wife is from?
Sweden.
Well, there you are.
Welcome, especially to all the people from Sweden.
Jakob, over to you.
You are now in charge.
Okay.
Maybe the thing is, it was Stephen that invited me for this.
So maybe Stephen could just tell us why he wanted me to speak this time.
Because I think, so I know you've been speaking recently or I think I know that you've been
speaking recently about the United Nations.
Speaking about the World Economic Forum.
And unusually, you've been researching the names of WEF members, World Economic Forum
members and also the graduates of that institution, if we can call it that.
And but you also speak about the Rockefellers.
Essentially, Jakob, the reason why I asked you, except I didn't put it in the email,
was that I think you're a very important voice because you're willing to name names and hold
these people to account.
I think that's the reason you're naming them.
You're a brilliant researcher.
You're consistent with a kind of tiny minority in Sweden who kind of go against the flow
in Sweden, because Sweden's all about everybody agreeing with everybody else, and especially
with the government.
And you're not that kind and you go completely the other way.
And I've observed that Sweden somehow produces these incredible individuals who do research
on their own.
And we've got others in the group who are from Sweden and one who has settled in Sweden,
as you know, David Webb.
So that's what I saw you speaking.
The first time I ever saw you was, I think, what's the name of that guy now?
And he was showing you, he kind of found you.
This was about 18 months ago.
And you were giving a lecture about the World Economic Forum and the Rockefellers.
I think you were talking about the Rockefellers then as well.
And I was just stunned by the...
It was in Malmö.
Yes, that's the one.
The Novel Light Conference.
Brilliant.
But then I saw you again in the autumn.
I can't remember exactly what it was.
And I was struck again by how unusual you were, but very good, of course.
Anyway, that's...
Yeah.
Thank you very much, Stephen.
And I'm very glad to have been invited to this again.
It's a bit late for me, but I usually very tired at the evenings.
Here in Sweden, it's 9 p.m.
And I usually go to bed at about 10.
But I hope I will be awake for the whole presentation.
So but I know you mentioned in the email that you had been watching this interview from
the TNT Radio Live.
And in that interview, I talked about the geopolitics of fear.
And it was...
And I talked a lot about the Rockefellers, of course.
This time, I want to talk about Rockefellers because I usually start with them.
But this time, the thing was...
He who did the interview with me at TNT Radio, he talked about...
A couple of theories on how the world is run.
And then he introduced me, he said that I had another theory than some of these usual
theories.
And that's what I'm going to talk about and address one of these theories.
So I'm going to share my screen here now.
Jakob, could you say a few words about the geopolitics of fear?
If that's not what you're going to talk about mainly, could you mention that at the end,
for say five minutes or...
You said you'd been speaking about the geopolitics of fear.
Is that right?
Yeah, yes. In that interview.
Yes, well, yeah.
And I actually called this...
I made a sub-stack post of it and then I called this the geopolitics of fear.
I mean, and that's what we're seeing, how they are trying to influence and creating
these global governance structures with the use of fear.
Exactly. So if you have time towards the end of what you're going to say now, if you
could speak about what came to you during that interview for five or ten minutes, you
know, geopolitics of fear, we'd be very grateful.
Yes, the thing is, I mean, a couple of these things are in this presentation.
So good. Yeah.
So that's what inspired me to do this.
Yeah. But I will try to find my presentation here.
Hey.
I hope I can find...
Can you see that?
Yes, it's transcribed to a new global order.
Yes. I just want to find the little button where I can play now.
Okay. This presentation is called Transition to a New Global Order.
And I'm going to start with this to groups.
A lot of people, they seem to think that we have a kind of a collusion between the East
and the West and that we have the BRICS system is an alternative that are up against the
globalists of the West.
But I find this wrong, totally wrong, because when you look into what the BRICS is and what
it comes from, it's nothing like that.
And most people don't talk about the G20 group.
They usually just talk about G7 or BRICS, but not the G20 group.
So I'm going to address this because the last year we had this BRICS summit in South Africa,
Johannesburg, and they had this leaders declaration.
One thing that happened during this meeting was that new member states were invited to
BRICS. And this was discussed a lot, what this would make with a power balance in the world.
But if you go into what the BRICS leaders declaration say, they talk about the G20
group of 20. And they say this, we reaffirm the importance of the G20 to continue playing the role
of a premier multilateral forum in the field of international economic and financial cooperation.
And the G20 is very interesting.
I have this is a graph from my book, The Global Coup d'etat.
This book covers a lot of this information about the World Economic Forum and then G20 and the European Union,
how they operate together.
And so if you watch this graph, we find that G20 consists of 19 member states,
plus the EU and since this year also the African Union.
And they have permanent guests attending these meetings. United Nations and the financials
institutions. And they also have engagement groups and unofficial groups that are attending these
meetings and have their own kind of summits that feeds into the process. Because this is a process
to change the current world order. Or I mean, this has been going on for a while.
And the interesting thing with G20 now, it is that we have this leaders troika with three nations that are
ruling together. You can say govern this together to ensure that the agenda continues.
So and this time we have three RICS countries.
Last year G20 was run by India.
This year it's Brazil. And next year it's in South Africa.
So now RICS countries are more in control of this. Or are they? Really?
If you know the history about group of 20, it was created in like 20, what's it, 25 years ago now.
And they are the main forum for international economic cooperation.
And they have a summit every year. And this forum started 25 years ago. But
at that time it was only central bank officials and also finance ministers.
But when we had this crisis that changed everything and the global financial crisis in 2008,
with Lehman Brothers collapse, and what happened?
G20 became the premier forum at this time and they invited the
head of states, head of governments to this. And the financial crisis was only the first thing.
Now we had a lot of challenges that we had to deal with or they had to deal with.
This is taken from The Economist. And you can see here a couple of... I usually ask
when I speak to people in Sweden, I usually ask them, do you remember when we didn't have a crisis?
What did we do? Didn't we have a global crisis or problems? And they can't...
They don't remember. So we live with this crisis all the time. And G20 has stepped up to take care
of all this crisis. And we have these two working tracks.
Because we have meetings all the time. A lot of people think that G20 is just a leaders meeting
once a year. And the big leaders go there. But that's not the case. It's very structured.
And it's a work that has continued with meetings, hundreds of meetings every year since 2008.
And we have this sharper track that's a working track that is led by
personal emissaries of G20 leaders. And we have the finest track. And this is very important,
the finest track. That's because it's about global economic governance. So
this is the core of it. The economy. And this is just an example from
this month, February, meetings almost every day. And we have all these groups with handling
everything. Finance, infrastructure, education, research, agriculture, everything. And we have
these ministers from all these countries that are working together. So I would describe this as a
kind of proto-world government. And they also have engagement groups in this.
I think it's like 13 engagement groups. And this is, I mean,
parts of the global society that comes, they have their own summits.
Like we have this urban, it's the cities. And where you have the judges and the
parliaments and civil society and for everything. And all these are just working for one thing,
to create this, they state that they work for the new international economic order.
And one very important part of these engagement groups are the global business forum for the G20.
Because this is where you find the power, a lot of power in this. It's one of the most
important groups. They are the most influential in this, I would say. And if you can guess
who's in the kind of advisory group for this, can I guess? Bill Gates?
Well, you can find the people like Bill Gates there. But if you want to find someone that is kind of...
Oh, you mean Rockefeller?
No, not the Rockefeller. They have their men. So, well, it's obvious when you see it.
Yes, Klaus Schwab. So we find that in this structure, the World Economic Forum is a big, big part of this.
And they are more or less... It's their baby with the business community, of course, and they have a lot of influence on the other groups as well.
And if you go back in history, this is from World Economic Forum. We have this anniversary book.
And in this, they talk about how the idea for the G20 came from a meter.
And they talk about how the idea for the G20 came from a meter.
And also that since the setup in 1999, it was a very important meeting for the G20.
And they talk about how the idea for the G20 came from a meeting at the World Economic Forum.
Since the setup in 1999, it was a lot of calls for we have to upgrade the G20. We have to do it a global summit.
And one of those who said this was Klaus Schwab, several speeches. And then we had this big, big crisis.
And, okay, we had the idea. We had everything more or less in place at that time. So crisis creates opportunity.
And the G20 also, they have all these partnering organizations, invited organizations that work very close with the G20.
Because it's like we have this international global structure over the member states.
And here we find World Bank Group, of course, and development banks.
Like the New Development Bank, if you remember, was a big thing with the New Development Bank because it was the BRICS.
And now they had this was an alternative to the West and everything. But they are just part of this.
And you also find all these UN agencies, WHO, of course, and UNESCO and World Trade Organization.
And all these are participating in these meetings and kind of steering this global agenda.
And another big part of this is the Bank of International Settlements, because we work with the finance track.
And you find the central bank governors. And that's how this started.
So at the core, you find the financial institutions, the big financial institutions and the Bank of International Settlements.
So that tells a lot about what this is. It's not just meeting a year.
This is a plan to implement something.
And if you go into a World Economic Forum, you also find, I mean, we have this participants here.
We have IMF, the World Bank, World Trade Organizations and Central Banks.
And if you go into the World Economic Forum Board of Directors, you can also find these important players on the board,
like the World Bank President, Ajaibanga, Christine Lagarde, European Central Bank,
Kristalina Georgieva from IMF and Ngozi Okonjo, Director General for the World Trade Organization.
So they are very, it's like a little global club with people that participate in these meetings.
They are at the World Economic Forum and they go to the G20 summits.
And I actually followed a lot of this in my PhD study about European Union,
policy. And at that time it was a lot about the G8 and G8 plus five, the precursors to what G20 became.
And you could follow how this very important meetings in the G8 at that time influenced
European Union policy.
And a lot of policy is made as well. I mean, it's like when you look on it,
I mean, member states have a legislation. I mean, it's not legislation at this level,
but they take these advices and everything, recommendations from this level and implement it.
And sometimes they also have these big
meetings and so on that they actually come up with very, very important proposals.
An example on this is
this report, a global deal for our pandemic age. How many has read this?
So this is, we had, it was kind of two reports that I found that it was
very important in the beginning of the WHO process with a new accord. And this is one of them,
a global deal for a pandemic age, a report of a G20 high level independent panel.
And it's very interesting to find the people involved in these reports because they are
very connected to this international financial establishment. In this case,
the co-chairs are Ngozi Okonjo from the World Trade Organization now and the World Economic Forum,
Board of Trustees. Larry Summers was very, very important and part of the Trilateral Commission
and so on. And also this guy, Ferman Shanmugaratnam, is very important,
not very known for anyone, but we also study this. But he is also on the board of directors of
World Economic Forum. So this is a very big part of what has come after this,
we started a process with this accord. And I labeled this
the Global Public Private Partnership. I mean, they actually
talk about it themselves and they think this is a very good idea. And I think this is also what
has happened, especially during the pandemic and just before we had this partnership between
World Economic Forum and the United Nations. And who are those people? Who are they?
Well, do you recognize anyone?
Well, I recognize Klaus Schwab, yes, but the others...
Yeah, Klaus Schwab, and we have Antoni Guterres, the Secretary General of the United Nations.
And to the right of Guterres, we have Amina Mohammed. She is the
second in United Nations. She is deputy for Guterres. And she is also actually
part of the Young Global Leaders Program at World Economic Forum.
Which country is she from, Joko?
She is from Nigeria.
And Guterres?
Portugal.
Right, Portugal. Nigeria?
Yes, I think she is from Nigeria. And also we said earlier, Ngozi, I think also she is from Nigeria.
Who is the tall guy on the left?
That's Börge, Börge Brände.
He is from Norway. And he is the President of World Economic Forum.
What's his history, Joko?
What?
What's his history?
Well, he... I think he has... I mean, he was a Foreign Minister, I think. And he has been on a couple of boards like Statoil and so on.
So when he was the Foreign Minister for Norway, did he have links with the World Economic Forum then?
Yes, I mean, I think he was kind of... And I'm not 100% certain if he was actually the Foreign Minister.
But he was very into this top echelons of power in Norway.
But of course he was invited to these meetings already then, because they are now times.
So Börge has been involved in... He must be in like 10 years now.
So he's the second guy at World Economic Forum.
So is it possible that the Foreign Minister of Norway is connected to intelligence?
Yes, I suppose so.
Well, I think we have to if we are working at that level.
Sure.
As a Foreign Minister, yeah, but that he should have links with the World Economic Forum and no Norwegian people notice.
And do you know when he was Foreign Minister?
No, no, I don't. And I must say that I'm not certain of these details.
So I have to... It's like I have to check.
I have a book here about...
So it would be very interesting if someone had the time to research this guy on the left, Jakob.
Oh, busy, busy day.
Yeah.
Well, I've got time today.
Hang on, Gerard, mute yourself.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Now I've found Börje Brande here.
So, yeah, he was... Yeah, it was like I said, he was earlier for me.
Earlier Foreign Minister of Norway and also part of the Bilderberg steering committee.
I will you find these people?
Yeah, exactly.
But what alerted me, he looks relatively young there.
So, you know, when these people...
So he's in an elite group there, isn't he?
Two members of the top people at the UN, two top people at WEF.
And he's relatively young, at least compared with Klaus Schwab.
So, yeah, I just focused on him, I thought.
I wonder what his history is.
Yes, yes. But it's interesting that they go from government into the World Economic Forum.
Absolutely.
And hobnobbing with United Nations members.
Yes.
And I think that's the most shocking part of this.
It was for me when I found these things a couple of years ago.
I mean, who knew about the partnership between United Nations and the World Economic Forum?
Nobody told us.
But I mean, it was in June 2019.
And when we had the great reset in June 2020, so they acted very, very quick.
Sure.
So when was that photograph taken, Jakob?
Was that 2019 as well?
Yes, yes.
So I think this is from the World Economic Forum's webpage.
And you can find it on United Nations as well.
But there was no press reported about this.
I haven't found anything about it.
Yeah, they're pretty confident that nobody will notice.
Interesting, isn't it?
Yes, yes, it is.
So if I shall continue.
With this, with people, you can understand how what the agenda looks like.
At the G20.
The G20 that, I mean, it affects like now 85% of the people on the globe.
That's many people.
So this year in Brazil, they have this slogan, building a just world and a sustainable planet.
They always say these things.
And it's always so good.
Maybe we're going to make it fantastic for us.
It was what they said in 2020 as well.
So what do they have up their sleeves?
Well, this is some of the things that they have.
We are talking about.
This is headlines from the news that are on the G20 portal.
Health and finance.
Countries need to prepare for possible new sanitary emergencies.
So that's the agenda.
And of course, this is how you can see how these global forums affect each other.
They report about the health and finance issues.
And how these things affect each other.
They report about World Economic Forum and their global risk report.
That points out disinformation and extreme weather as the main threats to the world today.
And they also say that this will be important for our agenda.
So World Economic Forum says this and this will be important for the member countries of G20 to work on.
And of course, the G20, they don't really talk about Ukraine or the conflict in Israel and so on.
That kind of conflict.
But they talk about these global challenges that they can agree on.
And it's always about climate, of course.
And one of the most important things this year, apart from the disinformation.
And of course, I can imagine that they view this, what we're doing as disinformation.
Because it goes against the agenda.
But this is a very important part of what's happening this year.
Global governance reform.
And because I've been following this process.
And I think the last time I talked about some of these, I don't know if I talked about the policy briefs.
But I talked about the UN agenda and the UN, yeah, our common agenda.
Because this year, United Nations have a big meeting in September.
The summit of the future, multilateral solutions for a better tomorrow.
But it's not very much, I mean, I think a lot of people are talking about what's happening with the WHO.
That's covered a lot, especially the critics look into it.
But not that many people are looking into the process with our common agenda and the summit of the future.
And they have big plans for this year.
And this is of course a big part of G20.
Because G20 will change because of the decision that will be made.
And this came out in 26th of January.
This is the zero draft of the so-called pact for the future.
And so this year, the leaders of the world is supposed to sign this document.
And in order to safeguard the future for present and coming generations.
And we find this language, of course, with everything that is, and this is the fear.
How we govern with fear.
We are at the moment of acute global peril.
And everything is bad.
Poverty, hunger, inequality, armed conflicts, violence, displacement, terrorism, climate change, disease, adverse impacts of technology.
So how do we deal with this?
When you read this, it's like I've read so many documents.
A lot of boring documents from when I was doing my dissertation about European Union.
But also about the European Union.
But also about the big foundations like Rockefeller Foundation, Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
It's like their wording.
They always say, the challenge we face far exceed the capacity of any single state to manage alone.
That's always the same conclusion.
So we have to give the power to this bigger authority.
That they talk about multilateralism.
But I think it's a kind of Trojan horse.
It sounds like, oh, now everyone will be a part of this and get to decide.
But it's not like that at all.
So when you go into the UN agenda and the United Nations process, they talk about how to change things.
And also change the way we think about the world.
And also change the G20 group.
The G20 group is outside the United Nations systems now.
I mean, the United Nations are hard and invited guests, but now they want to diffuse it together.
And this is one of the suggestions from this.
And this is a very important part.
We have some other important parts in this pact that we are discussing.
That it's a global digital compact.
Because we want to digitize everything.
And the second big thing is about the safeguarding of future generations.
But the thing is, they now have all these meetings.
The G20. All member states have had their meetings.
And when it will be in South Africa, it's the last country.
So it's a new round that comes in 2026.
And at that time, they want to create this biennial summit within the more into United Nations system.
So I would say, and they talk a lot about creating this.
And they actually have said about the G20 before, like it's an economic security council.
So now they talk about creating a representative apex body to enhance coherence.
And I think we should be kind of scared.
Because I mean, also to use this language like apex body.
And so this will be a kind of a tool.
Because they want to use this apex body to streamline security.
To streamline the financial system.
And to make it work for the sustainable development goals.
And if you go into this, we can also find that the bias is talking a lot about the CBDCs.
And the coming of a new international economic structure.
When the dollar is going to be abandoned for maybe a carbon currency instead.
So that is a big thing.
And now I'm coming to the end of this.
So I started with this G7 and BRICS.
And that's not the case.
I don't see that split really.
Instead we find this.
And this graph is actually from my book also.
The Global Core Detail.
And a lot of this, I mean it's worked a lot of this already during the pandemic.
But you find these global players on the top.
World Economic Forum, G20 Group and the United Nations.
That's the global public private partnership.
And then you find below them the G7 and the BRICS.
It's like they have the interest of the Western and the interests of the East.
But they work within this system.
They work with the sustainable development goals.
They work with the United Nations.
And this filters down through this regional bodies like European Union, African Union and so on.
Down to the level of the individual.
And I think I showed, because I've written a book also called the Digital World Brain.
That's about the future system.
But I could, after reading tons of documents, I could sketch up kind of an envisioned future system.
This is the future system.
And this is what they label us with global digital compact and total digitization of everything.
In order to steer the world in the direction that they think is needed.
And so, and I think I talked the last time also about the introduction of an emergency platform that they want to convene in when we have a crisis.
And in the top level, we of course find World Economic Forum, United Nations and so on.
And also the big foundations because the big foundations and I didn't talk about this today, but it's kind of another presentation.
And I also talk a lot about this in my Rockefeller book, of course, because these are the individuals that are influencing this.
So it's a kind of a management system, a digital management system that you can see that the pact of a future eventually will lead up to.
And also, I think it's interesting to look back into history a bit about how the history of global governance.
But we can, I mean, we have World War I that led up to the foundation of League of Nations.
And the League of Nations, a lot of these things were discussed before.
So it was a lot of preparations, discussions on creating these world organizations before the war.
And then they set up the League of Nations after the war so that we would have peace forever or not.
And during the Second World War, I mean, before the Second World War, they started to discuss how to create a new world organization.
And within this elite circles like the Council of Foreign Relations and this Royal Institute of International Affairs, these big think tanks.
So that led up to the United Nations and the Bretton Woods system.
And if we go into what we've seen today, we have these big conflicts and maybe this could be a really could develop into a world war.
But behind the scenes, we see the work with creating the new system in the background.
And a new financial system.
I mean, and this is what we see now is the more depth of the dollar system and the creation of this new global financial system.
Yes, I think that's what I wanted to say this time.
So if anyone want to come up with some questions or anything else.
Wonderful. Wonderful. We got plenty of questions. So if you'd stop your share.
Yes, see if I find. Yeah. Stop sharing.
If I can find the button.
I can do it for you. I can do it.
You can do it. Yeah.
There you are. Yes.
Beautiful. Well, wonderful reminder.
The research that you do, Jacob, is is wonderful to get this.
I keep in Australia, we keep seeing all these references to all of these entities and go, how do all these players fit in?
And the confusion is wonderful.
And of course, when people are confused, they won't engage so they can do whatever they like.
These guys, that's the game plan.
So congratulations on your wonderful work and that presentation and the driving of fear.
And thank you, everybody, for the wonderful resources put into the chat.
As usual, there's some wonderful pictures, including the class for wheel.
I love that. I must say of the spin the wheel for the current crisis.
Let's just keep us all in fear.
So, Stephen, next 15 minutes are all yours.
Yeah. So, Jacob, that was great.
So I wanted to ask you, have you always been so you're not your first language is not English, but you're very sensitive to ridiculous use of English, I notice.
And I was going to have wanted to ask you, have you always been interested in language?
And are you interested in similarly interested in the Swedish language?
But I think what got my attention when I first saw you, Jacob, was that you were making fun of the language they use and the ridiculous ideas, you know, the stupidity, the childishness of it all.
And the grown men and grown women fall for this nonsense.
It's just mystifying to me.
And I wonder whether it is to you.
Yes, I mean, the thing is, if you read all these documents, and as I said, I've read tons of it, it's a stupid amounts of the boring text.
And you but suddenly it's just it's just gets funny.
You just start to laugh because it's just just stupid language and we just repeat it.
And when you when you hear all the leaders repeating this nonsense, and it's like nobody's thinking for themselves at all.
It's like we already have AI that's run things because because people just read from the script.
They don't.
Why should I bother with think?
So ridiculous use of sustainable, for example, you know, sustainable, inclusive, inclusive.
What are the other buzzwords?
You know, they're just ridiculous.
They're just ridiculous.
Do people just follow these, you know, these people who they perceive as having power so they'll become powerful?
And is that a cult or do they really believe what they're saying or don't they even think about what they're saying?
I think a lot of people don't think at all.
But but some of them, if you're if you're high enough in this power structure, they must have a laugh as well.
Yes, too.
Because I think for some of them, they they know that these words have another meaning.
It's a different meaning.
And for the ordinary people, it sounds good.
But I mean, inclusive.
I mean, it's it's more like we want and we talk about left, leave no one behind and so on.
You know, yeah, but it but it's all also if you if you if you hear a psychopath say these words, you will know what they mean.
It's like we want them all.
We want everyone to be a part of this.
Nobody will be allowed to be outside this system.
We want to control every part of it.
That's that's inclusion.
That's to not leave one behind.
The press might think, oh, they're actually being kind to us.
You know, they don't leave anybody behind.
Is that have they thought of that deliberately or is it just an accident or?
Yes, yes, I think they they I mean, they have worked with the best marketing agencies and PR firm firms to to create this.
And and they have I mean, if you go into to the history with like the big philanthropists, that's that's very, very thinking.
When we do a bad thing, how can we make it sound good?
Yeah, I mean, that's how they work all the time.
It's like when they are doing.
I remember when we were shutting down some hospitals in my hometown and we tried to to make it sound good.
It's actually we making more efficient for you.
We are centralizing the resources and and and making more better use of it by not having this other hospital.
We always frame things to sound good when they are not.
So what does sustainable mean, Jakob, in your thinking?
I never I see it all the time, you know, we need this for a sustainable future.
And I'm thinking what the heck does sustainable mean?
So all the like banks like HSBC is one of them.
You know, they're all saying, saying we must do this for a sustainable future.
No one ever explains what the heck sustainable is.
Do you know?
Well, it's it's different things for I mean, it's not the same for everyone, of course.
And and it's just a password is it so easy to use?
It just sounds good.
You can put it on everything and nobody can can argue against it.
It's just sustainable.
I mean, it's just sustainable.
We know that.
But if you're a bank manager, I mean, sustainable is another thing.
So it's it's very useful.
I mean, it's sustainable for them.
It's a sustainable society for who?
It's yeah.
Keep the banks going.
Yeah.
So Aldous Huxley, so Aldous Huxley has written about the idea of sustainable.
So Aldous Huxley, so Aldous Huxley has written about overorganisation and the dangers of
overorganisation.
And so it seems to me that this is what they're pushing.
They're pushing global crises, bringing, you know, actually pushing them into the public
consciousness so that they can justify global solution.
And and anything that requires a global solution to me sounds like a big, broad,
what do you think?
Yes, it is.
It is really a big fraud because that's all this.
It's what we want.
I mean, we actually have a foundation in Sweden called the Global Challenges Foundation.
And this was set up to for this purpose to create new global governance structures.
And then they release a global risk report, a global catastrophic risk report in order to,
I mean, we have to have, we want this structure, but we also need to have a problem,
if we can say.
So I mean, this is how politics work as well.
I mean, politicians need, always need problems in order to come.
I mean, they have their solutions all the time.
So it's very, very important to create these problems.
And I mean, actually, we can find a lot of books about it.
I have when I was when I was doing my PhD, I found this book by a guy called Peter Winsimius.
He was an environmental minister in in in Netherlands.
And this is kind of a and he was former at McKinsey and Company.
And this book is kind of a recipe.
How do we how can we use sustainable development in order to to achieve?
I mean, we can and and get or get legislation that will create better benefits for our company
and be bad for for our competitors.
So and and in this, they also have this.
How do we do this?
OK, we have to to go into all the parts of the policy process.
We have to influence.
We have to set up the problem.
It's important to decide the problem.
And then then you have to give money to the activists, but talk about the problem.
And then you have to have an event.
Like a triggering event that makes people say, oh, shit, this is bad.
We have to do something.
And then it goes into the legislation, legislative process.
And then eventually they get what they want.
But one of the one of the things with this is also that the ordinary people won't they only see it when they will hear the activists talking about it.
And then the event is coming.
But they won't see the people that actually put the problem on the table in the beginning.
They think that because in this book, she talks about how can we use Greenpeace?
How can we use Friends of the Earth?
And we can influence them with the foundation money and convince them that this is a good idea.
So we have handbooks for this.
And it's all out there.
That was one of the things that kind of was surprising for me, that it was so open.
Everything.
And you can find it in when you study European Union policy as well.
It's very open on how they how could we influence the public.
On this issue.
And then they have to write it down and just download it.
But it's like nobody will ever read that.
It's only a few nerds like myself that find that amusing.
Can I ask you this?
So I was talking to an employee of Vodafone in Cairo, Egypt a couple of days ago.
And then we had a guest, Peter Koenig, who's going to ask you questions first, I think.
And he was in Peru.
His wife is Peruvian.
And so he was in Lima, Peru.
And both of them said independently to me that nothing worked in either country.
And I thought to myself, well, that's good, actually, because in in Covid, you know,
you couldn't get anybody in these countries, well, you might be able to get a few to wear a mask,
for example.
And conversely, in the Western countries where things are, how should I say, people have come used
to expecting a level of organization.
And if it doesn't work, you know, they're very they're complaining about how bad it is, you know,
how disorganized.
But actually, it struck me while I was talking to the guy in Cairo, I said, you know, it struck me that it actually
is good that things are disorganized because then people rely on their humanity and the
overorganization which we have become accustomed to, or sorry, the organized leads to more
organization, eventually get over organization, and it's always heading towards tyranny.
And also, you've got the other human beings are kind of losing their humanity.
So they have less to they don't trust their own thoughts, you know, their own instincts.
Neither do they trust anybody around them.
They've been taught not to trust each other.
Trust the state.
You can see it best in Sweden.
And sorry about that.
Maybe.
But I just wondered what you think about what I've just said, the over organization.
How do we get human beings to not love organization and to really think about how much organization we want?
Because some organization leads to more organization and more organization.
Eventually get tyranny.
Yes, I actually think it.
I have a book by a guy called Joseph Tainter, and he's talking about the collapse of complex societies.
And so I think if we this kind of level of organization we have, it will collapse.
It won't work.
It's too much bureaucracy.
And we have seen it over and over.
It's not a new thing.
So it will lead up to this, I think.
And but it of course, it can be very hard for for a lot of people because, as you say,
we have we don't think anymore or a lot of people don't think.
It's much easier for the experts to do it.
The people in Cairo, Egypt, a massive city of 40 million people.
Yeah.
I thought it was 25 million, but he corrected me and said, no, it's 40 million now.
They are actually better off than we are.
They're closer to their humanity.
They trust their own things.
They trust their families and their friends.
Friendship is a big deal in those countries and Peru as well, I think.
And so why do we why do we look down on it?
I mean, it's just ridiculous, isn't it?
Well, yeah.
Yes.
Yes, it is.
It's very ridiculous.
But I think one of one thing that we learned from from what happened during the pandemic,
it was that a lot of people, I mean, more alternative people came together and it was things that actually happened.
That was good.
Exactly.
Yeah.
We came nearer.
Yeah.
Nearer to how they operate in Cairo, Egypt, because we decided that we couldn't trust anybody and we but we could trust ourselves hopefully.
And then we tried to find like minded people.
And that's how it worked, I think.
And and actually, I have to say that I feel more alive these days than I think I've ever felt.
And especially when I look back, I was kind of very confused for much of the time because I didn't understand what the forces were.
I knew that I was different, but I didn't understand why I had that kind of feeling.
So people didn't actually confront me because they quite like me for some reason.
And but so I got away with it, you know, with being different.
But I have come to understand in the last four years that I am a bit different from other people.
And I think there are a lot of people in this group.
You've got seventeen hundred members or whatever it is.
And I think there are a lot of people who are a little bit different.
You know, I noticed amongst the the speakers as well that they are different.
Yeah, I think it's really interesting.
It's a great interesting time.
Yes. And I mean, I got a question a couple of years ago in the middle of everything.
We didn't have I mean, Sweden was better off, but we still have the stupid things that happened.
And and I was I was asked, what do you what do you think about this time?
And I said it, of course, I think it's awful what's happening.
But at the same time, it's it's also the best time because I have found so much fantastic people.
And we have started to really discuss important things.
And it has made us come together.
And so so it and I mean, this has been very good.
And actually, I have never sold so many books as I did back then.
So I mean, for me, it was an opportunity like Klaus would have said,
because because suddenly people want the kind of information I have been digging and working on for four years.
But nobody really had a kid.
And suddenly it just exploded.
And then people just what's happening?
And so so for me, it was kind of great.
And and and things have changed.
I mean, that's the thing that the shock that's happening in the system when we are doing these things.
I mean, it's starting a reaction from the other side.
And the more they push, the better, the more it comes, the counter movement.
So it's it's more or less impossible to to to win the game in the end for these masters.
So, Jakob, I think it's caused people like you and me and many others on on this call and in the group to really think about who they spend time with.
Because previously, I didn't really think about that.
Yeah. You know, when I was especially when I wasn't working, then I would kind of socialize with people who now I realize I didn't have much in common with.
So it really made us find we got whole new friends with 15 minutes is up.
But, Stephen, that's a great point.
You've all got a whole new bunch of friends, haven't we?
Yeah. But the thing is, Charles, there was a motive.
Because we were suffering like all the other people.
So we to survive, we had to find people who thought like us or vaguely like us.
And that was really cathartic for some of us.
Because we didn't really understand ourselves before.
And the quality, the basis on which we're creating these friends is that we're not just going to be friends.
Yeah. And the quality, the basis on which we're creating these friends, Stephen, is what this group is about.
Freedom, truth, justice, ethics, health.
Pretty powerful ideas, aren't they?
Jacob, you know, it's now before we get to Peter and Peter spoke for those of you who weren't.
And a child anti organization and pro chaos.
Yes, very good.
We need to think differently.
We need some difficulties in life.
Otherwise, we remain children for the whole of our lives.
Well said. All right.
Now, before we go to Peter, I want to show you some everybody something on from Brownstone Institute.
You may have missed it.
I want to just read this piece out.
It's from earlier this week from Jeffrey Tucker.
So take heart.
So, Jacob, this reinforces what you're saying.
Take heart, friends.
The ruling class narrative is collapsing day by day.
The last four years introduced vast waves of the population to the corruption of all the commanding heights.
Now we are seeing a broad clamour to find what's true, what's real, to rebuild and to renew.
Stephen, he must have heard you.
The Brownstone Institute team just returned from a weekend event with the FLCCC, one of our partner organization.
Their focus is on medical practitioners and patients who are seriously harmed by malpractice over the last few years.
It was gratifying to see some 600 people gather with great passion to deliver alternatives for themselves and their families.
As part of this, Brownstone's own focus comes into play.
The corruption of science and media, lockdown, surveillance, attacks on civil liberties,
cartelization of industry and the economic pillaging of the population.
The blending of all of this has been wonderful to watch the creation of dissident nation worldwide.
As part of the alternative media, Brownstone has experienced growth.
Please give us your thoughts.
Then Jeffrey promotes Julie Pones' gorgeous book, Our Last Innocent Moment.
So everybody, I find Brownstone Institute to be wonderful, but I thought it was a wonderful overview.
Jakob, you shining a light on this and Brownstone and these meetings go, wow, the awakening is real.
And Peter also helps do that.
So thank you, everybody, for being here.
We'll go now to the hands up and start with Peter, then Glenn.
You muted, Peter.
Peter, you muted.
You muted, Peter.
He knows.
He can't unmute.
He'll work it out.
We'll go to Glenn until Peter works out his mute situation.
Glenn.
Hi.
Wonderful presentation.
You tied together so many different things.
I've never seen quite that extensive a reference to the G20, so I very much appreciate it.
But I do want to approach things we can do and actions we can take and things we can achieve and win.
And toward that end, I think there are some key items that you do not, you didn't at least today address in any significant way.
So I want to mention them all as a composite and how they all affect the year 2024.
And the belief I have that this is a crucial year and that if we do not get a turning back,
that we don't have any opportunity to win, to gain a foothold after 2024.
And I'll explain why.
So the seven areas that I didn't hear you address to any degree was the connections to George Soros and his son Alex,
to the Hearst family and their publication business that was used so extensively to manufacture ballots that took away the 2020 election from President Trump.
President Trump in general as a force that's going on and what's likely to happen if we are able to have a fair election and he is elected this coming November.
The general realm of mind control agents, which is massive and pervasive,
not just in specific kind of industries like the oil industry, but across the banking, across virtually all big corporations, especially now the social media types.
From a control of the medical area, the Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory as being a centerpiece of where that corruption occurs.
The issue of migration, while you did mention the nature of having Trojan horse attacks,
that's not just some, I would claim that it's tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands,
some of them that are now in place in the United States and capable of being invoked and activated during 2022-24.
And then finally, the building of retraining camps that they've got this planned out so far ahead,
they're already building the retraining camps for those that don't go along, you'll be sent some place until you agree to go along.
So within the realm of, yes, I fully agree we have the opportunity that it will collapse.
I just think that the worry is that if it doesn't collapse in 2024,
that the elites recognize the danger of another Trump administration.
I do not believe they can allow Trump to take office.
Now, whether they do that through complete disruption of the elections or if they go to all-martial law after an election,
either are possible and both have to be prevented from my viewpoint.
So at a core, I think it's critical that individuals demand peace,
that they defund out of the realm of lie, cheat, steal and murder,
that they completely defund the stealing and the murder.
And all that stealing and murder occurs at a national level, completely defund your national bodies
and focus all your attention and all your efforts and if there's any taxation to go,
that that only occur in your local communities or at most your state.
So with that composite, if you could kind of comment on whether you agree that 2024 is absolutely critical
and to what degree a Trump presidency would have a big impact on our moving forward.
Thank you.
Yes, of course.
I mean, my presentation was very short.
I could speak for hours if I was about to take everything into account,
what's happening on every level.
But of course, and I think 2024 is very crucial.
It's a very important year and a lot of things are happening.
And we know that those that want this system, want this power,
they will do everything and they don't want to lose, of course.
So it will not be easy.
So I look into, I mean, when I say collapse, it will collapse eventually.
But as we have seen with empires before, I mean, we go into, they go into tyranny
and they have this more brutal methods when they are threatened before.
So of course, and if we go into politics, I don't think it will change that much.
We saw during the first Trump presidency, that, I mean, things were going on in the background all the time.
So I don't think we can say that if we get that president,
and now, of course, Trump will not be president of the whole world.
I mean, here in Europe, we have another situation.
We have Ursula von der Leyen heading the European Commission and everything with that.
So of course, I don't think they love Donald Trump or the way he's doing politics.
But as they did before, they have a lot of people in the background that are managing.
So and I think they are actually, I mean, I write about a chapter in my book,
The Global Coup d'etat about the Trump administration and the connections to powerful actors and networks
and also how we find people very involved, like the Bilderberg group.
We have people like that.
We have Peter Thiel that was part of the transition team and so on.
So even though they don't love Donald Trump, they will do everything to use him
and try to use this power they can get from it.
Because we have always seen this kind of, we see how we view things in Europe.
It has been this way in the United States before with the good cup and the bad cup all the time.
And we have viewed American presidents like George W. Bush has been the bad guy all the time.
So I don't really think that, I don't think if Donald Trump comes to power, he won't change the whole narrative.
I think they have people behind the scenes that will try to prevent that.
There is certainly an attempt to prevent it, but would you agree that relatively speaking,
many of the Republican leaders, certainly of the Senate and many of the Republican presidents in the past hundred years
have been part of the Club of Rome, whereas Donald Trump is not.
He is very much opposed to all of the principles of the Club of Rome and they can't stand that.
Because of that, they can't allow him to be totally disruptive of their world, of their sexual slavery mechanism,
especially for children, that is pervasive across all of the world, but especially intelligence agencies, blackmail, everybody else.
Those are all the things that Donald Trump becomes a threat to and why I view it that they will reserve no weapon in 2024 to prevent him from coming back to power.
Yeah, we will see what will happen.
Okay, thank you very much.
Thank you, Glenn.
Great questions and Jaco, we have to come back and do some more presentations on all those matters that Glenn raised.
Peter Koenig.
Okay, thank you very much.
I'm an economist and I have had the privilege to work for about 30 years with the World Bank and saw a little bit of what's going on in the inside.
So I call that the privilege actually because it has taught me many, many lessons.
But first of all, I would like to say a big, big thank you, Jacob.
Extraordinary presentation and I couldn't agree more with what you said and with your conclusions and also particularly with the fact that you referred to
and actually demonstrated by how you presented it that we are living in a chaos.
And I think that's what we have to have more of.
They are trying to put the chaos upon us, but because they know and I'm pretty sure they know that they're collapsing.
Now, what we have to do with that chaos, we have to transform it into what it actually is.
We are living not in a digital world.
That's what they would like us to be.
They would like us to be totally digitized.
But our world is dynamic.
And I think the dynamics cannot be predicted.
And I think life is dynamic.
And that's what we have to count on.
Now, more specifically, what one of their goals, probably number one, two, three priorities that they all have is a massive population reduction.
And this is something we have to keep in mind.
So everything they do is the final goal is population reduction.
The second goal is digitizing everything or everybody who is still alive after that.
And they know they're running out of steam.
The agenda 2030 was supposed to have a calendar that ends approximately 2030.
They know there's a lot of resistance, a lot of drawback and pushback by the people.
And they know they will collapse before that.
So there's actually a struggle going on between what I call the light and the darkness.
And we are off the light.
And we have to remain off the light so that we actually overcome this darkness.
And what does it mean?
What it means in spiritual terms is that we shouldn't get angry at them.
We should not put ourselves.
That's what they want.
They want to make us fearful.
They want to spread fear and anger.
And as soon as we are angry, we put ourselves on the same level as they are.
With the same vibes.
This has been researched.
And I think Davies, the Davies Institute, you mentioned you mentioned psychological training
and mind manipulation.
One of the key institutes that does that, and they're every time presented at the World
Economic Forum in Davos, is the Tavistock Institute.
They take the pulse of people so that they know how they're going to be.
And they know that they're going to be able to do that.
They take the pulse of people so that they know how they can manipulate the people afterwards.
And they have been doing that since the 1940s.
Now you can imagine the science that has developed in the last 80 years.
They're perfect.
But we don't know it.
We don't know that we are being manipulated.
But if you know that, you can take distance from it and say, OK, you know, that's what
they're trying to do.
But we are above them.
And as long as we can do that, it's not easy because I'm myself.
I'm getting very easily angry at this stuff.
And it's very difficult to take a distance and say, hey, wait a minute, wait a minute.
This doesn't help.
But this is exactly what we should be able to do.
Now, what these people are, and I put them into two categories.
I mean, they're executing agencies.
The World Economic Forum, WHO, the UN system are organizational executing agencies.
Then you have at present two sort of government executing agencies.
One is the Democratic, quote unquote, led Washington administration.
And the other one is the European administration.
The actually non-elected funder lion is already close to a tyrant with the sort of legislation
that she pushes through a parliament, which is nothing else but rubber stamping most of it.
But more and more of the parliamentarians are resisting also.
So that's a very good sign.
Then the other thing that we have to keep in mind is they're running the world or they're trying to run the world according to cult principles,
cult rituals.
If you see actually what they are doing, they're working, as you very well said, you know, all these G20 meetings, there are hundreds going on,
but we don't know about them.
We know about one or two that is going on every year in some place.
But all of those others, they're going on behind closed doors and all of what they are doing, they're preparing what they are officially then saying during the G20 meeting
and apparently debating.
There's no debate.
They have already decided.
And let's face it.
I mean, the G20s are absolutely none of them are elected.
There are institutions that have never been created.
They created themselves.
So they have they don't deserve our respect and they don't deserve to be obeyed at all.
We have to keep that in mind.
They have never been elected.
And so if we know if we know all that, then and then they come forward like with the G official G20, G7 meetings.
The Davos meeting and so on.
And they present us with a number of things.
I mean, one of the most ridiculous presentations I've seen at the Davos meeting this year was Klaus Schwab talking with Brynn from the inventor of Google and the former chairman of Google
about about brain implants, chip implants into into brains.
And he actually said if we would have all brains implanted, I could read all your minds.
He didn't say we could all read each other's mind.
He said I could read all your minds.
And eventually elections will become superfluous because we could read in your minds what you're thinking.
So, you know, what he was doing, it's so ridiculous that people laugh about it.
But by doing that, and he has done that in 2016 in an interview with Swiss French TV, exactly saying exactly the same, going a little bit less far than this time, but saying also about brain implants.
And, you know, this is like a warning.
This is like saying what they are planning to do.
And this is one of the cult rituals.
If a cult that goes very, very far back, these cults are taught actually.
There are scull and bones of the fraternity of Yale University that teach that.
I'm sure it's also taught at other universities and they go far, far back.
I mean, I've looked into this a little bit.
And in Australia, the aboriginals, they still work a lot with since thousands of years with with cultism for good and for bad reasons.
And so they always have to predict and tell the people who are concerned with what they are planning to do, what they are actually up to.
And as long as we know that.
And that's why I think this program that you're leading, Stephen and Charles, is so extraordinary because it allows people to open their eyes.
And I think that's what we need in order to have a maximum power of resistance.
And eventually, you know, I mean, WHO, you mentioned WHO also.
WHO is not really a UN agency.
WHO has been created by one of the chief eugenists by Rockefeller.
And then because he said who controls health, controls death.
And that's how WHO became into existence.
He bought WHO into the UN system.
Why can he do that?
Because he is so generous with the UN system.
He gave his land in Manhattan, where the UN headquarters are on now, is a Rockefeller piece of land.
And so he has a lot of influence there today.
And that's why nobody objected, actually, when the UN system, when Guterres made an agreement with Klaus Schwab, a cooperation agreement in June 2019, which you very well mentioned.
You know, this is a totally illegal agreement.
The United Nations, according to their charters, have no right to make agreements with NGOs.
And the rest of the world, the economic world...
Peter, thank you for that brilliant speech.
But have you got a question for Joachim?
No, OK, my question is actually what I'm leading up to, is how do we get out of it?
I think this is what we have to keep in mind.
How do we get out of it?
One way I just thought of when we talked about WHO is every country has the freedom to leave WHO in order not to be subject to that tyranny, which is supposed to be approved in May of this year.
So this is one way.
But I wonder what your views, Joachim?
Joachim, we want you to lead us out of this.
How are you going to lead us out of it?
Well, I think it's just a natural process.
I mean, it's just happening.
We can see it happening now.
We are sitting and discussing these things.
And Peter, I think he was brilliant, what he said.
But it's happening.
We are in contact with each other.
We are spreading this.
It's going very quick.
And the more we do, I mean, we influence people all the time.
And I mean, for me, it has been exponential.
It's just amazing how many people I have been in contact with and sold books to.
And in Sweden, you know, the country that people don't think.
But actually, there are a lot of people.
And so I'm optimistic because I don't think it's possible to win the game with manipulation
and not keeping the truth.
If you do that, you will lose.
So I think what we are witnessing now, it's the process with everything.
Their power structures are collapsing.
Exactly.
So it's just to keep up with the work.
So we don't have to be logical about it.
We just kind of act as human beings.
Sure.
Yeah, exactly.
As our model, maybe we should think, well, actually, the appearance that we have organization
is a mirage, if you like.
It's leading to tyranny.
So we need to reject all this organization stuff and start thinking like the people in
Cairo, Egypt and in Lima, Peru.
Yes, nothing works.
And they don't expect it to work.
So they have to think for themselves.
Yeah, exactly.
That's good.
Yes, I agree.
Totally.
Excellent.
All right.
Great answer, Jakob.
Yeah.
Yes.
Gosh.
Tjena.
Tjena, Josh.
Kul att se dig.
Thank you, Jakob.
I mean, I wish we had you for eight or 10 hours because Jakob has so much more critical
information that everybody needs to hear, watch his fantastic illustrations.
Going back 100 years for how this whole developed, who financed it, who organized it, who helped
organize it, who organized the meetings, who was doing what in the meetings, et cetera.
So today's presentation was more of a newsflash of what's happening now and what happened
a few days ago.
But he has the whole history.
And I think we need to make some kind of a repository of the Jakob Nordangård library
so that we understand how this all happened.
But could I ask you to just spend a few minutes for those who don't have time to research
what you've done to just talk about the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and all the key people when they
decided that we should go with climate and we should go with global health to create
our world government, one world government.
These are plans from the mid last century and they've been at it for such a long time.
So I doubt, Glenn, that we are finishing this off this year, but we need to get stronger
this year.
But, Jacob, could you just give a few more words on the history so we understand what
the roots are?
I'll just say, Charles, that Lars is another of these extraordinary Swedes you meet when
you get to, when you don't meet so many.
I've met since 2020, but there are some extraordinary Swedes and Lars is one of them and Jakob's
another.
Welcome, Lars.
We've heard you speak before.
It's just wonderful.
It's just extraordinary.
Yes.
So there you are.
Jakob, what do you think?
Yes.
Yeah, I think Lars is amazing as well.
But, and he has helped me a lot.
And if I should say something about the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, because that was the story.
They had, they issued, they had a project in the 50s that is very, very important.
It's called the Special Studies Project.
And in, and it was the Rockefeller Brothers.
We had Nelson Rockefeller, we had David Rockefeller, Lawrence Rockefeller and John D. Rockefeller.
And they, they had just before funded, I mean, been very involved in the United Nations,
set up of the United Nations.
And during the 50s, they had discussions on how can we more or less create a new system,
a new system, a new international economic order.
We even say state a new world order.
It's our historical mission to create this.
And that in that report, they talked about some things that they could use to further
these ambitions and create this new supranational structure.
And that was through science.
Science was very important because we had science, scientific cooperation over the countries,
over the borders.
And it was especially two kind of scientific fields that they were interested in.
And they were interested in that one was climate and the other was health.
Climate is something that, I mean, weather goes over borders and health also crosses
borders with pandemics.
So it was, and from that on, we can fall off.
I do this in my book Rockefeller, Controlling the Game, how they influenced the presidential
administration in the United States and also the United Nations to look into these problems
and frame them as very important to solve and that we need United Nations to take care
of everything and with the support of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, of course.
So that was the short version.
If you want to have a long version, you can have some presentations on my YouTube channel
where I go through all this and also my book about the Rockefellers that will be out on
Skyhorse in second of April.
And that's all I have.
I have all this documentation about how the Rockefeller have worked with, especially climate
change, but health as well.
Thank you.
Yeah.
Very good.
Well, Jakob, you could do another presentation to us just before the book comes out.
Give us an overview of the book and then we'll all go out and buy it.
There you are.
Stephen, go and talk Jakob into doing that because Rockefeller is a very interesting
journey, of course, and David Rockefeller and the Council on Foreign Relations, all
that.
Thank you Lars.
Winston from Canada.
Thanks for an excellent presentation.
Excuse me.
I am, for me, this is going far less quickly than you, Jakob, or Jacob indicated.
For me, it's taken too long to come to a conclusion.
In fact, last night I had a lengthy and very pleasant conversation with Charles Kouvis
regarding this issue on the whole legality.
I have no knowledge of geopolitics really, but I am aware of some things.
One is that the Cabal, having done its dirty business, has left us all in a bit of a major
problem, which is why we're here, which we're deliberating on all these things.
And they are, from your lecture today, Jakob, it seems that they are pressing on, irrespective
of all that they have done and continue to try to do.
So I am constantly looking at ways to deal with this.
And last night my conversation with Charles dealt with that.
I am, as I say, I have no knowledge of geopolitics, but I have to ask something.
I think there's one European country, I think it's Croatia, that has come out and announced
that they are not going along with this and they're going to, in essence, give up and
reboot.
I'm wondering, and I know there's a lot happening all around the world legally, but I'm wondering
whether there's any way that we in the West can pile on to, I think it's Croatia, and
somehow get some of these issues through their courts.
My thinking is if the courts were to handle some of these issues and see them for what
they are, then perhaps other countries may begin to pile on as well and the house of
cars would begin to collapse.
I don't know.
I think it's Slovakia, Winston, but I'm not sure.
It could be Croatia as well, but...
It's one of those countries I remember.
Yes, I think it was Slovakia, Winston.
I think, yes, it was.
Jakub?
Yes?
Oh, I see.
Was there a question, Winston?
Yes, yes.
I'm wondering whether we in the West can somehow pile on to Slovakia's situation, whether some
of these matters can be heard through their courts, whether it makes any sense to do that,
because things are going far too slowly for me.
I understand that things are happening in the West, but little by little, and I think
that something has to remove this structure from this, really.
Yes, I'm not certain what the question is, but the thing is I have too little knowledge
about what's happening in Slovakia.
Anyone that can brief me more about it, because I think it's hard to answer a question about
it.
Well, the question, Jakub, that Winston is touching on is really the court action instituted
by the Slovakia government against farmers, and then Winston says, well, let's go to all
Slovakia, and we were talking about the corruption of the courts, and here we have Reiner wrongly
jailed, and we have Julian Assange wrongly jailed, and the conversation is around the
corruption of the courts.
Winston makes a good comment there, but it's rather a difficult, impossible question, and
all of us have to hold our courts to account, because the judges take notes, and they are
broadly, they have been at the least politicised and overwhelmingly, to a large degree, corrupt.
Same in the UK.
They're following the politician's narrative rather than enforcing the law, and that's
what Winston's saying.
How do we have to enforce the law?
That's a great question.
We'll leave it as a rhetorical question, because we'll run out of time, because that's a big
issue.
Charles, I think what Winston was trying to say was that if you've got the president,
or whatever he is, in the leader of Slovakia or Croatia, then it would make sense to go
to their legal systems to get some wins in that legal system, which presumably will reflect
the views of the president.
That's exactly what I'm asking.
I don't know what it is.
Look, it's highly, highly unlikely, but it's good to see, and each country will take those
steps.
Jakub, you touched on this issue, as David Rasnik touched on it, of getting big, the
size of these bureaucracies, Jakub, you touched on, and the book by Lawrence Leopold Corp,
1957, the breakdown of nations.
It's a wonderful proposition that the cause of most failure of anything is bigness.
Just a classic line, if you get too big, it collapses.
It collapses.
Overall, I think, yeah.
So, Winston, you could write to the president of Slovakia to congratulate him on what he
said.
Give him some encouragement, because that would be very welcome, I think.
Especially from an American, no, you're Canadian, aren't you?
Canadian psychiatrist.
Yes, yes.
Well, you may need a psychiatrist.
You never know.
All right, let's move.
Let's keep moving.
We've only got half an hour left, and we need Jakub to go to bed.
Jenna.
Thank you.
You mentioned a plan to abandon the dollar in favour of a carbon currency.
I'm just wondering how would that work?
Well, it's a kind of a complex question, but they are talking.
There's a lot of suggestions for this carbon currency.
And I mean, it started with, you know, you remember with Greta Thunberg, when she was,
I think she addressed this to World Economic Forum, and she talked about we have to have
this global carbon currency.
So, what I see with the carbon currency, it's a, you should talk to Patrick Wood, and it's
more like this technocratic concept, where it's not backed with, we have the petrodollar
system, and now they know that they have to change this to a new system that is backed
with carbon assets.
And that's everything.
And it's more connected to energy use.
That's important because carbon emitted is the use of energy.
So, if you go back to what the technocracy was, it was the energy-based system.
And now they are kind of reframing this and make it with carbon instead.
So, that's the idea, and that's what we're trying to do now is also with connecting
everything in the world and making this sort of digital world brain is a part of this new
currency system as well, because you have to know what your assets is, and you have
to know what your assets are emitting and so on.
So, we will use all this data in this global carbon currency system.
But it's kind of a complex topic, and I think it would need a long presentation to go into
all these details.
Could I say something very quickly to this?
Yep.
Okay.
Well, the carbon currency is actually a deviation of what they're talking about, the central
bank digital currency.
Because central bank digital currency, as it is planned, nobody has implemented it,
they're just threatening us with it, is programmable.
And the programmable includes carbon footprint.
They actually can stop, they can take the money away from you if your carbon footprint
is too big, or they can limit it, or they can say you are allowed to buy only such and
such things with it, and everything is kind of linked to the carbon footprint.
So, this is what they are referring to.
It's actually part of the central bank digital currency.
Just a quick question, but a quick answer, a quick idea to think about, but it's a very
complex topic that almost deserves a session by itself.
Thank you.
Thank you, Peter.
All right.
Jakob, Janis is a British doctor, and Anders, your next question is a Norwegian researcher.
Hello, Jakob.
I'm Norwegian.
I've done a lot of research on the matter of 4G, 5G, EMF, but that's not the reason
for my question.
I'm a Norwegian, and we have been a member of NATO for more than 70 years.
In these 70 years, until 2020, we were having strict rules, no foreign bases, the US, on
Norwegian soil, and we had strict regulations also regarding having nuclear bombs on Norwegian
soil.
About three years ago, the first step was that we got four American bases, which are
then formerly US territory, kind of legally, and Denmark got three, and now Sweden has
accepted to have 17 bases, and Finland has accepted to have 15 bases.
So within three years, we have now 47 US bases in Scandinavia, and I don't kind of believe
that this is defensive.
It is to me either offensive or against Russia, or it is for the control of the Scandinavian
people.
What is your thinking on those 47 American bases in Scandinavia?
Well, obviously, it's very important with Scandinavia for what's about to come.
And as I mentioned with how to implement a new system and the upgrading of the United
Nations, it's like a kind of war is needed.
And Scandinavia is seen as very, very important in this.
That's what I think.
About the control, I don't know, I don't see how this could be a part of the control agenda.
It's more, I see it more like a geopolitical military agenda.
Offensive, mainly?
Well, it's kind of, maybe.
We will see.
If you think about it, one thing 100% I can say is that it is a huge provocation to Russia.
So this is, I think, an even bigger provocation than the Ukrainian story, because this is
quite massive.
47 bases close to Russia on the northern side.
The northern side includes the very important seawaters where the Russian nuclear subs comes
out.
And by having bases both in Norway and Sweden and Finland up across all that area, yeah,
it is quite likely an offensive strategy to take out their first strike capabilities.
I don't think it's for defense.
So, Andes, do you think that Russia could react in the way they did with Ukraine to
one of the Scandinavian countries?
They'd single out one of them?
The most likely reaction would be nuclear.
And as we know, USA have already used nuclear weapons in the Baltic Sea.
So it's hard to know how they will react.
But Russia do not have a conventional army, military, air force at the moment, which is
really impressive.
They have some new, very fast rockets, but it's not many of them.
So I don't see a threat conventional from Russia.
All right.
Thank you, Andes, Jim, and then Glenn, and then back to Stephen.
And we're finishing in 25 minutes.
Jakob, I hope you're okay for the last 25 minutes.
Andes, it's extraordinary provocation in my view.
I didn't know that.
That's amazing.
47 bases in Scandinavia.
New bases.
Wow.
I put it in the chat.
Have you found this out recently?
Is that in the Scandinavian press?
So, yes.
So the Swedish one, they came at the time even before they are a formal member.
They have agreed to the 17 bases.
Finland agreed 15 bases.
Denmark, three or four, all air bases.
And Norway, first four.
And a couple of weeks ago, another eight.
So it is 12 in Norway, 15 Finland, 17 Sweden, and four in Denmark.
And everything in the last three years.
Is this a NATO base or US bases?
All of them US.
So there's only one US base in the UK, for example.
That's Lake and Heath, I think.
And so that's extraordinary that these are full sized bases in Scandinavia.
It is part of Air Force bases.
It is part of submarine Navy bases.
It is storage holes in the mountains.
Yeah, it's full range.
And it is for both permanent soldiers and permanent location of weapons.
And including nuclear weapons.
Including nuclear weapons?
Yes.
So they're doing exactly the same in Finland and Sweden as they did with Ukraine.
Outrageous.
No, they didn't do it in Ukraine.
It was just a threat to doing it.
So everything happened and it was decided, I think, before the Ukraine War.
The first bases, at least in Denmark, Norway.
So, I mean, imagine 47 bases in the last three years.
So what's the idea of the Ukraine War to coax the Scandinavian public into accepting bases on their lands?
I have a...
Do that later.
Yeah, it's very interesting. Thanks, Sandish.
Yeah, thanks very much. Great presentation.
I find your music intriguing and I put some stuff in the chat. That's great.
Yeah, great.
Yeah, awesome.
And so appropriate with the music from the Georgia Guidestones that were just blown up in the United States.
And the intelligence community saying they can't figure out who blew it up.
Like they can't figure out who put the cocaine in the White House.
And other things. And they can't figure out who blew up the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.
And it seems like when they say they can't figure it out, that means they did it.
The issue now comes to how do we prevent them from them, meaning our intelligence agencies, from forcing us into nuclear war?
From doing some kind of cyber attack and blaming Iran or Russia or whatever.
And when do you see this coming? And when do you see this fake ale?
There's a park in Oslo, Norway that...
Frogger Park or Viglund Park, the guy who did the medal for the Nobel Peace Prize.
He's got large statues of reptiles crushing humans in there.
How do you fit this all in and what timeframe do you have in terms of this?
It seems like they're just making this drag on a little bit longer and longer every time we start to get wise to this.
So what was the... I'm a bit tired.
So how do we actually stop the nuclear war that seems to be coming and building up?
What are the pinch points that we have that we can address from the standpoint of a country that's right next to Russia in the middle of this?
The thing is, I don't really believe in that there's going to be a nuclear war.
I don't believe it. I believe it's a threat.
It's something because they had done it.
And they are too scared to use this kind of power because it will destroy everything.
So I see it more like something that they are using to scare us like they have done.
I mean, since the formation of the United Nations, they started talking about the whole Cold War.
So I don't think that is an option. I don't think they will actually do a nuclear attack.
But you talked about the next step. Was it like the alien threat?
The funny thing is, if you look into this United Nations, our common agenda, they talk a lot about space threats.
But of course, they talk more like it could be asteroids, it could be space debris and so on.
But it's like they are open the door to something because suddenly it's very, very important with space and the use of space.
And they want to allocate money to these things.
But it's more like when we have the structure for a more formal world government, then they will need that kind of threat.
They will need an alien threat at that time.
And I mean, it takes time also to build these narratives.
But we can see with how they have changed the last years with reporting about UFOs and so on.
So yes, something is happening, but I see it kind of after the 20, 30 frame.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Jim.
Glenn. I'll be quite quick.
It's specific to your discussion around the Rockefeller Brothers Fund in the 1950s and how you use the phrase that they would attempt to influence people.
I would say I assume you're aware of the various paths that they've taken and gone beyond just influencing and going to outright blackmail.
And if blackmail doesn't work, that murder is used as a tool.
There are large numbers of books about the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
But there are two specific ones.
This is one of them by Bar McClellan, the lawyer for LBJ, who specifically says, as well as two or three others, that it was a combination of LBJ together with John Rockefeller III that basically put in the assassination of John F. Kennedy as well as his brother, Robert F. Kennedy.
Do you have any reason to dispute their claims to that effect?
No, I've heard some things about it.
But I really want to read that.
I read that. I really, because I heard some things about it before.
And it's not far-fetched to think that they have been in the background to this because they were so important.
They were so involved with the presidential administrations at the time for influencing everything.
So if Kennedy wasn't doing what he was told.
Our group did a specific show on this particular topic under our Rumble channel, L4ATV1.
Yeah, I have to watch it.
Okay.
Thank you, Glenn. Excellent. Jerome, how's your book going? Tell Jacob about your book.
The book is going good.
A couple different things quickly.
My book on JFK will be published probably next three, four weeks.
In March, let's just say, the typesetting is almost done.
It will show from the X-rays that Jack Kennedy was shot twice from the front.
And these were optical density measurements of the X-rays and it's scientific evidence.
It can be seen in the X-rays.
It's going to be quite a shocking book, I believe.
And it was done by my co-authors, David Mantick, who is both a PhD in physics and is a radiation oncologist.
He practiced radiation oncology for over four decades and he's seen the X-rays more than anyone else.
He's done optical density measurements on it.
That's going to be a big impact.
I wanted to comment on the Finland and Ukraine situation.
The State Department has been pushing.
Then this cabal, which is part of the global coup d'état, does want a war with Russia.
And they've been pushing NATO into Finland and into Ukraine because these are Russia's two accesses to the Mediterranean, through the Black Sea and through the Baltic Sea.
And Russia is not going to tolerate that.
Russia has begun backchanneling to try to communicate that they do not want a nuclear war.
And Tucker Carlson is right now in Moscow.
And that's part of establishing some, he'll probably come back with interviews of Putin, which will be the beginning of the backchanneling.
And Putin and Medvedev are reaching out to say they don't want this madness.
Anyone who studied 1939 and the pact between Stalin and Hitler realizes that Hitler held at bay while Stalin invaded both Ukraine and Finland prior to Stalin being invaded by Hitler.
So these have been targets that have gone back to geopolitics for a long time.
And this cabal that is in charge, depopulationist cabal, has been pointed out, would be happy to kill billions of people with a nuclear war, which would also serve their objective of destroying the food supply.
And it's quite evil.
Bishop Vigano, who's spoken to this group, has been on these themes.
And we're now, I've started working with Bishop Vigano.
And trying to get him in touch with Donald Trump and establishing some channels where Bishop Vigano can speak globally.
I'm working with a company called Cloud Hub.
They've got technology which allows a podcast or a meeting like this to be heard in something like 70 languages.
And so it's automatic translation.
It is pretty good.
So there's some platforms we can create to go international with this.
And additionally, he's writing a book and I do want to publish his book.
And we'll try to get the rights to that.
But we are winning so much at this point with deconstructing this agenda that this global cabal has decided to accelerate their time.
They're pulling back the deadlines on global warming.
So all through Europe, these dates are getting moved farther out for decarbonization in Germany and UK, etc.
But their plan now is, I think, to escalate.
I think they're contemplating that they would contemplate a nuclear war.
And that's why we're going to get Hans Benjamin's book in print as soon as we can.
These, I think, these are seriously insane plans because the whole agenda is to destroy in order to create their global utopia.
They have to destroy what exists.
And Putin gave a statement yesterday about how the United States is self-destructing with pedophilia, breaking up marriages, this gender dystopia.
And he said, we're abandoning our traditional values.
What Putin is concerned about is the United States going this direction will destabilize the world instead of being a factor for stability.
And Putin is very, very aware of it.
And so is Medvedev.
And they're working to try to put an end to it.
And all this, you know, I've come to realize in the last probably week.
And it's a critical time.
But I do think we can turn it back.
But it's going to take spiritual forces like Bigino to play a major role in this, to turn it back.
So I may be planning to go over there and meet with them pretty soon.
Excellent, Jerome.
If you're looking for a second publisher, then Jerome's your man.
Yeah, I know Tony Lyons at Skyhorse.
He's published three of my books also.
And so I've known Tony for about 20 years.
He owns Skyhorse.
He's also raising money for one of the pack leaders for Bobby Kennedy's campaign.
All right.
Well done. Thank you, Jerome.
Well done on your great work and thinking.
And Jerome has put his website.
Jerome, can I suggest you put your website again into the chat?
And then, Stephen, last questions for you for the last few minutes, and then we'll let Jakob go to bed.
Yeah.
So Jakob, thank you so much for staying up way past your bedtime.
We're really grateful for your time.
And we're going to take a few more questions.
And then we'll go to the next question.
Thank you so much for staying up way past your bedtime.
We're really grateful to you.
I think what's great about you, Jakob, is that I just feel that you couldn't tell a lie if you tried.
No.
And so we need really need people like you, because one of the things that's going to free us, free humanity is a relentless search for the truth.
Considering all the opposing views, if you like, even on our own side, we have to kind of be humble, I think, in this crazy situation and consider everything, because there's no point in having your favorite truth, you know, and pushing that endlessly for two years past its best sell by date, you know, or even six months past itself.
So people need to just open up their minds to all possibilities.
And, and I don't think some people are capable of it, but I'm not saying that in a big headed way.
But I think I think you know what I mean, Jakob, especially you.
Yes, yes, I do.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
Because, I mean, we don't know the future.
I mean, people, they want to decide the future, but they can't.
It's impossible.
They can try.
Yes.
But it won't succeed.
I mean, I don't, when I try to plan my future, it's never succeed.
It never goes as I have thought out.
I mean, it can go in a good direction, but it's always happening things that I didn't think of.
That's just you.
So if you try to speak for the whole world, it's obvious that a mere human being can't possibly deal with all the variables.
So no one.
And so it's too complex.
It's too complex.
It's a lot of other people that have their additions and work for things.
So it's very, if you're alone, you might could create things you want, but you always have this.
Yeah.
As you said, it's a lot of things going into this that we need to think, you know, it's not a matter of being logical all the time, but it is a matter of searching for the truth all the time, being true to yourself, saying what you think to interrupt the false narrative.
And to realize that human beings sort out their problems in ways that we can't really identify.
So empires end, but nobody knows when the damned empire ends, when it's going to end in the future, as it were.
And what insignificant events will actually trigger the end of the empire or the end of the country, you know?
And so, but also it's not surprising in a way because human beings, you know, in charge of all this who are hubristic by their nature, they forget the importance of humility, and they get carried away, and they never know when to stop.
They don't stop at the right time.
So actually they have to be told when to stop or forced to stop.
And so anybody who wants to change things and is on a role, on a role, as it were, they would do well to ask their friends who oppose them, you know, what do you think I'm doing wrong?
But they're not so the notion that human beings can over organize the whole world is just ridiculous.
Yes, stupid.
Who is organizing? They're mere human beings who don't even understand the world in which they live, the complexity of biology and the massive, the hugeness of the universe.
So why on earth do they think that their solutions are going to be any good?
If they are any good, it's a fluke.
Very well said.
Jacob, do you understand the word fluke?
So if their solutions in inverted commas are any good, I said it's a fluke, you know, it's just it just happens, you know, nobody knows.
So in other words, it's an accident that it works.
Do you understand?
Oh, but they say it worked, therefore it was because what I did.
No, no, it doesn't work like that.
You understand what I mean, don't you?
Yes.
Thank you so much for speaking to us, Jacob.
We'll let you go four minutes early.
Well done.
Thank you.
I'm actually very tired now.
It was great to talk to you.
Yes.
Thank you so much.
Thanks, everybody.
We'll be back on see you on Sunday and you keep up your great work.
Go to bed.
I hope we haven't.
I hope we haven't made you so excited that you can't sleep.
I think I will sleep.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Thanks, Stephen.
Thanks.
Thank you.
Bye.