And I'll put Thomas up here.
So everybody, welcome to Medical Doctors for COVID Ethics International and today's discussion.
This group was founded by Dr. Stephen Frost over three years ago with the desire to pursue
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 specialty is radiology
and overnight while I was sleeping here in Australia, the Julian Assange case decision
was handed down. I wonder if while we're doing this recording, if anybody was that was that
handed down? Does anybody know? Because Stephen has done a lot of work on this.
Yes, I've just got reports Charles. I just got reports today, just minutes ago actually.
The case was handed down. He's got time now to appeal again.
Okay, thank you. Thank you Peter. Just quickly, I just wanted that for the purpose of this
because Stephen has fought for Julie and Assange's freedom over the years. I'm Charles Covester,
moderator of this group on Australasia's passion provocateur and we love passionate people
in these meetings. I practiced law for 20 years before changing career 31 years ago
and over the last 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 and we're from all around the world. Many of us thought
that vaccines were okay. Now many of us proudly say, yes, we are passionate anti-vaxxers.
If this is your first time here, welcome and feel free to introduce yourself in the chat
and where you're from. If you publish a newsletter or a 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. Most of us understand we're in the middle of World War III and that the
medical science battle is only one of 12 battlefields of this latest world war and
there's no time to be tired. We're four years into what I think is going to be a seven-year
war. I thought it was going to be a six-year war. I think we've got another three years
to go probably. Most of us understand the development of science and that the science
is never settled. Anybody who tells you the science is settled, they've got an agenda
to sell you. Some of us believe that viruses exist. Some of us believe that viruses are
a hoax and some of us are on the fence. And some commentators on this Rumble channel say
that anybody who believes that viruses exist is a liar or a fool. So there you are. The
criticisms are coming loud and strong. 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 our guest presenter, Dr.
Thomas Binder for as long as Thomas wishes to speak and then we have Q&A. Stephen Frost
by long established tradition asks the first questions for 15 minutes. This is a free speech
environment. Free speech is crucially important in our fight to preserve our human freedoms.
If you're offended by anything, be offended. We are lovingly 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. Our strength as men and women comes from
being united. The globalist agenda is to divide us in the context of relationships with other
human beings, understand that unity is strength. These twice weekly meetings are not just talk
fests. An extraordinary range of actions and initiatives have been generated from linkages
made by attendees in these meetings. 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
onto the Rumble channel. And now let me introduce, let me give you the bio. We've agreed that
we will include the bio to make life easy for viewers of these recordings. And let me
tell you a little bit just quickly about Thomas Binder. And if it was Binder, if it was in
Australia it would say binder, but it's Binder. And Thomas studied medicine at the University
of Zurich and received his doctorate in immunology and virology, specialised in internal medicine
and cardiology, has 36 years of experience also in diagnostics and therapy of respiratory
infections in hospitals and in ICUs. He's been working in his private practice in Switzerland
for 26 years. He stood up for the return to scientificity, medicine and humanness in March
2020 and has done so since then. On Easter Saturday evening, 2020, he was arrested in
his practice by an anti-terrorist unit after a slanderer had made the allegations he threatened
the government and society, was armed and had a psychiatric history, which was all wrong.
Yet, he was detained in a closed psychiatry unit for six days because of COVID insanity.
He was a board member of the Swiss Aletheia Humane Medicine and Science, is a core member
of Doctors for COVID Ethics, a member of the German Physicians and Scientists for Health,
Freedom and Democracy, is one of the 22 life scientists who wrote the Cormann-Droston
Review Report, including addendum blogs, articles, talks and interviews you can find on Thomas'
personal website. We put this into the chat, thomasbinder.ch. Of course, this was the extension
for Switzerland and on ex also known as Twitter at thomas underscore binder. So Thomas, welcome
your frequent visitor to here, looking forward to hearing what you have to say to us. Hello,
Stephen with your nicely brushed hair and Thomas, we're in your hands.
Welcome everybody. Thank you, Stephen, for your invitation and Charles for your kind
introduction. I'd like to talk about my experience during the last four years and about my two
cents on this Corona pandemic and the injections, of course, and maybe there will be some time
about to talk about the big picture as well. Yeah, well, I was confronted with COVID like
you all in first in January 2020 with these pictures and videos from Wuhan that I realized
were simply too much. I mean, we saw those hoards running around in penguin suits, cannons
mounted on lorries, allegedly spraying disinfectants in the air and people allegedly dying suddenly
in the streets that always landed on their hands. So I thought, oh my God, what's this?
At that time, of course, I didn't know what was going on. I didn't know what was going
on, whether these pictures were directed against the Chinese populace or against the populace
of the whole world. But I thought this is very strange. And then there was silence,
more or less silence for about a month. And then one morning I woke up and in the news
I heard now the virus is in Bergamo. Bergamo is in northern Italy and northern Italy is
50 km from the Swiss border where I live. And I was amazed. I was surprised to see that
like, obviously, almost everybody thought, oh, well, we have to do exactly the same as
the Chinese did because at the same time, we got messages from Wuhan that the Chinese
in their heroic war against the virus won. So obviously most people thought that we have
to do exactly the same, install the same insane authoritarian unscientific measures as stated.
And I couldn't understand the word. I mean, everything I had learned in medical school
during my scientific education, in my practical medical life was suddenly turned upside down.
And I was amazed that other doctors did not inform the public. So I thought, well, it's
my duty to inform the public as a doctor. So first I wrote emails to better doctors,
to journalists I knew, politicians I knew to inform them about what's going on. And
the spooky thing was I never got any answer, not even an answer like, Thomas, you're crazy
or so, just no answer. So as I could not reach out to journalists, I intensified my activities
in social media. I wrote blogs. And on the first day before Easter 2020, I wrote a huge
blog again where I explained the whole prevailing corona nonsense narrative, that the indications
to test is wrong, test is wrong. Highly likely there is no epidemiologically relevant asymptomatic
transmission, that it is irresponsibly panicking the populace with a CFR of 2% while every
pupil understands that the IFR is important, that is highly likely 100 times or so lower.
So that this virus probably is even less dangerous than influenza in the range of its broader
and sister coronaviruses and so on and so forth. And this blog was clicked about 20,000
times in a day. So I thought, oh, well, I didn't understand why me, an ordinary doctor,
should inform Switzerland or maybe half of the world. But well, I did it. And I thought
in a week or so other doctors will come out, this information will spread exponentially
and this whole corona nonsense narrative will have crashed within a week. I want you to
go on holiday on Easter for a week. But so on Easter Saturday in the evening, I was doing
some final work in my practice before going on holiday. And at about 10 o'clock, I was
arrested by an anti-terrorist squad, 20 policemen. In this whole operation, 60 policemen were
involved. And the reason was that the good acquaintance of mine, whom I sent these emails
as well, who read my blogs, in these tweets, blogs, etc., he projected threats, threats
against the government, against the populace. And he called another good acquaintance of
mine, the prime minister of the canton of the province where I live in Switzerland.
And on the phone, they decided they do not want to call me and they asked me, Thomas,
we do not understand what you want to tell us. Maybe we meet for a corona and you can
explain it to us again. No, they informed the chief of the state police and he started
this whole operation. At the same time, they protected the whole government of my province
and the train station that is opposite to my practice was closed for hours because of
this well-known fundamentalist terrorist, Dr. Thomas Pinder. After one hour, they realized
all allegations, there were three allegations, were wrong. The allegations were I was a threat,
I was armed, I had a psychiatric history. They found out after an hour everything was
wrong so they could not even issue an arrest warrant, they could not imprison me. But they
did not apologize and send me home. Then they sent a colleague to me that had to check my
ability to be imprisoned, although they could not imprison me. And this was an emergency
doctor. You must imagine already at that time she wore a hardcore FFP2 mask and was shouting
put on the mask, put on the mask, the virus, the virus. So this colleague had to check
my mental status and she decided I was corona insane. She invented a new diagnosis and as
insanity alone is not enough or involuntary commitment, she decided I must be self-endangering.
Although in a tweet some days ago, because everything seemed so spooky to me, I wrote
something like I'm 58 years old, sporty, no medication and never ever commit suicide.
So I spent six days in closed psychiatry, the first 36 hours in a padded cell. But then
of course I appealed and the court decided yes, they have to release me. But then in
this psychiatric hospital a psychiatrist diagnosed mania. I would suffer from mania. So the court
said okay, you are a doctor, you want to continue to work. So there are two possibilities. Either
you stay in the psychiatric hospital for six weeks to have treated your mania or you can
leave and go on and continue to work. But then you have to take a Beli-Fi, a neuroleptic
and whether I took it or not was checked by a blood check once per week. So I decided
to do the latter. So this was Soviet style psychiatry in Switzerland. But I never did
something unlawful. Everything I told and wrote from March 2020 on was 100% scientific
and evidence based so they could not really do me harm. I continued to work and of course
I even intensified to inform the public. So I networked locally in Switzerland. I joined
a group of Swiss, a network of Swiss doctors and scientists called Alethea, then later
for COVID.
In this context I have to mention one important person that is Suchary Bhakti. Of course I
realized immediately that everything is nonsense. But of course as a doctor I could not go public
while only searching for 99%. I had to be 200% sure. At that time I found Suchary, I
found his YouTube videos. You can look into his eyes and within a second you realize this
is a deeply honest, intelligent and pathetic person. I saw he is telling the same. Later
I found Wolfgang Wodarg as well. Those guys gave me the assurance that I was right so
that I could go public.
It is essential that the public understands that there was no pandemic of a killer virus.
This was mainly an RT-PCR testing pandemic because this of course is the recipe for the
WHO to fabricate any RT or PCR testing pandemic against any alleged or real disease.
I would like to stress that I am open to debate about everything. Whether there is a virus
around or not I am not completely sure. I am not completely sure whether it is a testing
pandemic by 95%, 99% or 100%. I am also ready to debate about whether there are viruses
or not. For the moment I think this debate is not very fruitful because already now when
we go to court the judges and the prosecutors think we are crazy. In the currently accepted
belief system alone there are 1001 reasons to unveil this whole nonsense so we do not
need the other stuff. If you tell the judge there are no viruses at all they even think
we are more insane. I think this may somewhat divide us. I think we are more likely to be
and I think this is not very fruitful in public. We can debate about everything in a closed
circle but this is my personal opinion. You can have another opinion of course but this
is my personal opinion. In what I say I still think there are viruses but I am not absolutely
sure of course. I learned during these times that we have to question everything especially
in the medical and scientific field of course. The basis of this nonsense narrative of course
is the RT-PCR test. Even before this comes to light we have to do the RT-PCR test. We
have to do the RT-PCR test. I mean how did we treat the flu and the cold before 2020?
Well it is usually a self-limiting disease so we treated ourselves and after 7 days it
was over. Sometimes it got worse and maybe day 5 when it got worse we went to the GP
and he maybe diagnosed complicating secondary bacteria pneumonia that could still be treated
on an outpatient basis with antibiotics and lasted maybe 2 or 3 weeks. But here the people
were told and only when it got really worse life threatening the GP sent us to the hospital
and only at that stage we tested for the causative germ. The GP had just to decide is it highly
likely a viral infection or is it a bacterial infection. But in the very severe life threatening
cases we wanted to treat specifically with antiviral drugs so then we must know the causative
virus and only at that stage we tested. We never tested for a cold or a flu virus before
and we did not test only for one of all possible causative germs like they did here. They did
no longer test for influenza they only tested for SARS-CoV-2 and we did not test asymptomatic
formally called healthy people of course. This was all totally insane. Then there comes
the wrong test of course. PCR is not a test for an infection it is a test for the presence
of a certain amount of a certain part of a genome of a causative of a germ. And even
if it is 100% sensitive and specific presence of a tiny amount of somebody or a virus is
of course does never prove an infection. The more viruses is around the lower the CTs the
higher is the likelihood that this is the causative germ. But the PCR test result must
always seen in conjunction with other clinical findings of course. And then of all possible
PCR tests they chose the worst. The Cormann-Drawston testing protocol is the recipe for the worst
RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. We could possibly imagine any advanced biochemistry student
could do a better one within a day. And then another important if these case numbers are
of course they these case numbers could cranked up and down according to the script by changing
the sensitivity and the specificity of the test. I mean what many even so called experts
allegedly do not even know by now is that a specificity of 99% does not mean 1% of the
tests are false positives and 19% are correct. But that the meaning of specificity is highly
dependent on the prevalence of the virus. If the prevalence of the virus is zero close
to zero all or almost all positive tests are false positives. I explain it to lay people
like this. If we do a pregnancy test that is 99% specific in 10,000 men we will get
100 positives. And as the prevalence of pregnancy in men is zero all those 100 tests are false
positives. And this positivity rate of about 1% is what we saw during the summer when there
was no or almost no coronaviruses around. And this Drosten test was especially bad because
it cross reacts with all the coronaviruses. There was a laboratory survey in Germany already
in summer 2020 where the specificity of the test was 98.6%. But this specificity went
down to 92.4% in the presence of all the coronaviruses. So it is clear that in the flu in the corona
season that the positivity rate goes up. So whether there was SARS-CoV-2 around or not
I am not 100% sure. But it is clear that most, most COVID cases were fabricated out of the
thin air by mislabelling other diagnosis. Mainly influenza that miraculously disappeared
during this time with this nonsense test. There are many proofs for this. I think that
the best proof I call it a picture paints a thousand words. Maybe I may share my screen.
Yes you can. Can you see it? Yep. This is a 3D picture paints a thousand words. Now
this is the ICU bed monitoring of the famous Swiss University ETH. There we see the number
of ICU beds. We see the date. Black curve is the total ICU bed occupancy. The green
curve are the non-COVID patients and the orange curve are the COVID patients. Now look what
happens. Let's look here. In the summer we have the false positivity rate of about 1%.
And then suddenly there is an increase of the COVID patients. COVID patients arrive
in the ICU. Then what would you expect? That the green curves myocardial infarctions, pulmonary
embolisms, car accidents, etc. would go on straight like this. Maybe someday a little
bit go down when they postpone operations or whatever. But at exactly the same moment
when these curves goes up the other curves goes down and die about the same amount. And
with the reverse of these two lines curves are almost complete mirror images. And you
see that the total number of the ICU bed occupancy stays basically the same. You always have
a little bit of hump in the flu season in the winter because then there are acute respiratory
infections and the most serious cases must be mechanically intubated and mechanically
ventilated in the ICUs. We see also that we also always had huge spare beds. Here we see
the total amount of ICU beds. They were increased to more than 1,500 and during the alleged
pandemic of the century they were reduced. But there were always huge spare beds. So
there was never any overcrowding of the ICU. So this is really a picture paints a thousand
words. This is the first proof I already mentioned in summer 2020 and nobody ever should give
me another explanation for this curve. If you want to explain it in another way you
must state that you are probably God for every patient that arrives in the ICU here he postpones
a myocardial infarction, a car accident or whatever. But I think this is highly unlikely.
I think this is really great and such graphs exist for every country. At the same time
they explain why there was no overcrowding in any country. For example, in Germany there
are about three times more ICU beds per capita than in Switzerland. Whereas in Sweden there
are only about half as many per capita as in Switzerland. So if we Swiss are maybe at
the limit in Germany they would have had enormous reserves while in Sweden they would have had
overcrowding of the ICU. But in no country we saw this. So this was mainly a RT-PCR testing
pandemic. And for people who do not believe that this really exists I recommend an article
that was published in the New York Times in 2007 under the title Faith in Quick Test Leads
to Epidemic That Wasn't. There they describe an alleged whooping cough epidemic in New
Hampshire in 2006 where 142 people tested positive also with a nonsense PCR test. And
then later they found out with bacterial cultures that none actually suffered from pertussis.
So this was by 100% a PCR testing epidemic. And this is exactly what happened now. It's
amazing that even in the freedom movement, especially the stars, they never talk about
this. They are still blathering about the lab leak. Of course this chain of function
research must be forbidden of course. But I think these rumors about this lab leak mainly
serve to inflate this comparatively harmless virus into a killer virus with propaganda.
Basically an endemic of a comparatively harmless cold virus was inflated into a pandemic of
a killer virus with PR and PCR. And it's always a good idea to walk in the shoes of the adversary.
If I was a psychopath who should plan such this pandemic? If I was not suicidal I would
not release a killer virus that could hurt or even kill myself. I would of course choose
a comparatively harmless virus or even no virus and inflate it into a killer virus with
PR and PCR. And this is exactly what they did. And what threatens of course that the
WHO does again at will if the modifications of the IHRs and the pandemic agreement are
accepted and ratified in our countries. So it is of utmost importance that we bombard
our parliamentarians with this information that they realize what's at stake. So this
to the RT-PCR testing pandemic. The other part is insane as well of course. In 2020
they came up with the idea of course that we can only overcome this pandemic with a
vaccine. The idea to end the pandemic with a vaccine starts long before this modified
RNA and DNA platform. It starts with the vaccination itself. There is no need to vaccinate against
this comparatively harmless virus. Then we cannot effectively vaccinate against the respiratory
virus. At least not reduce infection or transmission because the antibodies are in the blood, not
on the mucosa of the airways. The best we can hope with a vaccine against the respiratory
virus is to somewhat reduce generalized disease caused by viremia if the virus becomes more
spread in the whole body. Then we cannot effectively vaccinate against the permanently
mutating virus like coronaviruses because the vaccine always lags behind its variants
of course. Especially if you choose only one epitope. Natural immunity of course is always
better than the best vaccine. I explain this to lay people like this. Let's say my face
is a virus. I infect you. Then your immune system takes a picture of my face and stores
it. If I come around again next season mutated, so let's say with a broken nose, your immune
system still recognizes my face also with a broken nose. But if your immune system only
takes a picture of my nose, only one epitope, and I come around next season with a broken
nose, it will not recognize me again. Then of course even if there was a pandemic, of
course you cannot end a testing pandemic with a vaccine. You can only end a testing pandemic
by ending testing. But even if it was a pandemic, you cannot end a pandemic with a vaccine because
a pandemic ends after three months with everybody either immune or dead, while the development
and testing for safety and efficacy of a vaccine lasts ten years. So already this was intellectually
absurd. Then of course to choose the modified RNA and DNA platform was the apex of incidence.
I mean it starts with the unknown dose. We inject the construction plan for the production
of a protein foreign to the body, a prodrug, without having any control over which cells
produce it, in what amount, and for how long. There was a guy in the 16th century called
Paracelsus who said it's the dose that makes a poison or not a poison. So already because
the individually produced effective dose of the spike protein was unknown, these vaccines
could never have been approved of course. And then the problem, I mean when I heard
of this new platform, the first thing I did was to look for the receptor on these LNPs,
the lipid nanoparticles, who makes them enter only the muscle cells. But I didn't find this
receptor. These were deliberately chosen so that this mRNA could be inserted in any cell,
even across the blood brain and the placental barrier, so even be introduced into the brain
cells and in the cells of the embryos and fetuses. And this of course was deliberate.
This was intention to harm. There is no doubt about that, no doubt at all. If of course
the basic flaw of this whole platform, this is important that the people understand, it
is not only these SARS-CoV-2 gene transfections that are flawed, it's the whole modified RNA
and DNA platform that is basically flawed, because the main toxicity comes from the auto-immune
attack of our immune system against the foreign antigen expressing and then presenting cells.
Our white blood cells are policing around, they see these cells carrying, presenting
a foreign protein, they think this is an alien, and they attack it. Of course the lipid nanoparticles
are themselves toxic. The spike itself is toxic. But if the lipid nanoparticles would
be the main toxicity came from the lipid nanoparticles, with every dose the toxicity would increase
more or less linearly. If the spike was, the main toxicity came from the spike, the toxicity
would highly likely go even down with every shot, because there are more and more neutralizing
antibodies. But as we know, especially from the Neuron course work, we know that the toxicity
increases exponentially with every shot and with each. And this can only be explained
by this auto-immune attack. The immune system gets trained again and again with every shot,
so it becomes ever better in attacking and destroying those cells. So I'm convinced
that the main toxicity comes from this auto-immune attack. And this is the basic thing of the
whole platform. The basic thing is to coerce our body cells to produce and then present
a protein foreign to the body. This is completely different than gene therapy where you want
to make a cell, for example, to produce insulin or whatever, a protein from our body. This
is no problem. But there the problem is that they produce a foreign protein. So this is
important. The people have to refuse all modified RNA and DNA vaccines. This is especially
important because their production is cheap and rapid, so the pharmaceutical industry
wants to transfer all vaccines on this platform. So this is the reason why this message has
to spread. And then, of course, the dosage is much too high. Obviously, if the dose,
if the injections would stay in the muscle, muscle cells can regenerate. So this auto-immune
attack would be no problem. This might work. But as I said, they enter any body cell. And
then the dosage is high. Obviously, with physiological dosages, they could not get
a good immune response. So the dosage is horrendous. And then, of course, the lipid normal particles
itself is toxic, the spike is toxic, and the apex of it, the insanity is what Kevin McKernan
was the first to found the contamination with functional plasmid DNA from the manufacturing
process. So yeah, the idea to vaccinate against this virus was insane. Use this modified RNA
and DNA platform was the apex of insanity. So these are the two basic things everybody
has to understand. Now, once we have realized it is not about medicine, it is not about
science, what is this thing about? I think we can debate about this in the Q&A maybe
later. I guess everybody who is present here understands. If you ask me, it is the final
battle of evil versus good. For the first time in history, the battle of evil versus
good, the ruling psychopaths, or maybe we could better call them severe maligno-gnosyists
that always ruled us. In ancient times, they were wearing crowns. Nowadays, they are multi-billionaires.
For the first time in human history, they have the technical means to totally control
and enslave us. I am absolutely sure this is the aim of this whole agenda. There is
also a spiritual area of course. If you are good people, you have to stand up against
this, if not for ourselves, then of course for life, for our children and grandchildren.
Maybe I end here and I am ready to take any questions, of course, hard questions of course.
Very good. Thomas, wonderful. I have been a professional speaker for 31 years after
my legal career. What you have done is to honestly share your experience with the world
there, your perspective, and each one of us has a perspective. That is the value of
human beings and your analogies to explain complex ideas. That is what excellent educators
do. I learned a long time ago that if somebody does not understand me, that is my fault,
not their fault. That is because I have explained it badly. You have given us a great example
of explaining things well to those who do not speak particular languages. I think it
is a lesson of being open to hear other experts give different explanations of what is going
on. I found it wonderful because in my life I am always looking for great ways to explain
other ideas. You did that beautifully. Thank you so much for your honesty around that.
I have a million questions, but as you know, Stephen goes first on the questions. Stephen,
are you ready to go for the first 15 minutes? Where are you?
Yes, sorry. I did not have my video on. I thought I had it anyway.
Thomas, that was really great. I agree with Charles. It was a brilliant exposition by
a medical doctor in terms which the public could understand. I think what is special
about it is to explain things so clearly as you have just done and in a second language.
It is not your first language, English. I know how difficult that is because I have
learned Swedish. I have worked in Sweden as a doctor. It is really difficult to operate
in a second language. I think the reason that what you did shows great empathy. You have
put yourself without realising it in the position of all the people who did not understand medicine
and you have made it simple. It is easy to understand. I think they might struggle with
concepts, but the thing that cries out to me, Thomas, first of all, I would like to
say that I have been for a long time. I am really shocked about what happened. I was
shocked in 2020 and I am still shocked now. Not quite about the same things, but about
the totality of the nonsense that is being put about. It does seem to me that you said
this is the greatest attack on human beings ever. I think you did. It does seem to me
that progress has not served as well, technological progress, because more or less in the birthplace
of technology, we have fallen at the first hurdle. We cannot regulate stuff like computers.
So if we do not know how the damn computers work, how on earth are we going to regulate
them? That means that humanity is going to be constantly in peril. I just wonder whether
you have thought of that. Also, I wanted to ask you about, so I do think that one of the
features of the last four years was rampant psychological torture. It needs to be called
out. They reduced people to a state of Stockholm syndrome. So yes, PCR test pandemic, whatever
you want to call it. There was no pandemic in my opinion. In addition to that, these
quite inappropriate shots, so-called vaccinations, which were not vaccinations, they said they
were safe and effective. It turns out that they never tested for safety and they never
tested for efficacy. So crazy. We knew that all along, of course. I am just shocked about
the mess that we are in. I really think that people think that blindly that they must support
computers, because it is progress. But if we cannot manage them, if we cannot manage
computers, we need to get rid of them. We need to get rid of them. No matter all the
things that we think are good about computers, like learning for ourselves about anything
we want to learn about. We have to bin that if the dangers are greater than the benefits.
And I just wonder whether you have thought about that, Thomas? If you haven't, it doesn't
matter. We can talk about other things.
Yes, of course, I fully agree. I mean, this hype about artificial intelligence, I mean,
I always say who is seeking for artificial intelligence? Of course, the ones who have
no natural intelligence. And we saw during, we realized during the last four years that
the natural intelligence is dying out. I think one of our main problems nowadays is this
over-specialization. I mean, I said, if I told an infectious disease, hey, look, look
at this PCR test. This PCR test does not prove an infection. Then he answered, oh, I don't
know anything about PCR. Ask the PCR guy. And then I tell the PCR guy, hey, this test
does not prove an infection. He said, oh, I don't understand anything about infection.
Ask the infectious disease. This is the problem. I think the guys like you, Stephen, and like
me, with a broad education, broad experience, who could still see the forest, we are dying
out. I always say we have supers. We have a specialist for every leaf, any leaflet of
every tree. But the guys who see the forest are dying out. And we see it in all society.
It's the same with this diamond nonsense scam. CO2 is a poison. Come on. CO2 is the elixir
of life. Decarbonization is dehumanization. It's a death cult. It's amazing how they
manage to brainwash the public with this. I like the allegory of Plato's cave. I always
explain it like this. Most people are sitting in Plato's cave and on the walls, they are
no longer the projected shadows of the symbols. But there is a huge flat screen. And our legacy
media, our project, virtual realities on this flat screen, about 9-11 CO2 scam, pandemic
scam. Of course, there was no pandemic. It is a testing pandemic. The test makes the
appearance that there is a pandemic. But I fully agree. There was no pandemic, of course.
So the people are living in this Plato's cave. And it is our duty to show the people,
hey, there is the exit. There is the exit. You can leave this cave outside. The sun is
shining. Most people are great people, kind people, nice people. Leave this damn Plato's
cave with these virtual realities. Because if we live in these virtual realities, we
have to collide with reality once. And this might even be the end of our species with
atomic war or whatever.
Absolutely. We look as though we are well on the way after, what is it, like 50 years
of the kind of technology that we are talking about. And it is only 100 years ago or so
since the motor car first came to the world. And people think it has always been here.
And they need to be educated. But the other thing is we have got mind control to contend
with. So we had Jason Kristoff talk to us. We have had him talk to us before. And he
was talking about mind control. And it seemed to me while he was talking, and I think I
said it, I meant to say it anyway, that if this level of mind control has gone on, then
to solve the problems that we face, we need to first of all deal with the mind control.
Yeah. So anyway, I agree with you, Thomas. I previously said what you said about over
specialisation. It is extremely dangerous to have people who are super specialised,
who don't have any idea about the whole which they are dealing with. So in other words,
the hyper specialisation in medicine was always going to create a tyranny. Now, if you want
to commit a crime, you give people bits of the crime to do, but you don't tell them about
the whole crime. You just give them a little bit of it. So do you understand what it is?
So that is exactly what has happened. So they have encouraged super specialisation. They
have taken away common sense. Everything has to be worked out so that the computer can
sort it out, so you can apply for your passport online. It is all about convenience, allegedly,
but unfortunately people are losing their freedom by doing everything online and they
don't realise it. It is about time that they understood this and we need to explain it,
but I don't know what we do about the mind control.
I think one important aspect is this. I can explain the climate scan or the Covid scan
for an hour and then I usually get the answer. Yeah, well, it sounds somewhat reasonable,
but I refuse to believe it. I refuse to believe that such evil people do exist. This is also
important. So we have to educate them also about the power structure of society. What
I call psychopaths or severe malignant narcissists. Nowadays, we are at the height of the age
of narcissism. It started in the 1970s or so. Of course, at the height of narcissism,
almost all power positions are occupied by severe narcissists. Many of them are not malignant,
they are okay, but they are ignorant, arrogant. They have no slightest idea what they are
talking about, but at the same time they think they are geniuses. And this, of course, arrogance,
and power is a combustible mixture that someday had to blow up in our faces.
The people above them, these are the real psychopaths, the multi-billionaires and the
multi-trillionaires behind them. The multi-trillionaires are not even public. And
of course, they can manipulate them easily. Look at our politicians. These are the most stupid
people I've ever seen. It's incredible. It's incredible. If you look at Boris Johnson,
for example, he looks like a clown. It's insane. It's completely insane.
He is a clown, Charles. He is a clown.
Yeah, sure. Yeah.
The narcissism which you talk about, I've also thought about that and I've also spoken,
but it's hard to keep all these things in your head. So thank you for reminding me about
narcissism. Yeah. And that is encouraged by mobile phones and social media. So the twin
addictions of mobile phones and social media, these are really deadly addictions. If they were
addictions to anything else, they would grab attention worldwide. But oh no, we're talking
about CO2, which they don't seem to understand. Life needs.
It's just absolutely crazy. And to us, it's like we're constantly being gaslighted.
You know, so I recognize myself in your words, Thomas. We've never met. You're Swiss and I'm
British. But I just recognize myself in your disbelief of what's unfolding before us and this
unbelievable lack of wisdom. Yes. Gaslighting, of course, is the main technique
that the psychopaths use to manipulate us. If you explain this to the public, they come out,
you're a crazy conspiracy theorist. Why? Why? They present their agenda on their home
pages. On the home page of the UN, you can read agenda 23. On the home page of the World Economic
Forum, you can read the great reset. On the home page of the WHO, you can read one half.
This all is basically the same. And in the end, it's fascism. This is what we also have to realize.
I mean, this is this merger. What is the definition of fascism? It's the merger of
corporate and state power. This is exactly what we see nowadays. But of course, if they call it
public-private partnership, this simply sounds better than fascism. They say it's fascism under
the term public-private partnership. It's fascism. We have to stand up against fascism. They call us
Nazis, neo-Nazis. But in reality, of course, everything is topsy turvy. They are the fascists.
This is important. In the end, we must realize public-private partnership is fascism.
Yes, exactly. This alone is enough. Thomas, that's brilliant. So, yeah, public-private
partnership. So anybody looking at that might be encouraged to think, and they do think, I think,
that you've got the best of all possible worlds, you know. You've got all the best of the public
bit and the private bit. And you get a partnership of the two. And as you say, it's actually the
definition of fascism and totalitarianism. And so as far as I can see, this pandemic,
which was not a pandemic, was the Trojan horse. And I think it's the main Trojan horse because it
induces fear. It was a Trojan horse for totalitarianism. The other Trojan horses are,
well, the climate change agenda and all that nonsense. And then the wars around the world,
which make no sense, you know, like Iraq didn't make any sense. You know, well, yeah. And then,
of course, Ukraine. But the Israel war, it doesn't make any sense, except it seems to certain people
in the USA and in the UK, I have to say. So I think that some, but there's one thing that I think
that would work on people at the moment, if we can only get the message out. So they've used
propaganda on us, constantly repeating slogans. I think we need to have a slogan about there not
being a pandemic. There was no pandemic. There was no disease COVID-19, in my opinion,
it was improperly diagnosed. So any doctor in the world should have known and you did know Thomas,
and so did I. But yeah, I was I was disbelieving. I knew straight away that it was a fraud.
I don't know why, but I just knew. And any doctor in the world should have known that you do not
diagnose a viral illness with a test. Even so previously, I think I'm right in saying,
very few so called viral illnesses were diagnosed with a test. It was always by clinical medicine.
Well, guess what? They had a fraudulent test. But as you've explained that very well, but one thing
you didn't mention, and I think it should be mentioned is that in my opinion, there was no
COVID-19. It was improperly diagnosed. There wasn't a single symptom which was pathognomonic
for COVID-19. And therefore it should not have been you should not have been tested for COVID-19.
And that as far as I know, there are no tests. We didn't diagnose so called viral illnesses with a
test. So flu, for example, no, you wouldn't or a cold, the common cold. No, you wouldn't. You
didn't need a test. There were symptoms. And but there were no symptoms in COVID-19,
which were pathognomonic for COVID-19. And I'm amazed that so many doctors have missed that.
I fully agree. I mean, I'm somewhat careful. I'm not 100% sure. So I'm careful. I said,
I'm not sure whether it was by 95, 99 or 100% testing pandemic. But you're right. I mean,
I have never seen any proof that the virus called SARS-CoV-2 produces a disease called COVID-19.
And I realized also at the very beginning, I mean, that if you what were the risk factors for COVID,
it's where the risk factors to die. And what was the mean age of the people who died from COVID?
It was the mean age to die. So it's really possible that 100%, 100%, every case was just
mislabelled, mislabelling of all the diagnosis, mainly the flu as the COVID. I fully agree.
But there's something else, Thomas, which I think is really important. I'd love to know your answer
to this question. So we agree, you and I agree that there was no pandemic. Now, and I say there's no
COVID-19 even. But I didn't mean that I'm certain that there's no virus. I do think there's
possibility that there are no such thing as viruses. But I don't think it's very helpful at
the moment to go into that. But sorry, what was it? What did I just say then? I've done the
parenthesis and forgotten what I was going to say. So anyway, what I wanted to say was this,
the gain of function thing. I think that's a false narrative to encourage people to play into the
narrative. The other thing that's really important, I think, is the if there was no pandemic this time,
has there ever been a pandemic? Will there ever be a pandemic in the future? I think not. Because I
remembered in 2020, that when we were doing medical school, we were told by a single professor
that deadly pandemics kill the host. So in other words, he was suggesting, I remember asking him,
does that mean you can't have a pandemic? And he said, you may be right. So that's extremely
important. So they can't frighten us in the future. They shouldn't be able to frighten us in the
future. Because our, we should say, Thomas, in my opinion, there is no possibility of a pandemic in
the future. So stop fearing this damned pandemic, because they are going to bring it up in the
future, because that's one of their main Trojan horses for totalitarianism. I agree. I mean,
the problem is that usually people understand under a pandemic, the spreading of a deadly
disease around the globe. But the people was never told that in 2009, the WHO changed the
definition of a pandemic by taking out the dangers of the causative germs. So since then,
they can declare any seasonal flu or cold wave that's going around the globe a pandemic.
Nowadays, they call it PHEIC, Public Health Emergency of Concern. And if you pronounce it,
fake, fake. I mean, they are laughing in our faces, guys. They are laughing in our faces.
They will produce one fake pandemic after the other. I fully agree, Stephen.
David, that's 20 minutes now.
Just one last point. So in my opinion, Thomas, we agree that the WHO should go. But I say it's
not because the WHO is evil, which it is, and Tedros in particular, but all the others for keeping
quiet. It's because we don't damn well need them. The WHO because pandemics cannot occur.
It takes away the whole reason for the last four years. And I think that's what we should push on.
Exactly. This is what I have forgotten. As you're perfectly right, there can never be a pandemic,
for example, of Ebola. Why? Because we are getting that sick or even dead so rapidly
that we have not many social contacts before. So it cannot spread. Only a comparatively harmless
germ can spread globally. Yes, you are perfectly right. In that sense, there cannot really be a
pandemic of a deadly germ. Yeah, you are absolutely right. And the same professor I mentioned,
Thomas, he talked about the deadly virus kills its host. Therefore, there can't be a pandemic.
That was my question to him. He was emphasizing the interplay, the very important interplay between
transmissibility and virulence. So we had the ridiculous situation in the UK that they were
gearing up, the government of the UK, outrageously were gearing up to cancel the second Christmas in
the row in 2021. And they were talking about the Alpha variant. And Chris Witte, the chief medical
officer of England, no less, a complete idiot, but very evil as well. He was talking about the
massive transmissibility of the Alpha variant. And I was thinking, well, hang on a minute,
that doesn't mean anything if you don't mention the virulence. And, you know, any medical doctor
talking about transmissibility, not mentioning the virulence is a liar. Okay, let's go.
And then this notion of a second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth wave, of course, this is nonsense as
well. These are seasonal viruses. There was SARS-CoV-219, if it was, if it was, and then there
comes 2021, 2022. And we are always at least partially immune against the new variants so that
we do not die, so that we only get the cold and they are not dangerous. We do not talk about the
300,000th flu wave since Homo sapiens, if there is really Homo sapiens, I doubt it,
since Homo sapiens came on this planet. It is also an absurdity, a second, third, fourth,
even Fauci himself proved that in the Spanish flu, most people died from bacterial pneumonia.
Fauci himself, there is a paper published in 2007 or so by Fauci et al. Yeah, highly likely
there was never such a pandemic. Thank you, that was brilliant from you. The answers were
brilliant as well. Thank you so much. And Stephen, Chris Whitty reminds me he went to
university to become a witch, but he only got halfway through. You can use that.
He went to university to become a what? A witch. A witch. A witch. Oh, right. Only got halfway
through. Very good. Okay, all right. On we go to the land of Ireland, Gerry. Thanks, Stephen.
Gerry, you're muted. There we go. I'm not now. Thomas, I can categorically state that that was a
fantastically intelligent, a really fantastic, intelligently held handle on the COVID pathogenicity
hoax. And the reason I can say that with absolute confidence is that my view is that the pandemic
views exactly. Every word you spoke, like Stephen, were words that could have come out of my Irish
mouth rather than out of your European mouth. I'm a GP from Ireland who, I'm 12 years older than you,
and I went through the exact same thought formation in March of 20. I saw the red flags
and I thought there's absolutely no way are those people dying of respiratory failure.
Being a GP, I would claim a seniority in a sense that I was on the ground. I was watching the
people dying and I knew there was no pathogen in my community that could count. There was nobody
any sicker than there was the previous 40 years of my winter flu experience. And as I say, the
fact that I could recognise that there was no pathogen there. But I also saw that the authorities,
the ICGP, the Department of Health were not contradicting the people being shot by a sniper's
bullet in Wuhan. There's no way was that a respiratory failure, death. And that was the red flag.
As I said, I'd like to compliment you on thinking like I do. It makes you very, very lucky.
But what I'd like to ask about, and this is the fantastic thing, I never had the privilege of
being committed to a mental hospital. Now, as a GP, I have committed quite a number of people
to mental hospitals. And what we would refer to them as a pink forms, we put them in on pink forms.
And the remarkable thing, and the thing I want to question about is, you'd be very, very slow,
you'd be reticent to actually sign that form, because you really did. It was a horrendous thing
to do. And it was always, you were very, very convinced that the patient was a danger to
themselves or a danger to others. How the hell did they manage to make out that you were a
danger to yourself, or that you were a danger to others, or that you were in a manic state,
you were a man, you just explained that to me how they came up with that diagnosis.
Yeah, well, I think my case explains nicely what's going on. I mean, I guess we all agree that
the society was never divided in an amount we see now. And this doesn't happen by accident,
this always means that a huge part of the society is living in a context of delusion,
in a cult, in a sect. And of course, everybody says, I am the realist, you, you are the deluded,
you are the member of a cult or a sect. And in this situation, I always say,
the first thing we have to do is to question ourselves. And of course, I did this 100 times
before I went public, am I absolutely sure that I'm the realist and not the deluded?
And this question we can only answer by looking at the reality as soberly as possible. So this
is this was my duty, I just presented the reality as I saw it to the public, so that they could
decide who is here the insane and who is not. Insanity means you do not live in the reality,
you live in a virtual reality. This is about the definition of insanity. So of course,
the corona insane declared me to be the corona insane. And of course, the psychiatrist was also
completely brainwashed. So he had to invent the diagnosis. And of course, I tweeted maybe
until one o'clock in the morning. But this was not mania. I mean, I maybe I was a somewhat hyperactive
enlightener, or however you want to call it. But of course, I had this information, I had the urge
to spread this information, this had to go out. I mean, this was this was endangering the whole
society, the livelihoods and even the lives of many people. So of course, I felt the urge
to spread this information. And this, this, he this corona insane psychiatrist thought
would be a symptom of mania. I mean, for example, if I was at mania, I always worked, I worked before
this, I worked from the day after I was released. If you really have mania, you cannot work as a
doctor. And then you will lose all patients very, very rapidly. It's, it's fully I just realized the
contradiction in my question there. Because in March of 21, I was suspended from the Irish
Medical Register, because I was a danger to my patients. So as I say, I just contradicted myself
in the sense that I was deemed a danger to my patients. And that was done with two days notice
being brought before the Medical Council, and two days notice being brought before the High Court.
So yes, I can well see how we would be seen as a danger. There's another point that I did, again,
I'd like to go back on Stephen's idea, you know, this concept of no virus, I think that's a huge,
massively dangerous area to start going down. We sure as hell don't need that. You know,
whether there's a virus or whether there isn't a virus, there was a pathogenic hoax. The pathogenicity
of the virus was lied into existence through propaganda. And then proven as far as they're
concerned, by a PCR test, it was 95% wrong. So you know, I think that's important. We've got to keep
that in mind. The other thing is, you know, I'd like to point out those pregnancy tests that you're
doing on the men, those as a GP, I've done pregnancy tests on men. That sounds crazy.
And maybe that's a good reason why I should be committed to a mental hospital. But the fact of
the matter is, in certain testicular cancers, offhand, I think it's a seminoma, you actually
get HCG being produced by the tumor. So it's oftentimes not a bad idea to do a pregnancy test
on a man if you find a tumor in the testicles before you even send them off. Because by the
time they get to the hospital, you look awful smart if you've already diagnosed what the
histology of the tumor is going to be. So as I say, just bear in mind, any one of those 100 men
might just have been a seminoma. That's a matter of interest.
I agree. Intelligent comment. Very intelligent comment.
Just for future reference. We're talking about the gain of function. JJ Cooey,
I don't know if you actually watch JJ's broadcast meetings here. But JJ, again,
this comes into the gain of function. Again, I think the gain of function can be a bit of a
red herring. And it's important that we don't go down that road on Julie. By the same token,
there's little doubt as far as I'm concerned that 19 nucleotides were induced into the furin
cleavage site of the spike protein. And the function of this was to increase infectivity,
transmissibility. And it was during the development, it was actually patented in 2016.
And it was during the development of the coronavirus to actually endeavor to get
better into the cell for cancer therapeutics. I could well believe how they would increase
the transmissibility or the infectability of the virus without increasing the virulence,
because you don't know whether your family are going to get it or not. So I would go along
with the idea that some of these viruses were in fact introduced into key sites like New York and
that. I don't think they ever got to Selbridge, where I live in Ireland. So what I'm saying is,
I think we should keep our mind open to the possibility that there was again function
from the point of view of infectivity. OK, Charles, I've just about finished.
OK, very good. I agree. I think I'll leave it at that.
Maybe in some hotspot they released something or they turned on five gene specials.
Or I don't know. I think so. I think most severe cases we can explain by
miss and too late diagnosis and mistreatment. I mean, we always saw patients with white lungs
in the intensive care units. Usually they had bacterial pneumonia that we diagnosed too late
with multi-organ failure and ARDS and all that stuff. Now imagine what they told the people.
They told the people, do not go to your GP when you have Covid. Go to your GP when you're healthy
again. So those secondary bacteria, pneumonia were diagnosed too late. Absolutely. This is probably
the main reason for many, at least of the severe cases that were then labeled as Covid in the ICU.
We were told not to examine our patients. We were, as GPs, we were told not to bring the patients
into our surgeries and do a social distancing. We were told I refuse to do that.
This was the most amazing for me. This was the most amazing for me to see how our fellow doctors
shit their pants because of this alleged killer virus. I mean, if there really was a pandemic of
the killer virus, who would treat the patients? Certainly not the doctors. These cowards would
obviously be the first to run away. I was saying at that stage that I would, I was screaming at the
ICGP, my academic body, to actually do post mortems on all patients. I'd be very, very happy to see
if there were these little blood clots in the alveolar capillaries and that. I would be very,
very happy at that. And I was saying, it was too dangerous. And I was saying to my patients,
I will open the patients without wearing a mask for post mortem.
Okay, come on. We've got to go on. We've got to go on. Come on.
Okay. Okay. I finished.
Come on. Thank you. Well done. Well done. One of the issues that, that, you know,
Thomas, we'll go through the questions, but there is this question, hey, let's have the debate.
Thomas, you properly say I'm willing to be questioned on anything. On the other hand,
there are some things, imagine having a debate on whether God exists, you know,
you know, and, and that, that whole conversation and the same issue. And there's the question of
the distraction, or is it useful? It's a wonderful question of opinion. And one of the mistakes that
I think I see happen, that's why we have rules of debate and it's good. The repetition is important.
We have this conversation here in these meetings. Some people think it's tiresome,
but you don't have to keep saying the same thing. You know, you put, put an idea out there and people
think about it. However, however, as I said at the intro, there are 12 at least battle lines
in this world war that we're in Thomas, you touched on it. We have a spiritual war as well.
And we can get so distracted on this question of virus or no virus. And those who have a whole
firm beliefs won't be convinced one way or the other. And in the meantime, we're being killed
left, right and center. It's like, and the whole question of gain of function. It's like discussing
the quality of the timber on the deck chairs of the Titanic while the, while the ship's going down.
So just a question for each of us, you know, to contemplate Rose.
Hey Thomas, I want to take a step back and give you a little history. Can you hear me?
Someone's got a lot of background noise that you. I'm sorry. It's me. Yeah. Let me move to a different
location. So I want to give a little history in the U S regarding the primary care positions,
because number one, this was intentional to remove the primary care positions and go to
just specialties. So this has been going on a very long time in the U S intentionally. And I posted
in the chat, my blog regarding the analogy of the blind Indian parable. So I think we have to be
very careful in our language that there was an illness and to say that there wasn't COVID.
I think the problem is, is it was labeled as a respiratory virus and not a desaturation problem.
Now, whether or not it was specifically from the spike proteins, radiation, whatever, it could have
been a combination of both, but there were people with severe desaturation issues hitting the
hospitals. So we can't discount that. So I think we have to be very careful on how we're addressing
the issue. So my question to you, Thomas is, I did a deep dive because I said, is there a common
mechanism by which this is affecting the multiple organs? And I jumped on nitric oxide. Some people
like to call it nitric oxide, nitric oxide. And in doing my deep dive, I came across the PA in
Colorado who is giving the patients L-Arginine in the ER and then inhaling nitric oxide with the ARDS.
They were getting better within 24 hours. And he said, Rose, are you aware of the double blind
placebo study by the Albert Einstein Institute in Italy, where with a placebo giving L-Arginine,
the patients were getting better and decreasing hospitalization by over 50%.
So my question to you is, how come there isn't more focus on the nitric oxide angle,
especially regarding whatever, if you want to say it's the spike protein specifically,
spike protein with 5G radiation, whatever. Are you seeing any emphasis on this because there
was so much legitimacy to it with treatment? Well, there was neglect of any treatment,
as you know. I mean, we were told this is an absolutely new disease. This virus is an alien,
which was not true. If it was there, it was a member of the well-known coronavirus family.
So we knew immediately it is seasonal, usually causes a self-limiting disease.
There is cross-immunity against it, all this stuff. Of course, this is one of the possibilities,
how you could treat these seriously ill patients from whatever was the causative germ. I agree.
But is there any focus now that we know? Now we do not see serious cases. There are no more
serious cases of whatever. No more. But we're not reviewing it. And again,
I'm looking at, you know, they're going to hit us with something else.
So how come we're not focusing on that mechanism for what they hit us next with?
In every hospital, we should do a review of the history of all patients who were severely sick
and who were killed. We should do a review of all these with the knowledge,
if our knowledge, of course, and we would find a lot of things. It's hard to...
I think that needs to be on a radar. And I'm dumbfounded that nobody's created the invention
for measuring NO. I'm like, you know, we measure oxygen, we measure carbon dioxide,
but nobody's come up with a good test for measuring nitric oxide.
This is true.
All right. So anyways, I wanted to sort that out at you because there were so much immense,
you know, tangible positive with that. So anyways, it's on your radar. Thank you.
Sorry. Sorry. Nitrous oxide is laughing gas.
Nitrous oxide is laughing gas.
Nitric, Gary, nitric.
I think she's talking about nitrous oxide.
No, nitric oxide.
It's a very subtle answer and we're known for this.
Yes. So there is a logic to it.
Okay.
Well, she used both actually, Charles. So Rose used both nitrous oxide and nitric oxide.
So that wasn't helpful.
The last one. Yeah.
And actually you don't measure for things. If you're a medical doctor,
you don't measure for things like PO2 and all that nonsense. But anyway, that's taken over as
well. You look at the patient and you look to see whether the patient is cyanose centrally or otherwise.
Okay. Thank you. Rose, Janet.
Oh, thank you. I've got two questions. The first one is, you mentioned that the
condition of you getting out of the hospital was to agree to take psychotropic drugs under
supervision. Did you actually take the drugs and how did that affect you? And how did you manage
to get the treatment stopped? The second question is, I've spoken to some people who have tested
themselves with a PCR test when suffering from an upper respiratory tract infection and found it
positive. Then when they recover, the PCR then becomes negative. And I'm just wondering how that
can be explained. Yeah. Well, of course I know the half life of this drug and they said, so I took,
I can, I can state it here. I mean, I took two tablets the day before they checked my blood.
But this was enough that my liver, my liver didn't like this Abilify. This was great. So I
checked my liver enzymes after three weeks or so. They went up so I could stop it. And at the same
time, I could free myself from this state psychiatrist control and change to a private
psychiatrist because of course the health authorities, they wanted that I see a psychiatrist
once per month who had to report to the health authorities if I'm mentally able to treat patients.
And this lasted for about a year and then I could end this as well. And legally I couldn't do
anything. I tried just to get back my weapon. My alleged arm was my weapon. I got in
1980 when I entered Swiss military service. And when I left Swiss military service as a
prime lieutenant 15 years ago, I stored it at home. This is usual and legal in Switzerland
without ammunition. And they found this weapon at home, but this, I could not get back this weapon.
It cost me about 15,000 Swiss francs for lawyers, for new psychiatric reports and so on and so forth.
There's absolutely no chance to become right because of course the prosecutors and the
judges are brainwashed as well. So they think I'm insane, of course. And this PCR test,
the PCR test with the time, it becomes negative again. I didn't understand the second question.
Yeah, well, I spoke to a few people, including one very awake doctor actually. And what she was
saying to me was that she got ill with a upper respiratory tract infection and did a PCR,
which was positive. And then she waited until she recovered symptomatically, did another PCR,
and it was negative. And I spoke to other people who found that same thing. And I'm just thinking,
well, if the PCR is actually unreliable, why is it becoming positive when they're symptomatic
and negative when they're not symptomatic? Or is it a coincidence?
It is not completely unreliable. I mean, it is not total nonsense. If a PCR test is done
good, it is a parcel in the diagnosis, but it never proves an infection. But if, of course,
if the CT is low, for example, maybe 17, so there is a high amount of this virus on your throat,
and the symptoms are consistent with this illness, they can be correct, of course.
Here the problem was, does this Cormann-Rosten test cross-react with many other coronaviruses?
So, already from this, it was not useful. It is not completely useless, but it's only useful
in conjunction with other clinical findings, of course.
Thank you.
Thanks, Janet. Thank you, Janet. And now we have Benjamin. And Benjamin, have you met my
alter ego, my bubblehead?
You like that, Thomas? That says passion on my chest.
Great, great. Looks great.
Spot of fun. Thank you, Janet. Benjamin, he calls himself Benjamin, as you know,
sometimes hands Benjamin, but anyway, Benjamin for ease of thing. Over to you, Benjamin.
Well, thank you. Yeah, the Hans Benjamin is for written, for signing. It's too long.
Unfortunately, I was switching on too late, but so we both are Swiss, but we decide to communicate
in English here. And several aspects, actually. One was about, as you started the discussion
with gas lighting, and I always wondered, and even some psychiatrists even openly say that,
oh, actually, you know, that you can consider be deluded, that only actually applies to an
individual, but not to a collective. Now, the question is, what if a group or a whole society
becomes deluded and an individual isn't? How do you call that? Of course, we know it's called
gas lighting, but I mean, it shows that actually it's a very dangerous concept if you don't apply
these sort of diagnostic criteria only to individuals, but not to whole groups.
I mean, you certainly have to, and then maybe I may add in this context of what you witnessed,
because I witnessed something similar, but I was not independent, but in a working environment. And
it essentially, it forced me down the road of deciding either accepting what they were imposing
on me with potentially lethal consequences because of heart conditions, and actually, you know,
giving up the job. And that was pre-COVID. So, I mean, it shows these totalitarian tendencies,
which are actually inherent and as you described as being fascist,
and which means the coalescence really of powers, right? Because first case is bundle in Latin.
So, yeah, so maybe first, and then I have something specific about COVID in Switzerland
afterwards, maybe, but these are too many questions. Or do you prefer that I ask the
third questions also? Maybe Charles does. It has to do with the PCR test, which you mentioned. And
actually, I looked at the data in Switzerland during the late stages. That was end of 2021.
And then as you may know, Implod, water quality agency in Switzerland, they actually measured the
viral load in the wastewater and compared it with the positive tests. And so, and they were
diverging and everybody was wondering what's actually going on. And it was interesting. It
started to diverge precisely at the date when the vaccinated got tested. So, that was in December,
and I was suddenly from mainly unvaccinated, suddenly the vaccinated got tested. And sure
enough, you've got a wave in quote with the tested ones and no wave averaged over the population,
which actually, in my opinion, was a tremendous proof for actually the inadequacy of the PCR
test, A and B actually, also of the, however you call that treatment, which people took
as, you know, called off vaccines. So, I think it was because it really changed over a weekend. It
was dramatic and I can't show you the data. I think I sent it to Stephen at some point.
So, yeah. So, these are three questions about, you know, this, how do you assess a group,
you know, which turns really, you know, when a whole group actually becomes delusioned,
how you can actually correct for that. B, yes, that these totalitarian tendencies are actually,
they were established already before COVID that a company has, or a university in this case,
has such a tremendous power in instrumentalizing medics for their purpose, you know. And then
finally, this issue about the waste water plants. So, thank you.
Yes, of course. I mean, the psychopaths managed to impose their psychopathy on the whole society or
on a huge part of the society. This is what happened. I mean, of course, there is the
gaslighting happens on an individual level, but also on a societal level. I mean,
the people who do not understand how the Germans could be deluded by Hitler in the 1930s,
I hope they understand now what happened. Obviously, the people nowadays, we nowadays
are not better or worse than the Germans were in the 1930s. We get deluded by the same,
basically the same psychopaths. Then this waste water testing, this is utter pardon bullshit.
Well, another proof that there was no pandemic is this. In medical school, at my time, I guess
it was in the second year, we learned in something called epidemiology for beginners,
we learned that in the case of an epidemic, the first thing you have to do is to establish a
cohort, a study cohort that is representative for the society. Maybe in Switzerland, there are
nine million inhabitants. This will be about 1000 to 2000 people, representative for the populace.
These you question serially, test serially with a useful test, not with a PCR test, but antibody
test. Had we done this, we had known already at the end of April that there was no killer virus,
that most people already were cross-immune, et cetera, et cetera. Even after four years,
such a study cohort does not exist in any country. Either you believe that in your health
authorities, in your government, there is nobody with the knowledge of a second year medical
student, or you must accept that you have been totally fool. Every government knew exactly what
they did because if not, the first thing they had to do was to establish such a study cohort.
This is how we diagnose and control the pandemic, not with wastewater testing,
with PCR. This is utter bullshit. Then of course, they can state, now we have in the wastewater,
there is PCR against disease, X is positive. This then is enough evidence to start the next
pandemic. What was the first question?
It was the add-on between corporate fascism or university fascism was established before COVID.
All of this could only have happened because the academics were…
This neoliberal revolution started with the Mont Pelerin Society in 1947,
again in Switzerland. All evil comes from Switzerland. I'm sorry about this.
All evil organizations are located in Switzerland. They are granted immunity by our criminal
government. Then the millionaires took over this MPS and they created hundreds and thousands of
NGOs and they took over the universities. Of course, you must, in a revolution,
you start by taking over the universities. What we all learned here is that the so-called
ordinary people, I have the highest respect for the so-called ordinary people,
they smell that something is wrong here. While the academicians are the most easy to be deluded. Why?
They are so narcissistic, they cannot even have the idea to be wrong and not only to be wrong,
but to be completely wrong. This is the problem. Nowadays, imagine if I was young,
I could not study. If you study climate science, in the exam you have to write CO2 is a poison
and blah, blah, blah. If you do not write it, you do not pass the exam. Of course, this
neoliberal indoctrination started in the universities and then spread it.
We must realize this is planned over decades or even over centuries.
Also, most people cannot imagine this, but this is the time horizon of these people.
I mean, to the last point, I think it's actually accelerating that actually these tendencies have
been amplified by the funding scheme. I've been on committees deciding what should be funded.
I mean, sometimes it's breathtaking. You see how your colleagues actually take decisions.
You keep your mouth open. Because of this feedback loop, you get funding, but for that,
you need to please those who sit on committees or write reviews, which are those who chat around
the globe all the time. They are not necessarily the best scientists. It's actually an amplifying
circle. Then these things can happen. With climate science, you think why is there no open debate?
Why are people so narrowly focused? If you actually try to follow this document.
Benjamin, that's beautiful. It's a big deal. Last week, remember, we talked about, I think it was,
who do we have on the side? Jason. No, before last week, the climate movie was in the chat.
Wonderful movie. Precisely that point that both of you are talking about. I urge all of you to
have a look at it. It's entirely correct that if you don't subscribe to the particular
climate narrative, you will not get grants and you won't pass. If you are particularly
young, you'd be crazy to, but the experienced scientists that are speaking out, they can't
now be harmed by the system. We all have to recognise that. That's why this conversation,
it reminds us to look at the climate movie, 90 minutes or 80 minutes, one hour, 21. It's
magnificent. I urge you all to watch it. Thank you, Benjamin. Well put. Jim, we're doing well.
I urge you all to watch it. Thank you, Benjamin. Well put. Jim, we're doing well. We've got 45
minutes to go. We've got to keep moving. Jim. Thank you very much. Great presentation.
The issue of whether the COVID does or doesn't exist. Sorry, can you hear me? There you go.
Yeah. The issue of the spike protein, the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in vaccine or virus form.
Do you agree that that actually exists and they made a vaccine with the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein
and that it has an ACE2 receptor that binds to the ACE2 receptors in our bodies and that it has a
furon cleavage site and a TMPRSS2 cleavage site and a GP120, which is activated if the furon is
cleaved. Do you believe that that SARS-CoV-2 spike protein exists and that it can itself
replicate intracellularly?
I know that I do not. Thank you, Jim, for your question. I do know that I do not know the most
important things. I'm not absolutely sure, but I think, yes, I think this same modified RNA encodes
the spike protein like it is presented to us. And of course, this is toxic. This is toxic. But
as I said, I don't think that the main toxicity of the gene transfections comes from the spike
but from this autoimmune attack. But I think for the moment, this is my current belief,
yes, it's actually belief. I think this modified RNA encodes the spike protein.
We have the research, we have people like Kevin McKernan, whom I trust. He was also in our group
of the 22 live scientists who did this external peer review of the common drosten test.
I think this is true. That there are differences between vials, this is possible. I mean,
there is also this question about shedding, for example. I think from theoretical considerations,
the delusions would be that this should not be a huge problem if this thing cannot replicate.
I don't think that the spike can replicate, but what would be possible? They are working on
self-amplifying modified RNA. And what we, of course, do not know is whether in some vials,
in some batches, they already tested this. There the counter argument would again be,
if I was a psychopath, I would create a targeted bio-weapon, not a bio-weapon that is not
untargeted. So I think this is a huge argument against all this spreading, et cetera. Also that
chemtrails are very toxic or so. They would detoxify themselves, they would harm and kill
themselves. So from this, of course, it is evident also that the virus is not the bio-weapon,
the bio-weapon, of course, these are the chain transactions. These are directed, targeted. These
I can avoid. Yes. And the spike protein, it was Albert, remember the eagle who did the
how bad is my batch, actually showed that it may be the DNA plasmid contaminants that actually make
the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein within the vaccines, which is very interesting because the mRNA may
die off after three hours of being thawed. So the plasmids, the DNA plasmids, of course,
don't have to be refrigerated. So that may be a better mechanism of spreading the Jason McClellan
designed spike protein within the vaccines. And then there's the same, there's the issue of the
spike protein transmitting in exosomes itself as a quote virus or exosome or whatever it is.
So, and that in itself may be the toxic bio-weapon and it may have some genetic specificity
built into it. And that may be why we were forbidden to take hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin
and other things. So does, and, and do you have any opinion upon why we were forbidden?
If since, so you agree the spike protein exists and that would be a reason
forbidden to take hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin and other medications.
Is that correct? Or do you have any other reason why we were forbidden to take those?
There was also a legal reason. I mean, in Switzerland and I guess in every country,
for one requirement for an emergency use authorization of a new drug is that they are not
other therapeutic options, that there are no other therapeutic options. So if there are other
therapeutic options like hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin or whatever, the hurdles to get
emergency use authorization for these genes transfections would be much, would have been much
higher. So this, if there is a treatment, if this was generally accepted that there was a
treatment of this disease, they could never have been, they could not have allowed this,
authorized these gene transfections. I think this is the main reason. This is the main reason.
Yeah. So yes. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. Tom the Rodman.
Okay. Great. Thanks so much for all you've done. And I'm aware that you're in the doctors for COVID
ethics group. So you've seen a lot of presentations, but, and your cardiologists. So
I'm not good at this question thing. So I'm going to go through a bunch of questions fast and you
probably won't remember all of them, but here goes. As the cardiologist, I'm going to go through a
cardiologist. Have you seen evidence of the arterial or venal damage that we saw by Dr. Arne
Burkhardt from what he described that as being from the actual spike protein, not from the
nucleocapsid of SARS-CoV-2. And then the, what about the white fibrous clots? And is there any news on
on those and what those are? And then with respect to myocarditis, is there a routine test that can
determine, I mean, I think there is a dye that shows the, that can distinguish between the
nucleocapsid from SARS-CoV-2 versus the, the JAB spike. But is that something that you routinely
can run or is that really a difficult test? And then maybe just two more questions.
I think Suchard Bhakdi, he focuses on the, that the response to our innate or complementary immune
system is a big problem. You know, the response in particular to the spike protein, either from
SARS-CoV-2 or from the JAB. And then, and then somewhat similarly, JJ Cooey,
his mantra is that it's not this particular spike protein. It's not all a skein of function work.
It really doesn't matter that much as to what the design is. The problem is the generic
RNA or DNA transfection process involving the nanolipid protein, that that's where the damage
is. And that's what we have to focus on. That's what we have to stop because it's their new
platform for really harming us. And okay, the last question is, and this one's probably more for
biologists, but what, can we figure out what proportion of the damage is caused by the
spike and what proportion is caused by just the nanolipid transfection? I guess that's
kind of similar to the other question. So yeah, thank you. Great bunch of questions, Tom. Well,
I tried to answer shortly. Well, the spike itself is thrombogenic by binding to the ACE2
receptor of the platelets. It activates thrombocytes, thrombocytes aggregation,
so thrombosformation. But I think that even greater damage comes from the endothelitis,
inflammation of the vessel wall, the cells that take up the mRNA and DNA, and then express and
present the spike on their surface and are attacked. These causes endothelial damage and
this also activates clotting. This, of course, is, we predicted this first and foremost through
Jared Bartley. We predicted this to happen before it happened. Then came the first reports of the
central cerebral venous thrombosis, sinus thrombosis, etc. And of course, I see some more
myocardial infarctions, for example, in younger patients. But in a specific case, I cannot state
whether it was caused by the gene transfections or not. Because for this, we should have biopsy
material that we can test. And there, you stated right, Aniburghardt, who was unhappily
deceased last year. It's very sad. A good friend, he developed the methyl for immunohistochemical,
finding spike protein and nucleocapsid protein. If you only find the spike, then it's
probably caused by the vaccine. And if you find the spike and the nucleocapsid, another surface
protein of the virus, then it's caused by the vaccine. In the blood now, there are tests. You
can also test for the spike and for nucleocapsid, for example, in the blood. There are special
laboratories that do more and more tests. There is one, especially in Germany, who does this.
And the other questions?
What about the white fibrous clots?
I guess these huge clots that the embalmers show us, they cannot happen in living humans.
Of course, this produces clotting. But not that huge clot. These huge clots are not compatible
with life. If you have such a huge clot in the vein or an artery of the leg that totally obstructs
the circulation, then you have enormous swelling, enormous pain. This is incompatible with life.
This huge thrombus formation is just caused by this high precariculable state,
but then is more pronounced as postmortem. These huge clots are produced postmortem.
As I mentioned, the spike is toxic, the lipid nanoparticles are toxic. But I'm convinced,
we, especially Michael Palmer, wrote in our book that I can highly recommend. You can find it on
the Doctors for COVID Ethics, Doctors for COVID Ethics.org website, free for download.
About mRNA toxicity, it's now translated into Chinese and Italian as well. I can highly recommend
this book. There we really make the case that the toxicity comes mainly from the autoimmune
attack against it and the foreign antigen producing and expressing cells. Maybe this.
Thank you, Tom. Thanks much. Thank you. Thank you, Tom. Excellent questions. Mark.
Hi, Thomas. Thank you very much for informing people to give your spine a boost. I thought
that was a very excellent piece of advice. I have two questions. I was recently at a governor's
meeting at a hospital, and they have decided because they are short on radiologists, that
they are going to use AI to support the radiology department. My question is, do you see any downside
to the use of the AI to support the radiology department?
Well, I guess in areas like radiology, AI may be helpful. Why not? Of course, I mean, it might see
something that the AI cannot see. But wait, I mean, we forget all the AI is nonsense. This is a hype.
This is more and more sophisticated software, but there is never any intelligence in it.
But I'm quite sure this is one of the few areas where sophisticated software can be helpful,
of course, by showing things that the AI cannot see. And maybe, you know, in these imaging
techniques, there is density you can measure, etc. So it can directly indicate this might be
malignant tumor, this looks benign, things like this. This might be helpful, of course.
The shortness of radiologists, I hope it does not come from too many radiologists who are
injected and have serious side effects now.
Well, that, of course, is something that they haven't disclosed. And the hospital was having
a shortage of staff, and they had not done an analysis of why people were actually absent.
Right. And it's very high. My last question is, I'm a blood donor. And when you give blood,
you have to fill out a very large, long form, right, telling your history, etc.
The one thing that doesn't appear on the form is have you had the COVID jabs?
Have you any idea why they would not ask that question?
I guess in the UK, they ask it now. But they're not completely sure.
No, no, no, in the UK, they are not asking any questions about being jabbed. They're asking
all sorts of other things. Well, the notion, of course, was these vaccines are effective and
safe. And if you ask this, then of course, the people could think, why do they want to know
whether I'm vaccinated or not? If it's not effective and safe, why should there be any problem?
So I think this is the main reason. I mean, this would make unsecured people, why do they want to
ask this? Is there something wrong with this vaccine or not?
Right. But Thomas, what they actually do is the blood donor, let's say the department,
they make statements on the antibodies that are in the blood. And they make a statement that
they have found antibodies are very high in people that are blood donors. And they have made a
statement to say that this is because most blood donors are vaccinated. Now, if they don't ask the
question, are you vaccinated? They can't make that statement. Yes, but highly likely. I mean,
if 80% are vaccinated, highly likely about 80% of the blood that is donated is effective. Yeah,
of course you're right. But this also is a question that comes up often. I mean,
can I have become problems by receiving blood that are vaccinated? But there also is the delusion
argument. I mean, for example, if I was vaccinated, I maybe have 50 litres of body water. And of these
50 litres, I give 500 millilitres, I donate 500 millilitres. So this is a delusion,
more or less, by a factor of 100. And then these products are processed, stored, etc.
So even if all this that I donate would survive, the recipient would only get hundreds of doses of
a vaccine from theoretical considerations. So I don't think that blood recipients are
really in danger. And especially, the indication for blood reception must be very strict. So only
in life-threatening situations. In life-threatening situations, the risk-benefit calculation to get
blood maybe by vaccinated or not is of course on the side to get the blood.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mark. All right, two more. And then Stephen, good work. Anders.
Yes, hello. I am not a medical doctor, but I've done, let's say, some research the last
15 months. And I was in the belief that there was a virus. However, during the research,
I found that was not the case. There was a lot of problems to do research because
the information we are told, for example, this narrative of this mRNA and this LNP,
this was supposed to be what is in the jab. But what we do know now is that, well, this LNP,
they turn out to become hydrogel. There are many different types of polymer, and these are highly
problematic because part of them are charged, surface-charged positive. That's one issue.
This has been identified by several scientists, including Dr. Ana Maria Mijajea and also
the La Quinta Colonna and Robert Young. But much worse is that these jabs contain a lot of
graphene oxide and a number of different types of nanometals. And it is confirmed that these are
getting together, becoming crystallized inside the hydrogel. And they are making antennas,
and they are actually receiving radio signals from not only 4G, 5G, what I believed was the case,
but also terahertz from the light sources of the LED lamps at home and in the streetlights. And this
type of radiation is, I thought it was the correlation I found rural and metro. There is
an enormous excess mortality in the metro where they have the 5G. And you have an enormous,
well, you have nothing, no excess mortality in upstate New York in, let's say, rural USA for
80-plus year old people, even they were jabbed. So what seems to be the case is that there is
magnetic material which reacts to radiation, and old people, they do not use the phones as much as
younger people. And this is a huge concern. And it seems to be that this is not just what I initially
thought it is about 5G, 4G radiation, but there is a huge damage coming into the body from the
terahertz radiation, from non, very intrusive light energies. And when I started to look at this with
some other people recently, we'd come across, I'm not sure you know about, I think it was
about Barry Trower. He's a 5G military expert in the UK, in Bristol. And he was interviewed by
Rainer Fulmisch. So there is a lot of knowledge about bio, about radiation in order to make
mind control. And this has been known, but now we also see that it is likely that the terahertz
frequencies have been used for mind control. And this is an area which almost nobody has any skills
because this is hidden or very few people look into it. So I just wonder if you have considered
that, let's say, there was not a virus, there was radiation, that's one. Second, this radiation was
not just for the 4G, 5G. I have data for Switzerland. I have data for USA, Canada, Norway,
Sweden, UK. There is an extreme correlation to the radiation. And there is actually an excess
mortality in the elderly in Switzerland in March, April 2020, in USA, in California, in Canada.
But it is following, let's say, the launch of 5G. But what we see now is that this launch of
these terahertz LED lamps and streetlights, they may have a much worse effect. And we don't really
know everything there because this is something people need to look into it. But to me, this seems
to be a big red flag. Have you been thinking about that this might be something to look into?
Thank you, Anders. I fully agree that EMF is not healthy. Of course, this is not healthy.
And what I can say is that I never got attacked as strongly as when I mentioned that there is a
strong correlation between 5G antennas and severe COVID cases. I mentioned that in the start. And
there was also a study from Barcelona who showed this. But this, of course, does not prove causation.
Correlation does not prove causation. It might be a hint for causation. This correlation might
only be because of course the 5G, this bandwidth is of course also an important part of this
control and surveillance network. They need this huge bandwidth. And they especially need
Elon Musk's satellites so that the whole world is covered. And every human being will one day be
either via smartphone or neural link directly connected to the artificial clouds of the
powers that be. Yeah, so well there I'm not sure whether there, I said before maybe in some
hotspots they released something or maybe they even turned on 5G in a certain specification or
so. I don't know. I'm not sure. What I do not find helpful and what divides us again,
like the theory, like the debate about the theory are there viruses or not, is this
stuff about graphene and the like. I mean, I looked into this and I did not find any evidence,
I did not find 100% evidence that there is graphene. I looked at this Compro experiment
with Raman laser. He said to have found graphene. But if you look at this study,
if this method works like this, you target the laser on the object and usually you burn this
laser for milliseconds and he burned it for about 40 seconds. So basically he fried what he had under
what he wanted to examine and there was sugar of course and carbon. And this method might have
produced graphene. I'm not totally sure, but I have not seen any convincing report for the presence
of graphene in it. And again, this divides us. I mean, it's the same in 9-11, there are the planers
and the no-planers. And they have a huge war between them. But the only thing that they agree
that of course this nonsense narrative that on 9-11 20 Muslims armed with box cutters overcame
the USA and the laws of nature is nonsense. And that an investigation that deserves the name
investigation is needed. This is enough in the 9-11 story. And here in the currently accepted
belief system, scientifically belief system, what we know by evidence, this is enough by 1,000 times
to destroy this whole narrative. So I'm very sceptic about this graphene. But it is also possible that
some vials there was something different. This I cannot rule out of course. Thank you Anders.
This is my personal opinion. Thank you Anders. This is a good question, a long question. Anders is
going to make your question shorter. However, I understand it's always a balance between setting
the agenda for the question. So I get that. And I honor the work that you're doing. And I think for
the rest of us, there's different people look at these recordings everybody. Just there's 53
people online. The maximum number today was 63. But we know a lot of people watch the recordings
and different people watch different recordings. And for those of you that are here all the time,
you think it's repetitious, but someone who's only watching this recording, you know, for the
first time and only heard you Anders for the first time, this might be a crucial piece of data that
you shared. Same with all of us. So that's the patience that we have to have in these meetings.
So thank you, Anders. We'll have to keep moving. Because we're going to run out of time. We've got
Peter, then Stephen, and thank you everybody for all the resources you put into the chat. Peter.
And by the way, there's another great reference Anders. I don't know if you've seen it.
And all of you EMRAustralia.com.au. There might be some useful resources there Anders.
Electromagnetic radiation Australia.com.au. It's been up for some years. A huge amount of research
by a lady called Lynn McLean. And there might be some stuff there or collaboration Anders that is
useful for you and for others and Mark's deal as well. Peter. Well, Peter might have gone to sleep
because he's in South Africa, Thomas. So it's very late for Peter. In fact, he has gone to sleep.
How about that everybody?
I guess in South Africa, it's about the same as here. Here it's a quarter past 11.
No, I think South Africa, that's true. Or maybe it's another hour later. It might be quarter past
12. All right, Stephen, are you there? Yeah. So, Thomas, so it's great to hear you answering those
all those questions as good as they were so dutifully. So it's important as you understand
that, yes, people watching this video, they hear not just a bit of what you think or what you
thought in the last four years, but as much as possible. So unfortunately, we do have to
repeat ourselves. And some people on our side don't understand the importance of that. So
I just wanted to ask you, in your opinion, so you're a medical doctor, Thomas,
Thomas, and you're a cardiologist specifically, but I think you said in your resume that you
trained as a virologist and an immunologist, was it?
Yeah, after finishing medical school, I was not sure whether I should go into research or into
clinic. So I spent one year in the department for immunology and virology, and I wrote my thesis
there. Yeah. So I really have more than average knowledge in this field, more than average
knowledge of a medical doctor. Yeah, maybe this helped me to see the tree. What we also have to
know, of course, I mean, I took the red pill maybe in 2007 or so. I saw the collapse of World Trade
Center Building 7. I think this was the moment when many took the red pill. Then, of course,
I realized the pre-9-11 narrative is nonsense. Then I looked into the climate
scam and all this, and you go down the rabbit hole, of course. So, of course, we have a huge
advantage. We must never forget that there are people around that still believe in everything,
that the legacy media serve them, especially the news. So there is a huge
difference between the state of knowledge between the people. We must always try to inform the
people according to their current state of knowledge. In people who still believe in
everything, if we confront them with the things we are talking about here, they refuse and we
can never reach them. But there, in such cases, we must spread some doubt. For example, we can show
for example, there was in the yellow press, there was the title, intensive care units overcrowded.
And then you post besides this, the official curve of the Federal Office of Public Health,
where you see, no, no, the occupancy of the ICU units was 75%. And the same paper five years ago
wrote ICU occupancy only 80%. This is uneconomic. So if you so with something like this, maybe you
can spread some doubt. I remember when my son realized that the story of Santa Claus was a
myth. One day, when Santa Claus left, he said, Papa, did Santa Claus not wear the same shoes
as Uncle Earth had on who left before Santa Claus came in and came back when after Santa Claus had
left? Like this, like we cannot confront the populace with the whole truth. Everybody has
to find it out themselves. Yeah. So in view of the frauds that we've been fed, and we've recently
heard that. So I don't know whether you know Jerome Causse, but he's the co author of the book
that came out about President Kennedy's assassination. And it seems to be now accepted that we have been
for 60 years plus fed a load of lies to the people around the world on a very, very important matter.
But so this was about a so-called medical emergency. But if you remember, we had the swine flu
pandemic in 2009, and that was proved to be a fraud. And there's a document on the Council of Europe's
website. I think it's their website, which of course, Council of Europe is part of the
European Union, one of the, I think, seven institutions. So and that, of course, that was
the brilliant work of Wolfgang Rudolf, who happened to be a politician at the time, but he was a
medical doctor. And he understood that the swine flu thing was a fraud. And essentially, he forced
an investigation into swine flu. And in 2010, there was a report and still up on the internet,
it's been up since 2020 throughout, it's never been taken down. The report is there saying that
the swine flu pandemic was a fraud. So why do you think it was that very, very few people, including
Wolfgang himself, I'm not criticizing Wolfgang, but I'm not criticizing him, but I'm not criticizing
people, including Wolfgang himself, I'm not criticizing Wolfgang, you know, maybe he wanted
to live and he knew that it was dangerous for him to say anything further on that. But so we had a
we had a kind of precedent for a fraud, a pandemic fraud. And there it was in black and white,
officially, Council of Europe document saying that the swine flu pandemic fraud
did occur. And it outlined the same people, the same, you know, the pharmaceutical complex,
and politicians and criticized. And yet, nobody seemed to want to know about this,
including Wolfgang didn't seem to understand the importance of those a precedent for fraud.
And nobody paid attention to it. Why do you think that was?
Yes, I agree. It also reminded me instantly on the swine flu scam in 2009. The problem is there was
never a public workup in the legacy media, of course. So most people have no idea what was
going on there. And I think the purpose, this was a kind of blueprint. I guess, as you mentioned,
some of the perpetrators, Ferguson and Raulston were the same already then. And I think the
perpetrators at that time learned two things. First, they have to have total control over the
virus and they have to have total control over the narrative. To have total control over the
narrative in the legacy media, obviously, they will combine, but you cannot have total control
over the virus. So they invented this PCR test, who can exist even without the virus to crank up
and down the case numbers according to the script. Yeah, well, Wolfgang, of course, as you mentioned,
he almost single handedly destroyed the swine flu scam at that time, at least in Europe.
Well, I think he mentioned that, didn't he? I'm not sure. Absolutely. I'm not sure.
He did mention it when I brought it up. I would ask him about it. But I was surprised that he
himself wasn't highlighting that, you know, but as I said, maybe he feared for his life because,
you know, he could understand what was going on was very important, but also very scary. And so
maybe he was thinking, you know, I want to live a bit longer because he looks a happy guy, doesn't he?
I don't know. You have to ask him. But yes.
Yeah, well, I did ask him a few times. I never got a direct answer, but that wasn't a criticism.
I don't know. I also, I already in March or April in Twitter, for example, I posted this Arte
documentation. There is a good documentation by Arte about an hour about this corona scam,
the swine flu scam. And I mean, if you look at this, yeah, of course, I mean, everybody must
realize this was the same scam, basically the same as they did now. I mean, it's the same media hype,
the corruption of everybody by the pharmaceutical industry, that basically the governments were the
the department, the selling department, the propaganda department of the pharmaceutical
industry and so on and so forth. Yes. Exactly. Yeah. So it was very strange to me that that
wasn't highlighted because it seemed to me that was one of our strongest cards, the past history
of the pandemics, you know, which I don't think it's possible for pandemics to occur. And by the
way, I wanted to emphasize that the gain of function thing, I don't think they're capable,
obviously, of getting around the deadly virus kills its host stuff. So the higher the, the
deadlier the virus or the more virulent, the less transmissible. So then the damn thing can't,
can't go around the world. So, so the one is. So if it's deadly, which they want, of course,
to kill us. Unfortunately, it won't spread because it kills the host and they have problems with
transmission and people don't seem to understand it. I'm sure you do. So I wanted to ask you also,
someone suggested that, that I was, I think they were saying that I had said there was no virus.
I was very careful not to say that. I said there's no pandemic and there was no COVID-19.
The fact that I said there was no COVID-19 does not mean to say that I deny the existence of all
viruses. That's a different matter altogether. So you can, you know, I can legitimately.
Absolutely. Yes, absolutely. Yes. I concur with everything. I, as I stated, I'm not 100% sure
that not 1% or so of the case. Now you're frozen, Thomas.
He has frozen. He must be getting late at night. Perhaps that was an important point.
We'll wait patiently for a moment. Usually ends in the person who this happens to
disappear, which he's just done. He has disappeared. We'll wait for a moment so we can
say. I'm already not sure what's happened. I dropped out and I'm back.
You froze. I don't know. So it was particularly important what you were saying. And so they
switched you off. They canceled you, Thomas. We didn't cancel you. They did. You know, our enemies.
So I wanted to ask you, so you know about biology and immunology, albeit some time ago,
but so I heard from a friend of mine in the UK who was an expert on HIV and AIDS,
and he was active at that time as a nurse, but he was working with a lot of medical doctor
researchers on HIV and he's extremely perceptive, this guy. His name is Kevin Corbett.
I recommend him to you. We were talking last summer about, so I knew about the rise of
virology and virologists, the power of virologists. But then you happen to mention that the influence
of immunologists have declined since the 80s. And I said, oh, that's really interesting. So at the same
time as the influence of virologists was rising, the influence of immunologists was declining. Well,
immunology, as you know, the immunologists who taught me at least were always saying that it
was a wonderful immune system. So, you know, if you like praising God, you know, for lack of a better
word. So and the wonders of the human immune system. And but the virus, so the biology,
it seemed to me, you know, in my simple mind last summer was completely opposed to that. So that's
the anti-human bit, the virology. And the immunology is the pro-human bit, you know, the emphasizing
the spirituality, if you like, the wonder of the universe, the wonder of the human immune system,
the brilliance of it. And the notion in virology that mere human beings, mere human beings can,
you know, meddle with the immune system and trick it into
curing their so-called diseases, you know. So I wondered whether it was a necessary
construct to get rid of the immunologists, to replace them with virologists in order for 2020
to occur. The same question about epidemiology and the same question about evidence-based medicine
and the same question about genomics, were these all constructed to make, to allow what happened
in 2020 to occur? Obviously, it took time, but that's even more evidence of evil. So was it the
intention of these and super specialization, which you mentioned brilliantly earlier on,
all these things and the notion that doctors should be beholden to protocols and guidelines?
So diminishing the autonomy of individual doctors, which we were taught at medical school,
was the best defense for the patient against evil. Well, not evil, but yes, you know what I mean.
So in other words, you want a doctor who is autonomous, who's an individual, is autonomous,
not controlled by the medical establishment in any way. They've got rid of that. Apparently, I didn't
ever obey any guideline or protocol. I knew there were protocols, but I just ignored them. I always
did what I thought I would do for my own family. Anyway, Thomas, what do you think?
I fully agree as always, Stephen. When I wrote my thesis in immunology and virology in the 1980s,
this was still one department. Virology and immunology, they were one department.
And somewhat later, they were separated. And since then, I agree, the virologists obviously
have no idea of immunology. The average medical doctor has not the slightest idea about immunology,
because as I mentioned, the fundamental duty of our immune system is to recognize non-self and
to destroy it. This you learn in the first two lectures of immunology for beginners.
And this is the basic thing of these gene transfections that you choose a foreign antigen,
a foreign protein. So this must result in this autoimmune attack. This we had known before this
criminal emergency use authorization. And also, I'm amazed as you, I could not believe how few
people, experts, virologists realized this. I mean, virologists, these are laboratory doctors.
Nowadays, they are not even doctors. Most of them are biologists. Epidemiologists as well.
Most of them are not medical doctors. They are biologists, mathematicians. They are living in the
same virtual modeled world as climate scientists. Epidemiology and climate science is about the same.
They are living in a modeled, artificially intelligent virtual world without any natural
reality that is totally disconnected from reality.
The problem is not the lack of knowledge. It is the illusion of knowledge. And these guys believe
they are geniuses, while in reality they are narcissistic village idiots or maybe better urban
idiots because the people on the countryside are the more intelligent obviously than
people in the city. Sorry, Stephen. Yeah.
Charles, why are you interrupting on this? Because it's two and a half hours,
long speeches. And you know the rule, Stephen, less is more.
That's why, because I'm the moderator because two and a half, like gosh, you know, there's 47
people left on the call here, Stephen. We don't have endless time.
And Charles, I'm not going to have an argument. Thomas, thank you so much for coming on. Very,
very interesting. And there's another issue that Peter woke up, Peter Underwood.
We tried to get you to get the question and Stephen, you had another 15, 20 minutes.
So I'm not being unkind. I'm always kind. I wasn't saying you were, Charles.
Okay, Peter. Yeah. Thank you, Charles. And thank you, Stephen. I understand your
enthusiasm because I guess I have woken up now. I think Thomas has already answered the question
I was going to ask. Do viruses exist? That's something I discussed with Jerry and many others.
And there's this kind of confusion out there. My sense is that a virus is a
kind of a genetic stream of something, whether I've read a lot about it and I've never come to a
conclusion. I wanted to ask Thomas, does he think that viruses are reality? Peter, he has answered
that. We're not going to go back on that. Watch the recording. Yeah. We've had plenty of
confusion around that. That's why I put my hand down, Charles.
Well done. And Thomas, excellent, great insights on various questions. So all of us can learn new
ways of expressing ideas. That's the value of these meetings. Thank you, Stephen, for organizing.
Thank you all for being here. Tom Rodman is running, for those of you with endless time,
you can join Tom on his video group. And Stephen and I will discuss whether or not
we have an event on Easter Sunday for some people. And this is the last day, Stephen,
where I started at 7 a.m. next week. Yeah. I started 6 a.m. and the week after when Australian
Day- 5 a.m. ends, I started 5 a.m. all through winter. So- Crazy. Crazy. Yeah. And Stephen,
the one thing that Thomas really, Thomas, the one thing you really said that's been really important
and I've taken note of this, amongst many, or clearly public-private partnerships are fascism,
but I loved the comment that the quote, billionaires today, the billionaires today
are the kings of today. That's a lovely metaphor as well. Well, only in their own minds, Charles.
They're not the kings. Indeed. Very good. All right. Thanks everybody for being here.
Thank you, Stephen. We need to remember human hubris. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Well, that's right.
The psychopathic- Thank you, Stephen. Thank you, Charles. Thank you, everybody, for all you are
doing. And venceremos. Thank you so much, Thomas. Some of the things that we were discussing,
I think we need to get out to the public somehow or other. In particular, immunology and
virology, the interplay between those things and how they've been misused.
And happy Easter. If you believe in Easter and Greek Easter is two weeks after that. I don't think
we have many Greeks here, Stephen. But anyway, Greek Easter is two weeks later. And so may you get
Easter eggs delivered by rabbits. How about that? That's an interesting contemplation, isn't it?
All right. Have a good time. Great to be with you all. Have a couple of-
Charles and I aren't always arguing. So very often, especially in his winter, I praise him for his
sense of duty. Getting up at five o'clock every twice a week.
Quarter past four, Stephen, twice a week. That's right.
However, it's given me a new appreciation for the current affairs TV hosts who come onto our
screens at six a.m. in the morning or seven a.m. in the morning. And many of them get up at three
a.m. So I'm glad I'm not one of those. And the other is Stephen, the vegetable, the vegetable,
the far, sorry, the market, the markets, they get up at three a.m. to be at the vegetable,
fruit and vegetable markets at five a.m. starts. Amazing. Anyway, everybody who needs sleep.
Lovely to be with you. Happy Easter. Bye for now. Bye, Stephen.
Excellent, Thomas. Thank you so much.
Thanks. Bye bye.
Thanks, everybody. Have a blessed Easter.
Yeah. Thanks, Daria. They may be in me. Oh, gone now.