So everybody, welcome to Medical Doctors for COVID Ethics International.
In today's meeting, this community was founded four years ago by Dr. Stephen Frost, a medically
a British trained medical doctor with a passion for truth.
As a seasoned whistleblower and activist, Stephen founded this group to champion truth,
ethics, justice, freedom and health in the face of global challenges.
I'm Charles Covess, your moderator, and Australia's passion provocateur.
I wear my red jacket because red is the colour of passion to remind you to be passionate
about everything that you do.
After 20 years as a lawyer, I shifted gears 32 years ago to become a professional speaker,
amongst other things.
And for the past 14 years, I've guided parents and lawyers in addressing vaccine injuries
and medical failures.
In fact, medical failures are the number one cause of death these days in America, according
to the latest data that I've been mentioning on numerous occasions.
I'm also chief executive of an industrial hemp company that is going to make a massive
positive difference on America, on Australia, and on Europe and on each one of your lives.
At this time, we remember Rainer Fulmick, unlawfully incarcerated in jail in Germany
following a show trial, and the Netherlands, what's the name of the Netherlands doctor
who's been fighting the government, has now been harassed and jailed and attacked by the
system.
Anyway, we think also of any lawyers fighting the good fight for truth, freedom, justice
and ethics.
Our group is a dynamic blend of voices of doctors, lawyers, homeopaths, journalists,
professors, peacemakers, and bold troublemakers hailing from corners of the globe.
Many of us once viewed vaccines as benign, now many wear the badge of passionate anti-vaxxers
with pride.
And I'm certainly one of them, and I would never take a vaccine of any description because
not one of them has ever been properly tested for safety and efficacy.
First time as you're warmly embraced, introduce yourself in the chat, share where you're from,
and let's connect.
Got a podcast, book, newsletter or show?
Drop the links in the chat so we can amplify your work and stay connected.
We're in the thick of a global struggle of World War III with medical and scientific
battles among 12 battlefronts.
Another of the 12 battlefronts is the spiritual battlefront.
Five and a half years into this fight with more to come, there's no room for being tired.
Stay strong, stay healthy, listen to the advice that you get in these meetings.
There's some wonderful resources.
If you have a health problem, put a request into the chat.
There's some amazingly skilled, knowledgeable people in this group.
Science we know has never done it, thrives on challenge and inquiry.
Some here believe in viruses, others see them as fiction, and many are still exploring all
views fuel their dialogue.
And I note people keep making comments in the chat on the recordings on the Rumble channel,
and they go, you are all idiots to even allow the possible existence of viruses.
So there you are, you're all idiots.
If you have any open mindedness around viruses.
These two and a half hour sessions are action oriented.
After the meeting, Tom Rodman hosts an optional Telegram video chat.
We'll hear from our guest presenter today, Dr. Clayton Baker from the US.
What part of the US are you in, Clayton?
I'm in New York State.
Beautiful.
So Clayton's from New York.
We'll have a following his presentation.
Stephen Frost asks the first set of questions for 15 minutes.
There's a free speech haven appropriately moderated to keep ideas flowing.
Free speech is our weapon to safeguard our liberties.
If something offends you, own it.
We sidestep the outrage culture and its demands to silence truth as we sidestep the
triggering culture.
Don't say anything you might trigger somebody.
We choose love over fear.
Fear binds and sickens.
Love liberates, heals and inspires.
These twice weekly meetings are far from mere talk.
They've birthed real world actions and alliances.
A key tactic in our fight is exposing medical crimes on social media,
rallying behind the demand of medical truth now coined by John Rappaport.
I urge all of you to demand medical truth now.
This call can unite humanity in a search for accountability.
And Mark Dyer, well done to you for calling for medical truth now.
And as soon as you shine a light on truth, a lot of people go scurrying.
Share solutions, products or resources in the chat.
The meetings are recorded and uploaded on the Rumble channel.
And we're thrilled to welcome our guest presenters today.
Dr. Clayton Baker from New York State.
Thank you for sharing your time with us.
I'll give you a quick intro for those who didn't get the invitation.
So Clayton is the 2025 Brownstone Fellow.
And I'm a big fan.
I've been a long time subscriber to Brownstone Institute.
Jeffrey Tucker is the Clayton, the founder.
That's right.
That's correct.
Congratulations on being a Brownstone Fellow.
And you're a senior fellow with the Independent Medical Alliance.
You're an internal medicine physician with 25 plus years in clinical practice.
You've held numerous academic medical appointments
and your work has appeared in many journals,
including the Journal of the American Medical Association
and the New England Journal of Medicine.
From 2012 to 2018, Clayton was clinical associate professor
of medical humanities and bioethics at the University of Rochester.
And Clayton is the author of the book, The Medical Masquerade.
A physician exposes the deceptions of COVID.
Available at Amazon, Barnes and Noble and Lulu.
So Clayton, can you put that link into the chat?
The Medical Masquerade.
In fact, easy to find.
And you can follow Clayton on X at CJ Baker MD.
So thank you also to Stephen Frost for starting this group.
Clayton, type that in there so people can buy your book.
I will.
And the link in there and your ex Twitter and your ex handle, ex.com handle.
I will do that.
Well done on writing a book.
I've written two books, co-authored another two books.
It's a lot of work and there are some people here.
I think Jerome Corsi has written 30 books
and Dave Raznick's written a number of books.
Clayton and Thomas Bender's probably written a few books
and Robert Harper's probably written a few books.
And on we go.
Over to you, Clayton.
Thank you for joining us.
Very well.
Thank you very much for having me.
And Stephen, thank you for contacting me.
It's a real pleasure and honor.
I'm familiar with this group.
I've seen your, I've sort of, I think way back a couple of years ago, kind of,
what's the word?
Skulked is the wrong word.
What do they call it?
Lurking.
I think when you just go and listen in to an online thing.
We like lurkers here.
We like trolls as well.
As soon as they shine their head, we chop them off.
And if no one's criticizing you, then you're really not coming up with new ideas.
So we get plenty of criticism.
So Clayton, I'm glad you've had access to us.
So you know what we like.
And I'm genuine when I say, you know, it's a free space environment,
but relevant to the topic that we're talking about, whatever you're talking about.
Correct.
So, well, Stephen and I spoke a little bit yesterday and there were two issues that
I've written about was a number of issues I've written about, but there's two that
he expressed, I think some interest in having me talk about.
I know you all have had Kirk Moore from Utah in the United States on the show.
And as you all may know, Kirk Moore is a physician in the United States who in 2021 and 22 took
action on his own to protect his patients from the COVID jabs.
And he, for those people who wish to do so, he provided them with false COVID
documentation in the form of these little ID cards that they were producing for everyone who
got the vaccines.
Without them, there were in various states in the United States, it was different in each state,
but you would be denied access to certain aspects of polite society or even being able to go to
your job or whatever if you didn't have evidence that you had been vaccinated.
And so Kirk took it upon himself, along with a couple of people in his practice, to provide
people who wished vaccine cards that were given despite the fact that they had not actually
received the vaccine.
And he was subsequently brought up on criminal charges in the United States for doing this.
In January 2023, he was charged by the US Department of Justice, run by the
AG under Joe Biden, Merrick Garland, with offenses that could have totaled up to 35
years in prison for this.
Now, of course, the charges that he was charged with were not obviously violent
crimes or anything of that nature.
It was things like conspiracy to defraud the United States because he was supposedly issuing
these fake vaccination cards, conspiracy to convert, sell, convey, and dispose of government
property for allegedly getting rid of these COVID vaccines, and so on.
So it was all these very, how shall I say it, indistinct kind of, not thought crimes,
but these sort of nonviolent sort of crimes that were somewhat cooked up as basically
thwarting the desire of the federal government.
And despite President Trump winning the 2024 elections, this year he was up on trial,
and Trump's new Department of Justice was continuing to pursue this case.
It became kind of a cause celebre in the United States, and they actually went through the first
three days of the trial, and by all accounts the trial was not going well for the prosecution.
And during the weekend break in the trial, the attorney general, Trump appointed and
approved attorney general, a woman by the name of Pam Bondi, decided to drop the case.
And it was interesting because what she had said, two things that she had said was that,
I'm going to read it for you.
She said, at my discretion, the Justice Department has dismissed charges against Dr. Kirk Moore.
Dr. Moore gave his patients a choice when the federal government refused to do so.
He did not deserve the years in prison he was facing.
It ends today.
And then she added another, this was all on Twitter,
this would not have been possible without Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia,
who brought the case to my attention.
She's been a warrior for Dr. Moore and for ending the weaponization of government.
But when all of this happened, I actually know Kirk a little bit.
Over the years, he and I have spoken, and we've kind of become internet friends, if you will.
We've not met in person yet, but I hope too soon.
And we were in conversation at various points throughout this whole ordeal.
And anyway, when that happened, I got in touch with him and I wrote this article for Brownstone,
which came out a couple of days after he was exonerated.
It's called The Exoneration of Kirk Moore and the Trial of Pam Bondi.
It was on July 16th, I think those three or four days afterwards.
And my thesis in this essay was two things.
It was number one that it was highly unlikely that
Attorney General Bondi was not aware of this case.
It was just too prominent and she's a very media intense kind of person.
I know many of you are not from the United States,
so some of the national players in the US of A are not necessarily
on your radar screen all the time.
But she's a fairly media forward kind of personality,
and she's gotten a lot of criticism for basically being,
to a lot of people's minds, not very aggressive with a lot of the COVID era criminals.
And a lot of other people in the United States have been guilty of,
for example, offenses against free speech during the last five years.
She kind of talks a good game, but there really haven't been many arrests or charges against anybody.
And so at any rate, going into the case, it was pretty clear that
her Justice Department, and in fairness to her,
what it may be like in other nations, I suspect it's not dissimilar.
In the United States, we have such an absolutely gigantic,
just an absolute leviathan of a fourth branch of government,
which is what is sarcastically called nowadays.
Basically, the unelected permanent bureaucracy is so ginormous and just so
self-perpetuating that you can bring in a new administration
and they can literally never get full operational control over the government.
So in fairness to her, she probably did not have,
does not even now have full operational control over the Department of Justice,
because there's so many career lawyers and career bureaucrats.
However, she certainly has the ability to dismiss a case,
a prominent case that she finds to be inappropriate.
And this did not happen literally until the 11th hour.
There was probably a good chance that either way,
she was going to have a lot of egg on her face if this case was allowed to go to completion.
Well, anyway, gratefully, they did drop the case, as I stated.
Again, she kind of did this victory lap.
But as you all may know, one of the absolutely concurrent problems that she was facing with
at the time was tremendous public outrage over the fact that early on,
she had said we're going to release the Jeffrey Epstein files.
And then in a week or two prior to the Kirk Moore case was saying,
well, there really are no Jeffrey Epstein files to speak of.
And it's really not something we're going to get into.
And there was a tremendous amount of gaslighting going on.
So she was under tremendous pressure based on that.
And on top of that, very early on in her tenure, after she had been confirmed,
she had dropped a case against Pfizer.
Of course, another one of the great COVID era villains for
illegal practices abroad in places like Mexico.
And as it turned out, when she was in private practice,
one of her clients in the past had been Pfizer Corporation.
So she was facing a tremendous amount of criticism.
And this case didn't seem to be going well.
And finally, she dropped the case and Kirk was exonerated.
So one of the theses of my statement was that,
obviously, no matter how you come to a good result, we're thankful for a good result.
And I took some time to go back and say, look,
what do someone was talking about Muhammad Ali earlier in the pre-conversation.
And this is something that came to mind for me is that a lot of the great minds
in ethics in general and in natural law theory were very
of one mind with the issue of what do you do when you're faced with a law that is patently unjust.
And I started my essay by quoting St. Augustine, who was widely considered to be the father of
natural law theory, who said an unjust law is no law at all.
Then taking it down to Thomas Jefferson, who, of course, was the principal
author of the Declaration of Independence in American history, said, if a law is unjust,
a man is not only right to disobey it, he's obligated to do so.
And down to Henry David Thoreau, who was a transcendentalist philosopher in the United
States, well-known in the United States history, who said that anyone in a free society where the
laws are unjust has an obligation to break the law. And then, of course, Martin Luther King,
who said one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.
And my conclusion from this was I regard Kirk, I mean, Kirk's a personal friend of mine,
but I regard him as a hero. And I can't help but think based on their written record that
St. Augustine and Thomas Jefferson and Thoreau and MLK wouldn't, I think they would agree with me.
And I think that it's funny because once you're long dead or once you've been assassinated by the
deep state like Martin Luther King was, then it's OK to make you a hero and it's OK to say that you
name streets after you and schools after you and whatnot and appreciate the fact that you're
willing to stand up to tyranny even within your own country. But when it's actually happening,
you're vilified and you are imprisoned. I went back and did some research. It turned out that
Martin Luther King was arrested 29 times over the course of his life. Henry David Thoreau spent time
in jail for refusing to pay his taxes on account of what he thought was the injustices of slavery
and the injustices of the Mexican War. And, of course, Thomas Jefferson had a price on his head
throughout the whole revolution. So, you know, all of these guys were basically criminals
for following through on this notion of a natural law based notion that unjust laws are
not to be obeyed. And yet, you know, 100, 200 years later, I guess a little quicker in the case of MLK,
but he had to pay with his life to get this kind of, I guess, acceleration in his posthumous
reputation. You know, then if you, after the fact, when you're long gone, then they
consider you to be a hero. And, you know, again, it just takes me back to the issue of, again,
someone who was well known to Martin Luther King was, you know, with the Vietnam War, of course,
was Muhammad Ali, who we see a very similar treatment in terms of a famous athlete with
what happened with Novak Djokovic in the tennis world at the time of the COVID vaccines.
You're basically going to be vilified and you're basically going to be told that you can't
ply your trade and you're a disgrace and you're a coward and you're all these other terrible things.
And yet you come out the other side, if you stand tall, you come out the other side stronger.
Unfortunately, a lot of other people, you know, it doesn't stiffen the spine, I guess, of too many
people who are willing to give you credit later on. So I thought that this was interesting from
a historical standpoint and from a philosophical standpoint that, you know, what Kirk chose to do
was, I think, heroic. I think it was in certainly, I mean, I think that the evidence is overwhelming
based on the quotes, which I verified of all of these, you know, accepted to be great thinkers
from St. Augustine on down. And, you know, this is just the historical pattern. You know, there's
not much new under the sun that if you choose to do this, this is the path that you're going to
follow. And, you know, I guess the optimistic thing that I would say to a lot of people is,
you know, he wasn't destroyed, he wasn't obliterated, he came out the other end. And,
you know, I was joking with him. It's kind of like the quote in Star Wars where he says,
if you kill me, I'll become more powerful than you can possibly imagine. And fortunately,
he didn't get killed. But I think he's got a moral authority now that the people that tried to do this
to him simply don't have. The final thing that I said in my article that I thought was hopeful was,
you know, we really need to point out to our people in positions of power, whether it's our AG,
Pam Bondi, who for all of her faults is infinitely better than Merrick Garland.
It's absolutely inconceivable that such a result would have come out of a continuation of a Garland
run Department of Justice. But I think we need to, regardless of what their imperfect
motivations may have been, I think it's important that we do give credit where it's due when people
do make the right decision. And I think it's really important that we encourage them to say,
look, this guy was right. You finally came around better late than never and all that.
And you need to take this example and see that you doing the right thing under perhaps unpopular
circumstances is a winning strategy. It's a winning strategy, ultimately, to kind of go
through the fire. So that was sort of a summary of the essay that I wrote that I think may have
attracted Kirk and Stephen's interest. I probably would have been quicker just to read it to you,
but there's the summary. So I'd be welcome to hear what anyone else had to say. The other article
that people have taken an interest in, and it's the first article in my book that may be worth
looking at from the standpoint of you all because you all have such an interest in ethics was
the first one I actually wrote for Brownstone. It's called The Four Pillars of Medical Ethics
Were Destroyed in the COVID Response. This is back two years ago now, a little over two years ago,
May of 2023. And it's the first major one in my book here. That's out of focus, but that's okay.
But essentially what I did is I took it as kind of an exercise to go through all of the
fundamental tenets of medical ethics, autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and then
go on into the sub-topics within that. So for example, autonomy, of course, a lot of that is
informed consent, and informed consent has multiple sub-characteristics and so on.
And I essentially went through those with a review of what happened during COVID and realized that
literally every single one of these major pillars and these sub-tenets were, it wasn't just some of
them were dispensed with, they all were dispensed with. The whole concept of medical ethics was
completely thrown out the window, was just declared null and void, and was just dismissed with for
at least two years. And we're still clawing our way out of it now. And we may, who knows
whether we ever really will get fully out of it. So I had expected that to be a
thousand word essay or something, talking about the four main tenets. And I went through the whole
basically the whole textbook on medical ethics and found that not a single aspect of it, not
a single substantial aspect of it was retained intact. So we're dealing with something where it
simply was a matter of tossing everything aside. And I think that part of the reason for that,
isn't it something that we all need to, in my opinion, be aware of, is that this was really a
military operation at the end of the day. It certainly wasn't the United States. It was
basically turned over to Department of Homeland Security and Department of Defense to the point
where you're basically, they're taking a sort of a martial law kind of standing on this. And when
you apply martial law, what happens to habeas corpus, what happens to other fundamental rights,
they get tossed aside. And so I think one of the things we have to be willing to do is to realize
that that's what happened, that it's not an accident that the ethics were thrown away. It's
basically because without telling us, all of our, we were all placed under martial law and they
don't have a right to do that. As we all know, they have no right to say, well, the plagues come to
town, therefore your rights are null and void. That's not in any constitution, certainly not in
the United States Constitution. And I'll say one other thing about that. I had a friend who was a
cardiologist and I met him in the hardware store in the middle of 2020 when things were just
starting to reopen. And I said, this is insane. I said, we have a bill of rights. And he said to me,
well, the founding fathers didn't know much about infectious disease. And I said, oh, really?
You didn't know that Thomas Jefferson lost a couple of his kids to cholera, did you? You didn't
know that George Washington survived smallpox. He had smallpox. Or that Benjamin Rush, who was a
physician, who was one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence after it was over,
went over to England to get the Edward Jenner vaccine. He was interested in that. So these
people had absolutely no clue about infectious disease, but they had all lost family members.
They had a much better idea of infectious disease than we did because it was a constant threat.
And yet there was nothing written in here that you have a right to assembly, you have a right
to worship, you have a right to speech, you have a right to all these other fundamental to earn a
living unless cholera comes to town. That was not written into it. And they knew darn well that
that was a possibility. So I think all of these arguments takes us into one other area that I
could talk about if people are interested. It's just basically the history of public health.
And history, public health as a subtopic of medicine is really going all the way back to
Rudolf Wirkow in Germany is really a quasi-military concept from the very beginning.
And it really was even in Wirkow's day considered to be a potential method of state control.
The Prussians like to do that kind of thing. And that's absolutely where it began. That's
absolutely where it came from. It came down through the Rockefeller Foundation and so on,
that these are in the United States, that this is a method of population control.
The Centers for Disease Control, I think it's less about disease and it's more about control.
But anyway, we can get into that some more if you want. So I've tossed out a bunch of ideas and I
don't know if people have any interest in talking about that.
Clayton, it's Stephen here. We'd be very interested in a ported history of public health.
Because I remember professors talking at medical school about public health,
but we weren't clued up, or at least I wasn't clued up enough to understand what they were
saying. But I remember essentially that the suggestion was from some of these professors
that public health was dangerous from the point of view of the public. They could be used as a weapon
by governments of the future. So I think it's, they knew then, you see, some of them did.
Not all, but some of them.
Yeah, I think you're fortunate that you had people teaching it to you that were as open about it as
that. Because quite frankly, I was taught that, at best, I was taught, and I went to medical school
in Canada at McGill University, which back then was still quite British in its style, more so I
think than American. I felt I got a very solid basic education, such as it was at the time.
But what I heard from public health was, look, that it really started out, and again, I think
they were honest at that time about what it constituted to some extent, because it hadn't
been totally captured by pharma and by, I think, military mindset at that time, although I think
there was a danger of it. When I was taught about public health, you started with, say,
John Snow and the pump handle in London for the cholera epidemic, and you said, okay, this is how
someone does this detective work to figure out where infectious disease is coming from.
And even if you don't know the exact mechanism, you can make interventions that improve public
health and prevent mass illness. And then it proceeded on to invariably, to some extent,
talking about vaccination. And of course, the whole vaccination story or the whole vaccination
mythos that exists kicks in soon thereafter. I think one of the big problems with that is that
there's a gigantic disconnect in the facts with vaccination. And I don't have the pictures in
front of me, but the reality is that most of the public health benefits in terms of reduction in
disease from sanitation, clean water, and so on, had already happened and had already achieved
the overwhelming amount of benefit that we were going to achieve prior to the institution of most
vaccines. Now, of course, smallpox would be an exception because that had been around for
over 200 years. But the modern ones, post-date decreases in infectious disease outbreaks
in terms of instituting these vaccines as the cure. That kind of has conveniently been swept
under the rug, although fortunately it's coming back to the fore once again, and people are
becoming more aware that, for example, tetanus, you know, there's about 30 cases of tetanus in
the United States every year, those 330 million people in the United States. So your odds in your
lifetime of being hit by lightning are supposedly around one in 30,000. So, you know, your odds of
getting tetanus are dramatically less than being struck by lightning. And, you know, a large
percentage of patients, I take care of patients, I would say a lot of my patients are way beyond
10 years. Technically, they should be due for a tetanus booster. So if you really need a tetanus
shot every 10 years, it ain't that that's keeping it down to 30 cases a year. It's that it's
exceedingly rare. The reality is that most of tetanus, when it was a problem, was because there
was a lot of horse manure and dead horses, quite frankly, in the large cities in the United States.
And that was the vehicle through which people would contract tetanus. But now, you know, there
really isn't a lot of horse manure, and even in New York City, I was just in New York City, there's
manure, but it isn't horses. But anyway, it's, you know, that's just simply the case that once you got
past this primary source of the infection, you really don't see that anymore. Now, the notion
that you need a tetanus shot every 10 years just seems statistically implausible. Furthermore,
you know, nowadays, at least in the United States, you don't get it just a tetanus booster,
you get a Tdap. So you get tetanus diphtheria and pertussis, which means you're getting a
cocktail of three, because one of them supposedly needs a booster. And so, you know, we really start
very quickly, even with that one vaccination, we start seeing how this becomes a bit of a shell
game. We've got a problem, which is trying to present, which is exceedingly rare,
we've in which the primary problem for which has already been established and taken care of.
Then we've got this subscription model where people are supposed to continue to be on it,
even though it's not clear that they need it. You know, we're not testing titers, we're just saying
this is the rule of thumb that you're supposed to do. And essentially, if you run into the office
and into the office or into the emergency room, and you're more than now they're saying seven to
10 years out, so you're more than seven years out, and you cut yourself on something, you know,
now you're due for this cocktail of three shots. There's really not good basis behind it in any
way, shape or form. It's a shell game. And this is what we're dealing with in so many different
ways with all of these products. There's really not good. It's just partly habit, it's partly
coercion. And that's what we're faced with in terms of modern, quote unquote, public health.
I think the other thing that I really would point out, and this is going to sound perhaps a little
bit dark for people, but I think it's important to say, is that in my opinion, and I've written
extensively on this, the entire concept of this pandemic preparedness situation is a, it's,
I think the term is improper, but it's what we hear all the time is a Hegelian dialectic.
The likelihood that those SARS viruses that the Bat Lady got out of those caves in southern China
back in the 2010s would have ever caused COVID if they hadn't been sent all around the world to
Ralph Baric's lab in North Carolina and maybe to the Naid lab in Montana, maybe somewhere else,
and certainly back to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. If those had been just, if those bats
had been left alone and if nobody had been weaponizing those viruses, COVID never would
have happened. But the whole precept or the whole excuse or the whole justification that they give
for this whole operation is, well, we have to find these things and we have to monkey with them or
else they're going to cause trouble. But in fact, I don't even think they're misguided in that. I
think they know darn well that they're weaponizing these viruses and then they're providing, it's
the classic problem reaction solution type of thing. And that's the whole, that's the entire,
entire pandemic preparedness model. It's deliberately creating the problem. It's
deliberately creating the reaction, the panic and whatever, and then they have the solution.
And I think we really have to realize that now it's not even, I think it's a three stage kind of
situation. If we look back at public health, it's this old concept, legitimate concept that there
are interventions we can make, like cleaning up the water supply or getting the horse manure off
the street that actually help. But then we managed to realize we can't really make a ton of money
doing that. We can make a ton of money producing vaccines. So we insert the vaccines in there as
the next step in the process. And then we don't make enough money doing that. Why? We'll actually
make the pathogen with the custom made, custom made vaccine to go with it. And so it's kind of
a three step degradation of public health from something legitimate, perhaps back in John Snow's
day to something completely, frankly, evil in Anthony Fauci's day. And I think this is a long
downward slide that we've seen that area of supposed scientific inquiry descend to.
And indeed I interviewed Carrie Mardet on tetanus. She's quite an expert on tetanus.
And even that word, you know, what is tetanus in this whole conversation? You know, how do you know
you've got tetanus? So having heard Carrie on it, and I certainly wouldn't take a tetanus shot
because I stood on a rusty nail in that whole game. And she looked for that research on the evidence
of the efficacy of those shots. So are you ready for questions, Clayton? Sure. Those wonderful three
topics. I'll have you know that I live in a suburb in Melbourne, Australia. The suburb next to us
is called Clayton. So there you are. Must be named after your family, although they might be in the UK,
a place called Clayton. Now the risks that people pushing back against unjust laws,
I've also mentioned in this group last in July last month, every signatory, the 56 signatories
to the US Declaration of Independence committed technical treason. They all put their lives on the
line to sign that declaration. So we've often had the conversation in these meetings Clayton, where
if we're not willing to suffer for freedom, then we're bullshitters. So that willingness to fight
for what we believe in these issues. And if we don't, we will certainly, we will certainly lose
them. And I have I've practiced law for 20 years, I have many, many lawyers, friends in high places in
Australia. And when I say to them, I'm appalled at the attacks on freedoms, they say, what are
you talking about? So the lawyers even within the system cannot have observed no attacks on freedoms.
They think like most doctors, what's happened is, you know, totally acceptable. We're protecting people.
So and lastly, the Magna Carta in 1215 came about because of the king acting in unjust ways. So
we have the legacy, the 800 plus years legacy, in fact, 810 year legacy of the Magna Carta.
All right, Stephen, over to you for the next 15 minutes, a whole bunch of very interesting topics.
And then we go to other questions from lots of other people. I'm sure there will be because I've
got a stack of questions. Go Stephen. Yeah, so Clayton, thank you very much for that presentation.
And I just wanted to ask you, you're in New York State and New York State, as I
understood it from the UK was really badly affected during the so called pandemic,
which wasn't a pandemic, in my opinion. So and California and I think those are probably the
two worst states, but I think the New England states were pretty bad too. But I think the
most the worst damage was done in to businesses and such like was probably done in California
and New York. And it was a shock to me that they were as woke as they were. I wonder whether you
can remember in the details of how life was in New York and what you thought of what was going on in
2020 and 2021 and 2022 for that matter, because actually the pandemic was official until the
11th of May 2023, when for the first time people who haven't been vaccinated could actually enter
the United States. So medical apartheid for from October 2021 to May the 11th of 2023.
I just wondered what your idea of what was going on in the United States, your reaction to it,
compared with New York and how bad was life really in New York State with of course New York City
and Los Angeles, two big targets for these freaks? Yeah, thank you for that. I would say that it was
pretty bad. New York City, of course, was the worst because New York City has a whole
level of governance, if you want to call it that, misgovernance on a daily basis that the rest of
the state doesn't have, but it does have also the population center. So we travel along with it.
And so as you may know, we were one of the initial areas where there was this tremendous
intensity of deaths or purported deaths. And there were certainly deaths in New York City.
How many of them were due to the treatment protocols is arguable. But that was definitely
something that was very prominent in the very early stages of the 2020 even, you say,
in the first three months of the pandemic, say March, April, May,
that was the era shortly thereafter in which they started sending the patients back to
the nursing homes that were recovering from COVID. And you had all those additional nursing home
deaths that happened in a number of states. And of course, New York State was one of those.
I recall in mid-2020, I'm in Rochester, which is about five hours from New York City by car,
that they actually took, it was actually earlier than that, it was probably April,
they took, were asking for volunteers and physicians to go down and spell some of the
people that were so exhausted in New York City. And I actually considered doing that.
We had a child at home that was having issues, not COVID related, but was out of school and
was struggling. And so I didn't end up going, but I had one fairly close friend who did.
And the fascinating thing was she went down for a week and did nothing, was not really employed in
any meaningful way. This is a pediatric emergency room physician, so somebody who had
the skillset to be able to man an inpatient ward or man potentially an ICU or something if necessary
and really was kind of standing by for a week. So again, nothing made sense. Life was difficult
because we were essentially locked down. You could go to the grocery store, you could go to the home
depot, which is our big box hardware store kind of thing, and a couple of other places, the Walmart
and so on. But you couldn't, all of the small town, all the smaller businesses were shut down.
Now how it was, of course the liquor stores were open. How you could be safe going and buying booze
or buying two by fours at the big hardware store, but be in danger if you went to the
corner store was never spelled out to anybody. The schools were closed and the kids were all doing
completely quote unquote remote learning, which meant they were doing absolutely nothing.
And it was pretty much a given that we were not going to get the kids back into school during that
school year. Now myself as a practicing physician for about two weeks, I was told I couldn't come
into the office, but soon they let me go into the office and I went in the very first day I could.
And I said, I don't want any remote, any remote nonsense. Just I'm supposed to take care of my
patients. Let me go and take care of my patients. And for the most part, I was able to do that.
But did they make you, so did they make you, for example, wear a mask to treat your patients?
They instructed everyone to wear that. Yeah, you had to at that point to wear a mask and all that
stuff just while you're in the office. Absolutely. I'm an employed physician. So yes, I was told to
do that. I can't say I was 100% compliant, but I was certainly instructed to do it.
Did you realize then, Clayton, that it was an important psychological thing, the mask,
so I never wore a mask at any time, even though people were telling me I just wouldn't do it.
I just knew that if I wore a mask that would make me worse. I knew I had to resist it to survive.
But obviously, I understand that other people didn't, but was there a lot of pressure on
people in New York State, for example, upstate New York to wear a mask?
Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. The masking was, if you went into the store, I remember going into,
now again, I don't know how many of you are from foreign, not from the United States,
perhaps I'm the foreigner here, but some of the places that are sort of, everyone knows in the
United States because of these giant conglomerates, but you'd go into Costco, which is the big box store
where you buy too much of everything, too many paper towels and all that.
And I would not wear my mask. I just wouldn't do it. And I would be, most people would look
askance at me and then every so often I'd take crap from people. More than once I walked out
of stores because they wouldn't cash me out. So it was pretty bad. And this went on for a while.
I mean, this went on for most of 2020 and into 2021. In some ways, it got worse in 2021 because
that's really when once Biden was declared the winner, magically the vaccines were considered
to be something everyone wanted to take. There was actually some pushback against the vaccines
at the very end of 2020 while the elections were going on because they were Trump's vaccines.
And if they were Trump's vaccines, a lot of people said, I'm not going to take them.
I mean, I'm in a relatively, you know, I'm in a place that's 55 Democrat, 45 Republican on a good
day. And of course, New York City is probably 80, 20. So, you know, this was the mindset. But then
once Biden was declared the winner, you know, then there became this very strong push. And particularly
when his administration took over, there's a very strong push for mandatory vaccination.
And then it became an issue of not being able to participate in society, even though things had
opened up if you did not have your vaccine cards. And that's where the whole issue that came up with
with Kirk Moore. So this is now into 2021. Taking it back to the summer of 2020, you know,
we're basically at home. Most of the time you'd go and you'd shop and whatever, but you mostly
stayed at home. And a lot of people, there's all these rules about large gatherings. You weren't
supposed to meet people for Thanksgiving, which is a big holiday in the United States. This was in
November. But in the summer, you know, basically a lot of people would just go to work and come home
and do very little else. Of course, that's deadly for these small businesses, restaurants and
whatnot. But that's what was going on. And it was clear to us, a lot of the parents, and I had three
kids in high school at the time that it was in New York, at least where we were, it was very unlikely
that these kids were going to get back into in-person schooling in the fall of 2020 into 2021.
By then, of course, we knew very, very well that, you know, the schools have been open in Scandinavia
all along. Everyone was fine. Kids don't get sick from COVID. Nobody dies from COVID. That's under
a very, you know, under 40. And so that's when I really became very strongly active.
I guess you would call politically because I was pushing very, very hard to try and get schools open
for the kids. I thought this was low hanging fruit. I thought this was an absolute no brainer. And of
course, in many other states in the United States, the schools were fully open by the fall of 2020,
but not in New York. There were a couple of districts, a couple of rural districts that
quietly kind of got the job done. And there was actually one county in Long Island, actually quite
near New York, but which is more conservative, that the parents were just, I guess, just effective
enough that they managed to get their kids back in school all day. Now those kids are in school and
they're wearing masks and there's plexiglass and there's insanity all around them, but they're
physically in school and they're getting an education. The best they were able to do or the
best they were willing to do where we were was two days a week in school. It was never explained
why that Wednesday nobody was in school. It was you were in Monday, Thursday, or you were
Tuesday, Friday, and then everyone got the day off on Wednesday. And that was just insanity for that
whole 2020-2021 school year for the kids. And then- Was that 20 or 21 or both?
So right. So if we look back and you look at that March 16th, I think it was, that the declaration
in the United States, 16th or 18th, was that we're locking down, the two weeks to flatten the curve.
It was pretty clear within a few weeks after that that the schools simply weren't going to be opened
in most of the United States for the rest of that school year. And in the United States,
the school year is basically September through end of May, early June. So once the summer vacation,
which is late June, July, and August, and then right after Labor Day, which is beginning of
September, the kids all go back to school. During that summer, there was a lot of effort by myself
and others to get the schools fully open in the fall. But that was the period of time when
Randy Weingarten, who was that horrific human being in the United States-
Oh, the interesting- Wait a minute, Clayton. Oh, yeah. Someone-
So, yeah, no, no problem. So that was when the whole kerfuffle went up about getting the schools
opened and the teachers unions and so on managed to keep them shut. And so we had this hybrid
learning. So we had our cohort split in half, our classes split in half. Half the kids would come
in one day, half the kids would come in another day. And since the five-day week, nobody came in
on Wednesday. It was just out of insanity for that whole year. And then once we had actually,
by March, in our part of New York State, myself and about 20 other people had gotten together and
we had put together a lawsuit for the entire state of New York to open up the schools.
And it was going to court. And we had internal intelligence that someone had leaked from one of
our schools that they had a plan. At least one of the districts had a school to reopen the schools
because they thought they were going to lose the case. Unfortunately, the judge at the 11th hour,
literally the night before the hearing, recused himself from the case, gave no explanation as to
why he had a conflict of interest because by law he didn't have to. And the case was completely
torpedoed because they would have to assign a new lawyer and a new judge and all that sort of thing.
So we had literally no recourse at that point until the school year was over. So it was bad.
We didn't have essentially legal remedies for what we were trying to do. And I was involved at a
legal level. I wrote a number of expert affidavits for businesses that were trying to open for
kids' sports, that kids could at least play sports outside of school if they couldn't
go to school. So I was involved in multiple, multiple of those cases. We won some, we lost
but in terms of the schools, there was just too much going on behind the scenes. To some extent,
the teachers unions were really running the CDC at that point. So it was just a horrendous situation
for the full school year of 2020 into 2021. And we were still fighting-
Sorry, go ahead.
No, I was just going to say we were still fighting that next summer because there's no guarantee
that going into the fall of 2021 that they were even going to have the schools fully open. Now,
of course, down in Florida, they'd been open that whole previous school year and their results were
better than they were in New York, but it made no difference. People are very provincial. They don't
think outside of their own, they don't gather information outside of their own small area.
And it was just a constant struggle for over two years.
Yeah. So Clayton, you're in New York state. That's one of the worst parts. Of course,
New York City was the worst part of New York state, but I think New York state was pretty
bad because I knew some people in and know some people in New York state. And so, and I wonder,
how long was it before you realized that you were essentially on your own in 2020? And when did you
begin to realize that there were some people around you who had some understanding of what was going
on and actually agreed with you or were there none? Did you feel very alone for like two years?
No, I would say that there was a small but very mobile or mobilized group of people. Actually,
it was interesting. My county, which is Monroe County, which is in, it's the county that basically
surrounds Rochester, was actually had a, was kind of a hotbed down in the southern part of the state
in Long Island. And where we were, were kind of hotbeds of descent. How successful we were,
I think we had some successes, but we were, there was just a number of people that happened to
cluster there. And we had a group of about 5,000 parents who were on a Facebook page,
about 5,000 parents who were on a Facebook group. And it was heavily censored, but we still managed
to get the information out. And we ran these lawsuits, we petitioned, we protested, we
raised a pretty good stink throughout the whole time. And we managed to get some changes through.
I think it could have been worse. I think that large parts of New York state might not have opened
for school, for example, initially in that fall period, if we hadn't continued to be active.
And I think we came very close to successfully opening the schools in that March of 2021 until
we were torpedoed by this judge. So I think that there were certainly were people I knew,
but it's a very small group. It was maybe
half a dozen, 10 really, really active people and hundreds to a couple of thousand of like
minded people that will sort of back you quietly, but won't truly speak out.
It was not totally alone. I was grateful for that. But I was the only physician in
my part of the state, I would say. There was one other physician's assistant who was very vocal,
but I was one of two physicians or physicians assistants in an area of a couple million people.
If you take Buffalo and Rochester combined, two people in the medical field,
it's a very small number of people that were willing to really stick their necks out.
Yeah. So I don't think a lot of people realize how brave Kirk was because he did what all the
doctors should have done all around the world. The ones who hadn't kind of resigned from the
general medical council like I, because I didn't want them snapping at my heels when I knew I had
things to do. But yes, had I been working with patients in 2020, I think Kirk was the example.
So when you're faced with a fraud pandemic, well, I don't believe pandemics are possible actually,
but I think it was a fraud pandemic, then you have, and they say that they have to isolate people,
human beings, highly social animals from each other because there's an emergency pandemic
response. I think we have every right to break the law. All right. We're up 20 minutes.
He's on the call. He understood that and he acted good for him. Yep. Correct. Very well said. And
that's the risk we have to take. We have to be willing to suffer. Oh, that's not criticism of
you, Clayton. I got some trouble. I didn't, I wasn't up on federal charges, but I got, I
probably spent $10,000 in legal fees, but I was, I didn't get in the same amount of trouble that
Kirk did. All right. Let's get into the questions. Now we had Anders hand up, but then it's down.
Anders, your hand wasn't taken down. Let's just fall down. What's your story? And then we've got
Albert. Maybe Charles, you can encourage people to ask questions because without the questions,
the questions will come. I've got plenty of questions while I'm waiting for questions.
I want John Baudwin. I'm very sure. And I want John Baudwin to tell us about his latest court
case, but Anders, do you want something or shall Anders go? We've got Albert, I mean.
Well, Anders is not usually shy, but anyway, no, we can't hear him.
Okay. Hello. Hello. Yeah. Yeah. Now we can hear you.
And it was great to hear you, Dr. Baker. It was a good testimony of what's going on.
I don't want to tell too much. Let's say I'm in Norway and I am doing my own stuff. I would say
your testimony is really great. And I'm not going to go too deep into
questioning you, but it is a really interesting story. You have a marvelous story
for presentation. And I just wonder what is the
what is the contest to the marvelous story of, let's say, there are so many
contests to this story. What do you have to say of, let's say, I'm trying to figure the best way
to say it. You have a story. What is your story to the major mass
death of people who is dying in recent time? Linked to, let's say you can call it for 5G.
You can call it for many other stories, which is linked to, let's say,
mass determination of those who are subject to master demonization of, let's say,
those who are dying outside the statistics of master. And who is dying? People are dying across
the board. Do you know that about 130 to 140 million died the last 20 years? And how did it happen?
Have you any idea? Yeah, I would say that. Thank you for the kind words and for your question. I
would say a couple of things in response to that. I think that there's in many ways, I think that
the whole covid disaster was obviously for many of us was a wake up call. You know, obviously it
made us very much aware that this was not an accident, that this was in large part very much
deliberate. And I spoke earlier that we have this whole technique, if you will, or this whole
mode of action that a great many people in power in our world, not just in the United States,
not just in Europe, but throughout the world utilize of creating a problem, generating a
reaction and then proposing what the solution is. And I think that's what we saw during covid.
I think it's absolutely the basis of the of the scam that is the pandemic preparedness so-called
racket. And I think it's, for example, what's going on right now with geoengineering. You know,
there's a tremendous amount of stuff going on over our heads that we need to become aware of the
amount of toxic spraying that's going on. That's a new subject of really key interest for me,
which is happening at various different levels. Part of it's our government,
our governments under the pretense of protecting us from climate change are dimming the sun and
blocking out sunlight and essentially polluting the atmosphere. But as we, some of us are becoming
increasingly aware, this is not for that purpose. I believe part of it is a depopulation agenda.
I mean, you don't spray aerosolized aluminum over the whole planet. But if you want people to
flourish, if you want life to flourish, we know that aluminum is solely toxic to us. And we also
know that the weather is being weaponized. It's been weaponized since essentially in some ways
since the end of World War II. We know that the U.S. government severely weaponized the weather
during Vietnam with Operation Popeye. We know that the U.S. government created a lot of
the deadly hurricane that struck South Carolina, I believe in the 60s. That was Operation Cirrus.
And we know that there was a similar disaster, at least one in Wales back in the 60s, which the
British government never admitted to. And those are peanuts compared to what's going on now
over our heads. We can get into the 5G, we can get into Nexrad, we can get into Harp
and all these other technologies. So, you know, if we look in that area, what is the pretext?
The pretext is, oh, well, we have from a defense standpoint, we have to have these defensive
techniques because otherwise other nations will do this to us, which is exactly the reason we
built more atomic weapons and nuclear weapons than we could ever use, blow up the world 100
times over. And then we have the additional issue of all of this monetary control, which is coming
out in Europe, which is really very terrifying. You know, so I think that there really is multiple
mechanisms by which our, I hate to call them elites, I call them the parasitic elites because
there's nothing elite about just, parasitism is not an elite form of life. But at any rate,
I think that this is something that we're becoming very much more aware of. And maybe it's a mixed
blessing, but maybe that's a blessing of the COVID era that I think so many more people know that all
of these different things are going on, that they are largely problem, reaction, solution, kind of
Hegelian dialectics, and we need to do what we can to stop them.
Thank you, Anders. And Anders, I will-
So I'll just forward the question to Thomas Binder. I think everything is clear. What you say is very
good answer. I just want to have more people to understand we are into a big problem. Thomas,
do you agree?
We've got many Trojan horses for totalitarianism, it seems, Clayton.
Sorry, I didn't listen to your question. Yeah.
We'll get to Thomas when he talks. But Anders, you've raised a good point, and we are under
attack in many fields. So thank you, Anders. Well, from one AB to another, Albert Benavides,
how about that? Talk about ironic for all those possible combinations of initials.
Thomas, put your hand back up because it came down automatically. Albert.
Dr. Baker, it's a pleasure to meet you. My name is Albert Benavides, San Jose, California.
I'm the bears guy. And my little battle station is just to shout out that I believe that the
people running bears are the very same people that are manipulating the data and obfuscating
the data. And we just do not have a true, honest, ethical pharmacovigilant system that was obligated
by the 1986 Vaccine Act. But with that being said, I think there's a real important case in
your neck of the words, I believe, with Deborah Conrad and Attorney Warner Mindenhall.
Sure. Sure. Deb's a friend of mine. Actually, I know both of them quite well.
Excellent. I figured you must because I think that's right in your backyard there.
I'm not familiar with New York, but I hear that Rochester area. But my question was,
how do you feel about that? Are you involved with that? And specifically, if Deborah is
a contact of yours, I was always wondering in all of those reports that she filed,
were there any reports that were never published? Because, and I'll put that in the comment section
now, is that even Bobby Kennedy knows that not all legitimate reports received are even published.
Just like Breanne Dressen of React 19, her report that was filed was never published.
And that's beyond underreporting factor. This is a whole different underreporting.
The stuff they receive and don't publish, nefariously do not publish. So anyways,
I'm glad to know that you are familiar with that and possibly a part of that. But
how do you think that case is going to work out?
Okay. So yeah, thanks for the question, Albert. It's nice to put a face to a name because I'm
familiar with some of your work with the VAERS data. For those of you who aren't totally familiar,
maybe I can give a real quick summary. So Deb Conrad actually was the PA that I mentioned that
was the only other person in my neck of the woods who was really particularly active during the COVID
era. And what Deborah was a physician's assistant, very trusted long-term employee of a hospital.
And she was put in charge early on in the COVID period to be in charge of various aspects of the
COVID care area. And this is back when many of us thought, well, maybe this thing is legitimate.
And she did at the time. And she realized that it was her responsibility once the vaccines came
out in 2021 to follow the rules. And the rules in the United States are as if you see a clear
vaccine injury, you have to file it in this VAERS system, this vaccine adverse event reporting
system. That's what VAERS stands for, I believe. And it's a very clunky system. It's a very
difficult system to, it's not easy to report. It takes a lot of effort and you have to input a
lot of information. But she became absolutely, she was seeing a tremendous number of these
adverse reactions and she took it upon herself to report all of them. And what she found very
quickly was she was told by her employers and by her supervisors to stop doing it.
And she said, well, no, this is wrong. This is, I'm legally responsible to people. She worked
with the emergency room and the emergency room people saw an awful lot of these because people
would come back in hours or days or whatever after getting a shot with these reactions.
And so she had this backlog of cases and people were saying, well, you know, we're being told not
to do it. We're being told, she said, I'll do it. So she started taking a lot of them home herself.
She was doing them on her spare time. She was literally entering many, many of these various
reports and she ultimately was essentially fired for doing so. So she raised a lawsuit against the
health system, the hospital that she worked for. And this has gone through and has not been
dismissed like many other similar ones have, but is what was made it through to discovery right now.
And now with discovery, you know, the can of worms for this particular
health care system is about to open because every one of these failures to report constitutes a
significant breach of the law. And if she can demonstrate that she was, you know, told not to
do it, well, then that's even worse. So you're talking about an absolutely gigantic potential
case. And it did recently proceed through to the discovery phase. So it's all out. You know,
it's like the thing I just saw. I can't verify it, but that, you know, Macron had sued who was the
person in the United States, the Candace Owens. Yeah, Candace Owens. It sued Candace Owens for
claiming that his wife was a man. And now he's dropped it because he realized that, you know,
there's going to be discovery. So obviously discovery is a big deal. And so we're reaching
that phase now with that case. I'm not directly involved in the case, although I know Warner,
men and all the, the lawyer very well. I've worked with him a little bit in other issues
and I know Deb very well. And the interesting thing, one of the interesting things about Deb
is the, I didn't know Deb prior to COVID, but I will tell you this, I met a lot of just really
great people through COVID because the people that did find the need or felt compelled to stand up
to this are some of the best people I've ever met. And Deb is one of the finest human beings
you could ever hope to meet. And, you know, the notion that you would just try to destroy her for
doing her job, it really shows the degree of cynicism and the degree of, there's really not,
you know, it's kind of this Hannah Arendt banality of evil kind of thing that you've got these people
who trusted her and worked alongside her for better part of 20 years. And now they're just
going to destroy her because she insists on doing her job and following the law. It's, it's, it doesn't,
it does not say good things about human nature. But hopefully, yeah, we're at a point now, I guess,
in that case where she and Warner, and Warner's a bulldog, he's not going to stop.
It could blow a lot of the various situation wide open.
Thank you. Thank you, Albert, for the question. It's a great reminder of the sometimes the price
we pay for fulfilling our obligations. Now Kirk Moore is here. So Kirk, if you want to say anything,
most welcome, but nothing bad has been said about you. Clayton only said good things about you,
and we've been singing your, singing your praises. We've got just one second, I had a thought
coming across there with VAERS. We've got the same problem in Australia, it's called DAEN,
Database of Adverse Events National, DAEN. And it's also proven to be significantly defective.
Albert has worked with Sharon Cousins, who has been doing a fair bit of work here in Australia.
And so the data upon which people quote, and indeed, I shared a research paper, someone said
to me, look, here's the research paper that proves having vaccination reduces your chance of heart
problems. And I go, wow. And whilst you've been published in the New England Medical Journal,
I think the retired editor says that less than half of those published research papers
can be relied upon. So all of us have heard that many times. And the other thing I wanted to say,
Clayton, was Warner Mendenhall has presented to us three times here so far. So we know Warner well,
and he's also doing great work in fighting for our rights. So Clayton, we used to supply
Warner with clients. Wonderful. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Thomas is here. TB.
Talking about tetanus, we've got the TB man here.
Yeah. Oh, Thomas Bindey. He's in Switzerland. Is that right, Thomas? But Thomas, Kirk needs to
understand, Thomas, that you're a potential ally for him because, you know, Kirk Moore, the guy who
was, yeah, they stopped the case, Pam Bondi. But Kirk probably doesn't know you. So maybe he does.
But Kirk, you need to know that Thomas was put in, was it a closed psychiatric hospital, Thomas,
for nine days, and you're a doctor. Well, at Easter 2020, I was arrested by an anti-terrorist
squad because of my COVID information of the public and sent to Rooney Bean for six days.
But they could not do me any harm because I never broke, I never did anything wrong. I never broke
any law. And this was, this is the reason, Kirk, Kirk, you certainly, you have all my support.
And I'm happy what happened to you, of course. But please do not understand me. I would like
to discuss which is the best strategy if you want to resist the whole evil agenda in general
and such pandemics in particular. Because I chose another approach. Of course, my decision was
somewhat made easier as after my arrest. I was, I knew, of course, I'm under observation now.
I cannot do any mistake. They are, they are just waiting for a mistake. So for example, to, to
make, to write mask certificates that they do not have to wear masks only after internet contact
and not after having seen my patients in my practice. I'm a cardiologist, by the way,
in the private practice. My approach was the following. Look, if you want to
overcome totalitarianism, resist totalitarianism, we may not comply. The only weapon we have is
civil disobedience. If we give those such, for example, mRNA transfection exception,
exceptions to the patients, we must also know that there is another that this patient will comply.
I told to all my patients, look, you have to decide what is more important in your life,
your profession, your education, going on holidays, or just to resist. Do not accept the vaccine. Do
not wear a mask. Do not accept anti-social distancing and so on and so forth. For example,
the students, I say, they take a year off university. I mean, you can do many even more
interesting things and learn a lot in a year while you are not in university. So I, I did not write
such exemptions also because I was under observation. So observation. So this decision to do this
was easy for me, but we must, we must tell the patients that they should not comply.
Civil disobedience. Do not wear a mask. Do not accept the vaccine. Do not accept, accept anti-social
distancing because only with this method, when they do the next try, when they try it again,
only maybe 10 or 20% of the people will disobey. And this is, this is the only way out of this.
There is no savior. There is no wonderful Maga, Maha or whatever. I mean, the more time
passes, we must realize that Maga and Maha are the other scams. If you ask me. So the question to
you and to all of you is, should we not rather choose this approach? Yeah.
So who's going to answer that? Clayton, are you going to answer it? And Kurt may have a go at it.
I'll say something very quickly. The first thing I would say is it's nice to meet you,
Thomas. I have followed you on Twitter for, I still can't call it X, but I don't know why,
but I have followed you for a long time and I know a little bit about your trials and tribulations
and it's very nice to make your acquaintance finally, even if it is on Zoom. But perhaps
someday we'll meet in person, but very nice to make your acquaintance. I agree broadly with what
you're saying. It really has to be a change in mindset. And one thing that I've been thinking
in particular is I think that one step we need to take, in my opinion, all of us here that I think
see the world differently than many others, I really think that we need to start outreaching to
very, to the young people because, you know, it's easy for me to say, you know, I'm in my 50s.
I've had, you know, I've had, I don't have, I'm not going anywhere. If anything happens to me,
it's probably the deep state. But anyway, but that said, I've had a, I've been very fortunate. I've
had a charmed life in many ways and I don't think that's really in the cards for young people if
they don't wake up. You know, I think that this is going to be a very different world in a short
period of time if the resistance doesn't come more strongly than it is right now. I think that
there's some awakening, but I don't know that the awakening is adequate. And I really think we need
to start looking at the younger generation and saying, look, you know, you need to realize that
the people that are at the very top do not have your best interests in mind. In fact, they may
not even have your existence in mind. And a lot of young people have an inkling of that,
that older people don't. You know, one of the things that I was very disappointed with in COVID
is how willing the old were to sacrifice the young, which I found to be utterly disgusting.
You know, I can see people keeping their, I mean, I wasn't particularly good at doing it,
but I can identify with people saying, I'm going to keep my head down and ride this out and
hope that things get settled. But to just be so blatantly selfish at the level of,
let's close the schools so that under some, of course, bizarre senseless rationale,
but even if you believe the rationale under this bizarre senseless notion that we're protecting
the people in the nursing homes, you know, it's like, you know, these kids need to go to school.
These are their formative years. You know, the years from five to 20 or five to 25 are the most
important years in your life. And you're going to take years away from these children so that the
people in their eighties or nineties can live two more years. I mean, that was literally kind
of the equation that was thrown out there and how people didn't just totally reject that is absurd.
I mean, I rejected that as absurd. That's wrong. And, you know, the notion of kids are resilient.
That's what we would hear from kids are resilient. Well, they better be the way we're treating them,
the way that they're treated in our societies. I hope they're resilient because they aren't going
to survive if they, if they, if they aren't. And so that was one thing that just really disgusted
me. And, you know, I would think, you know, you really start to wonder if you have a, if the,
if the species has a bit of a death wish, if you're going to sell out your young generation for your
old generation as readily. And then I go back and you look at history though, and history tells you,
you know, what's the whole history of warfare. The whole history of warfare is old men arguing
and young men dying. So really this is probably not very different from the way it's always been,
but it does not speak well to our species. And I think that one place I hope to go,
and I hope other people will go is to, is to tell young people who also have a little more
plasticity in their brains yet. They're not quite so set in their ways and say, look,
these people are lying to you. You know, it's the same thing as we heard in the sixties and how much
of that was a sci-op, I don't know, but I don't trust anyone over 30 because most of the people
over 30 that are in charge, I don't think are particularly trustworthy. So anyway, that's,
that's one thought that comes to mind based on Thomas's commentary.
So Thomas and Clayton, how do we make that connection with young people then to get them,
you know, we've got a serious thing to tell them, but how do we get to them when their own parents
don't talk to them and their own grandparents, but the grandparents love, of course, idolizing
their grandchildren, but they don't teach them anything. So, so how do we get to these children?
Because I agree with you, if we don't, the human species is absolutely sunk and I can see signs of
it. They're all on their mobile phones. They just waiting for leaders as I can see it, who can lead
them out of the mess that they find themselves in because they can't buy a house in the UK.
They can't do anything. They know it, but they can't formulate what it is that's wrong because
they haven't no experience of life. And we need to lead them out of this. I agree with you, Clayton.
What do you think, Thomas? I think we should not underestimate the young people. I mean, just
an example in Switzerland, we had the chance in Switzerland, we have some element of direct democracy.
So we had the chance to vote three times about a referendum against the COVID law.
The COVID law gave the government the opportunity to install those insane, all those insane measures
that were not constitutional until without this COVID law. Okay. And the public voted three times
for this law against the referendum. So for the law, for the government, with about two thirds to
one third. But the youngest voters, those from 18 to 35, I guess, they voted against the COVID law
by 56%. And this was always gave me always some hope. The problem is not the young.
Problem is our generation. I'm six, I'm becoming 64 in September. The problem is our generation
that still believes that the mass media, especially the public broadcasters in Switzerland,
and in the whole Europe, of course, we have the public broadcasters whom we are obliged to pay
in Switzerland one franc per day, 365 francs per year, so that they inform us objectively.
And the problem is my generation who still believes that what our public broadcaster
tells them is the truth. And they cannot imagine, and they could not imagine, that such an insane
terrorist cardiologist like Thomas Binder in social media blogs and so on and so forth,
tells the truth. And the public broadcaster is the lie. This is the problem. If you ask me,
it's not the younger generation. The younger generation gives me much hope because they
inform not in the mainstream media. They look for information. Look, we are, the public,
the broadcasters bombard us every day with information 24-7, but always with information
we are not interested in. And the things that we are interested in, we are never bombarded with.
So we have to search to get informed actively. The younger generation does this much more
than our generation, especially over 70 years. I think the average, the median age of the consumer
of the Swiss public broadcaster is above 65 now. So almost no young people still consume those
media. And I think that the future, the younger, the young people are the future. I have two
children, two grandchildren. And yeah, honestly, what was our motivation to do everything we did?
It was of course that our children, our grandchildren, all children, all grandchildren
should have a good life as we had after the Second World War and not grow up in an insane
technocratic world as a slave. That's my two cents at least.
Yeah. And John, if you don't mind, Kirk has got his hand up, but maybe Kirk has some views on
this subject as well. Kirk, you can speak if you want to. You're muted at the moment.
Yeah. Steven, can you guys hear me okay? Sure. Okay. And thanks for having me up. I just wanted
to give my little two cents worth in there for Thomas and his question regarding. And I mean,
again, I think Clayton said it kind of agree a little bit with everything. I think the younger
generation, we have to give them maybe a little bit more credit than what we tend to. I think
it's a generalized apathy. I struggled with what I was doing from the standpoint of allowing people
to not have the civil unrest and to just push back. Because I think that if people would push
back, then we wouldn't be here right now. I think it came though more from our medical community.
If we'd have just had 10% of our doctors in the United States alone push back, we have over a
million doctors in this country. And if we'd have had 10% of them just say, no, we're not going to
do it. And then have a certain percentage of nurses say, we're not going to do it. As opposed to
the handful of people, I think Clayton and I can probably come up with a list of 25 or 30,
maybe 100 docs that really were pushing back vocally against everything that was happening.
You know, Deborah Conrad, you're in a population of 2 million people
and you know of one other person that was pushing back. That's crazy. I'm in a population of
2 million, give or take here in the Salt Lake Valley, even Provo, 2.5 million. And again,
I'm the only one that I know of that was pushing back. That is just far too few.
It's a generalized apathy. It's a generalized feeling that the government is looking out for us.
Clayton, what you were saying about the 1960s, you know, look, I don't trust anybody. I don't
trust anything that the government ever said. You know, I was pushing back against vaccines,
getting all the way back to 2000, 2005-ish timeframe. I've gotten to fights with all of
my colleagues and people ask me this question all the time. How many of your colleagues have
come back to you and said, oh Kirk, I'm sorry for, you know, canceling you. I'm sorry for not being,
I'm not calling you for not, you know, not helping you or whatever since all of this happened. Not
one. Not one. I haven't had any of my classmates from medical school. I haven't had any of my
colleagues that looked at me and said, oh Kirk, you're, you know, you're crazy about what it is
you're doing. The people that already knew what I was doing, hey, they're still there, but not one
of those people that, you know, disagreed with what I was doing have come back and said anything.
So again, I think it's an education thing. I think it's, I agree with Thomas. We need to push
back. We need to do this as a, you know, civil unrest. I think there is a huge, you know,
monetary thing like Clayton mentioned. You know, they're going to control the monetary system.
And therefore with that, they're going to control all of society. They're going to control what you
spend it on, what you don't spend it on, where you can spend it. And people just don't see that
coming. And unless they do start seeing it coming, then we're, you know, this is the end of times as
far as I'm concerned. Sorry, guys. Thomas or Clayton or both, do you want to comment on
what Kirks just said? Of course. I mean, I could not understand as a doctor, of course,
first of all, I blame my fellow doctors, of course. I mean, and if only one or two percent
would have resisted and found one percent of journalists who gave us the opportunity
to reach the public in the mainstream media. Of course, this could not have happened. The
whole nonsense narrative would have collapsed within a week or so. But just to explain to you,
I mean, how there was a total brainwashing of the doctors within days, worldwide, globally, within
days. How did indoctrination of the general practitioners happen in the province of Arga,
where I live in Switzerland? At the beginning of March, there was a weekly Zoom meeting on Friday
at 12.15 or so, where the two main infectious of our two main hospitals, the government,
the regional government and the general surgeon of my province made a Zoom meeting for all GPs.
So there we could learn what is COVID, how we must treat it and all this. And in the third
meeting, I really got angry. I told them, hey, fellow doctors, come back to reality. Come back
to science. Everything you tell is a lie, it's nonsense. We already know by now that this virus
is not more dangerous than influenza, highly likely even less dangerous, etc., etc. I explained
the fake PCR test that can never prove an infection without considering the clinical
symptoms of a patient, etc. And they closed my microphone. They closed my microphone. They had
no answer. They closed, they shut me down. And all other questions of the GPs to these people,
the infectious and the government were about money. What do we have to do not to lose money
during this pandemic? Because at that time, the government decided that we doctors may only see
emergency patients. So my practices were half empty. And I always say as my practice was half
empty, I had time to think. And if I have time to think, I'm becoming dangerous. But this is how it
works. Within days, my fellow doctors were completely brainwashed. They were afraid of
seeing the patients. They told their patients, you have COVID, do not come into my practice,
come again if it's over. I mean, it's absolutely ridiculous. I mean, if there really was a
pandemic of a killer virus, that is a biological impossibility, by the way. But if there was,
who would treat the patients? Never ever the doctors, because obviously they are the first
to run away. I always said it's a pandemic of of chowards. Yeah. Amazing. Yeah. So that was my first
thought, Thomas, that the doctors were essentially frightened of the so-called pandemic, which was a
fraud. The whole thing didn't make sense, you know. So, but you know, I didn't realize at the time in
2020, I knew that it was a global coup d'etat in March 2020. But I couldn't get my head around
that my colleagues to almost all of them, I mean, almost all of them couldn't understand what my
position was. Absolutely. And they wanted to close me down. I was very dangerous to be around.
Anyway, so our fellow doctors also believe in the official narrative about 9-11, about CO2,
induced climate change and all that stuff. And these are the most important things.
I think I'm absolutely sure 99.9% of the people here were critical before COVID.
For example, me, I guess in about 2007, I saw World Trade Center collapse in three or four.
This was when I took my red pill. So then I went into 9-11. And within two days, it was clear it was
total nonsense. Then I was looking into the climate change narrative, etc, etc. And all those
big narratives are wrong to prove and otherwise. This is, of course, our approach here. But the
approach of most of our fellow doctors is that they still believe, like the child that believes in
the Christ child, the Santa Claus and Easter Bunny.
So Thomas, my curve upwards was Dr. David Kelly and fighting the British government over that,
except I didn't realize it was a fight. They did. But then I decided that 9-11 was a hoax or whatever.
And I managed to find Dylan Avery, the director of the brilliant documentary about
9-11 called Loose Change. And there were several versions of it.
So I managed to find him on Facebook and started chatting to him until he said,
I wish 9-11 had never happened. And I said, why? And he said, because it's...
So he was only 18 when he first made the first version of Loose Change, which was about
9-11 being an inside job, you know. And he said that his whole life had changed when he made
that film. And whenever he met anybody, who most of the time he didn't know who the people were
who were talking to him and who revered him, all they wanted to talk about was 9-11. So he
could never get off the subject. But it just shows what young people are capable of if they
meet the right people, you know, if they feel... He was a brilliant filmmaker, even at the age of 18.
So anyway, John Bauduin... But please stay on Thomas and Kirk, and Clayton, of course.
John Bauduin has been in New... Sorry, where was it now? Massachusetts. And he managed to get
all the death certificates for the whole state of Massachusetts, which is a remarkable
accomplishment because... And I knew about death certificates from the David Kelly case,
the importance of death certificates, what is written on the death certificate, particularly
the cause of death, the importance of coroners and all the rest of it, and the importance of
post mortems. And of course, they were cancelled. The post mortems were cancelled,
and so were the coroners in 2020. Sorry, did you want to say something, Clayton?
Yes, I'm going to turn it over to John at this point, because as I think I'd mentioned to you
yesterday, I have a hard stop. So if you'll forgive me, I'm going to have to... I have something at
five that I have my time that I absolutely have to attend. So yes, okay. I'd love to come back
another time and speak with you all. I thank you all for your attention and for having me.
It's a real honour to be here with all of you, and a pleasure to speak with you. So thanks so much,
and I'll step aside and let John take over. And Clayton, if you watch your emails,
you'll get invited to all the meetings now every Sunday and Tuesday. Obviously, you may not be able
to come, but you're very welcome anyway. Thank you so much. Thank you all very, very much.
Thank you.