And Sebastian, I'll put those numbers in the chat in a moment.
Just been a bit busy.
So everybody, welcome to Medical Doctors for COVID Ethics International.
And today's meeting, this group was started over four years ago by Dr. Stephen Frost,
a British trained medical doctor with a passion for truth.
Stephen was a seasoned whistleblower and activist, and he founded this group to champion truth, ethics, justice, freedom, and health in the face of global challenges.
At this time, we remember Reiner Fulmick, a German lawyer, US lawyer, currently locked up in a German jail unlawfully.
In the invitation that many of you got, I have put a link to the video of many people demanding free Reiner Fulmick now.
Please watch that link. Please watch that link to the video. Please share that video far and wide.
We also remember Arno van Kessel, a Belgian lawyer, I think, imprisoned in Netherlands for fighting for his clients.
And I also bring to your attention Buttonheart Bear under the foreverfreedommovement.com.
Buttonheart is a way that we can help liberate children from child trafficking for sex and slavery.
Go to foreverfreedommovement.com, buy a bear and help to shine a light on the horror of trafficking children.
I'm Charles Coves, your moderator. I'm Australasia's passion provocateur. I'm in a red jacket because red is the color of passion.
After 20 years as a lawyer, I shifted gears to become a professional speaker 32 years ago.
And for the past 14 years as a legal strategist, I've guided parents and lawyers in addressing vaccine injuries and medical failures.
And indeed, medical failures are now the number one killer of people in America.
Perhaps the Maa Ha movement might do something about that to make America healthy again.
I'm also chief executive of an industrial hemp company.
And industrial hemp is going to have a massive impact on America, UK, Australia and the rest of the world.
This group is a dynamic blend of voices and professions from all around the world.
Many of us once viewed vaccines as benign. Now many proudly wear the badge of passionate anti-vaxxer.
First timers, you're warmly embraced. If you've got a podcast or a book, please put the links into the chat so we can promote you.
We're in the thick of global struggle in the thick of World War III. Medical and scientific battles are one of 12 battle fronts.
The legal battlefront is another one. The propaganda battlefront is another one.
The spiritual war that we're in, as demonstrated by today's memorial service for Charlie Kirk, is another one of the 12 battle fronts.
We're five and a half years into this fight. There's no time to be tired.
We've got, I said five and a half years ago, this is a seven year war initially.
And so stay strong, stay healthy and be up for the fight.
Don't say to yourself, I'm tired. There's no time to be tired.
Science, we know, is 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 our dialogue.
These sessions go for two and a half hours, after which Tom Rodman hosts an optional Telegram video meeting.
We'll hear from our guest presenter today, Dr. James Hill.
For as long as James wishes to speak, followed by Q&A, per tradition, Stephen Frost opens the questioning for the first 15 minutes.
This is a free speech haven, appropriately moderated to keep ideas flowing.
Free speech is our weapon to safeguard human liberties.
The communist playbook starts with limiting free speech.
The totalitarian dictator playbook always starts with limiting free speech.
If something offends you, own it. Only you can offend yourself.
Playing the offence game is an attack on free speech.
We lovingly sidestep the outrage culture and its demands to silence truth.
And the idea that Charlie Kirk deserved to be shot because he said things that made people uncomfortable is outrageous to even suggest.
We here choose love over fear. Fear binds and sickens. Love liberates, heals and inspires.
These twice-weekly gatherings are far from mere talk. They have birthed real-world actions and alliances.
And to that end, I want to challenge each one of you watching live here now, or watching the recording.
What are you doing about the freedom fight? Coming to meetings is wonderful, but what are you doing?
If the only thing you can do is to send $10 a month to Turning Point USA, or to the charity of your choice that's fighting for freedom, then do that, if that's all you can do.
A key tactic in our fight is exposing medical crimes on social media, rallying behind the words crafted by John Rappaport of medical truth now.
This call can unite humanity in a search for accountability, and we demand accountability for the fraud that's been perpetrated on humanity, particularly by the likes of Anthony Fauci.
So we're thrilled to welcome our guest presenter today, Dr James Hill. Let me tell you a little bit about James.
I've got a very short bio, but it's worth sharing.
As they say in the classics, Winston Churchill, I think famously said, I'm sorry my letter is so short, I didn't have time to make it longer.
And so James, and he can tell us more about himself if he chooses, is an American lawyer, scientist and physician.
Residency trained in internal medicine and in radiology in Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School.
He's a founder of startup companies in oncology, vascular surgery and ophthalmology and has served on the board of scientific advisors for several life science companies.
His Substack, and James, if you could put that, your link to the Substack into the chat, please, is hillmd.substack.com.
I've had a look at it. I've subscribed to James's Substack.
So well done on your amazing journey. Wonderful to have you here, Stephen Frost. Thank you for starting this group and for organizing James.
James, you can share your screen anytime. We're in your hands for as long as you like.
Thank you so much, Charles. It's a pleasure to meet you and an honor to speak to all of you.
My journey, and it's great that this group is physicians and others in the health care space and otherwise who are concerned about ethics and the COVID, what I consider to be a bioweapon operation.
In addition, I had in 2020 sort of immediately suspected, well, I'll give you my background a little bit more.
So I'm a physician practicing for about 38 years. As Charles said, my training is in radiology and internal medicine.
And about 12 years after starting practice as a doctor, I went to law school and became a lawyer.
And I focused in the last 26 years or so on intellectual property law and patent law in particular.
So I'm currently splitting my time, probably 60-40 between law and medicine.
And my medical focus now is primarily on research and a couple of startups that I have.
I co-founded an oncology startup a few years ago that sold, it was a cancer treatment with selenomycin that was nanoencapsulated for treating, for killing cancer stem cells.
And we sold that to a company that's had a name change. It's now called Tharimmune.
Unfortunately, that was just a stock deal. There was no cash transferred. So I haven't made money on this yet.
And I also have another oncology startup with the same co-founder and an ophthalmology startup.
So the reason probably I was initially contacted is I've been a huge COVID skeptic from the beginning.
We started in 2020 when we had these measures imposed that lacked informed consent, took away our freedoms, were disguised as health mandates for the general public's welfare, but were just potentially killing us.
And so in September of 2021, I wrote an article on Substack. That's when I first started Substack called 50 Telltale Signs.
COVID is a bioweapon operation. And I can mention some of those here today.
But one of the main reasons is the intense coercion to get vaccinated, regardless of your age, risk, prior COVID infection, your immune status, whether you're pregnant, whether you had autoimmune disease or an immunodeficiency.
In fact, I monitored the CDC's website for about two years into the vaccine rollout, and they kept saying we don't have enough data on autoimmunity and immune deficiencies to know how these vaccines affect that status.
Yet they were recommending to people with autoimmune disease and immunodeficiencies take these vaccines, not to mention the pregnant women and the young children for whom there was no sufficient published data.
So the other issue I noticed was you had these four companies that were supposedly competing, all coming out with the full-length spike protein encoding vaccine, with no thought to going through and removing from the full-length spike protein any dangerous epitopes.
There was a paper that I read by Sorensen et al. out of Norway and England showing a 78% sequence overlap between human proteins and the spike protein.
In fact, there's viral evolutionary papers that discuss how the COVID spike protein is much more homologous to human proteins than to other coronaviruses.
So this appeared to be clearly designed, and I read a lot of papers that showed that this was almost certain.
There was an important paper by Kanduk that looked at the hexapeptides and heptapeptides, six and seven amino acid sequences that were identical to human proteins.
And there were many of them, something like 34 hexapeptides and maybe nine heptapeptides that were in common with humans.
And this paper by Kanduk calculated the odds of that occurring naturally or through chance mutations and selection.
And it was something like in the hundreds of billions to one.
So this appeared very early on clearly to be designed.
It was quite harmful. The spike protein had so many problems with it in terms of causing thrombogenesis, blood clots, oncogenesis, cancer, inflammation, you name it.
So it was shocking that they also designed this vaccine not to have any other antigen targets.
So normally with a multivalent vaccine, you'll have multiple antigens so that there can't be easy immune escape by a virus.
And in this case, it was just that one spike protein.
And nobody thought also to remove dangerous regions aside from the epitopes where antibodies bind, which could lead to autoimmune disease.
There were dangerous regions that were interacting with immune cells and with the clotting system.
And not one company said, let's try to compete by making this safer by removing some parts of the spike protein that's encoded by our vaccines.
So this appeared to be totally controlled by intelligence agencies is sort of the bottom line that I concluded early on.
And the backdrop to this was I had looked into 9-11 a lot when it happened and for a few years tried to study everything I could on it.
You may recall early after 9-11, there was very little information other than what the media was feeding people.
There weren't a lot of extra videos on the Internet yet.
But about a year or two later, you started getting people questioning parts of 9-11.
And so there were some researchers that were sort of instrumental in my shaping a different opinion than the mainstream government narrative, including Judy Wood.
And I don't necessarily accept everything she concluded, but the fact that the towers disintegrated and had very little mass left right after they were gone, that made me believe this was just not a typical pancake collapse from controlled demolition and certainly not due to jet fuel fires.
But I also looked into some other researchers who questioned who's behind this, which intelligence agencies and what are they trying to accomplish.
And I looked at people like Christopher Boleyn, Wyatt Peterson, who has a pretty extensive article on UNZ.com describing which intelligence agency is apparently leading this with the cooperation of NATO, US, NORAD, etc.
So as soon as COVID happened, I could see some of the same patterns.
The fact it was super national.
You had all these countries going along with the lockdown policies.
They all had five phases, red to green or one through five.
So it was coordinated.
And there aren't that many countries or intelligence agencies that can have that kind of effect.
You know, you think about NATO, think about the WHO, think about the United Nations.
And they all seem to be cooperating with this.
But it instantly made me suspect that there was a problem with the vaccine.
I have a friend who's on the board of directors at Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Los Angeles.
And he said to me, I can get the vaccine early.
You know, if you want to get this right away as a health care worker, you can receive this kind of earlier than your place in line.
And I told him, you better be very careful because this is before the vaccine actually launched.
There's something very odd about the way they're promoting this and the way they're demanding that you not get early treatment and that you be forced to take the vaccine.
And it's the only way out of the pandemic.
And you kept hearing people say, no one's safe until everyone's safe.
And specifically, people like Klaus Schwab would say, no one's safe until everyone's vaccinated.
And that's just not a sound immune principle.
You never need 100% vaccination rate to achieve herd immunity, even with the most transmissible virus.
So a lot of these things, you know, were very suspicious.
Also, you had people like Ryan Cole saying that no pathologists were looking in autopsies for the cause of death to check whether it's the COVID vaccine rather than the virus by checking for nucleocapsid and spike protein antigens or antibodies.
So it was very suspicious. Then I saw the whistleblowers that came out, like Melissa Strickler, saying that during the manufacture of the COVID vaccines, they had the windows blacked out at Pfizer and a lot of strange things like that.
So I look to many of you early on in the pandemic or guidance, because I know a lot of you have been objecting from the beginning.
And so I consider many of you to be heroes.
But what I also noticed is as time went on, some of the leaders in the COVID skeptic movement, if you call it that, seem to back down on their positions.
And I suspect it sounded the influence of the intelligence agencies.
And an example would be Dr. Peter McCullough, who I really respect.
Early on, he did an interview with Reiner Fullmich in 2021 where he said, this is bioterrorism.
We're going into phase two of bioterrorism.
And then about two years later, he was asked in another interview, do you think the vaccine harms we're seeing are intentional?
And he said, no, he changed his tune, essentially. He said, no, I don't think it's intentional.
I think it was just vaccine frenzy. People were overzealous and they made a mistake.
So he and others were starting to put out this narrative that it's all a big mistake.
Steve Persh, for example, wrote an article about a year ago saying the COVID vaccines are the biggest medical goof in history.
And Dr. Drew, who I went to medical school with, he was two years ahead of me and I trained with him in internal medicine.
He was my senior resident. He would say, we just have to try to put all this behind us and forgive and let's not have accountability.
Let's not even ask people too much what was going on. Let's just have them say we're going to start afresh and move forward.
And you had this kind of narrative of Scott Atlas, Jay Bhattacharya, Martin Kulldorf.
They appeared before Congress and said, it's not in our interest to point the finger and try to lay blame and find fault.
We should just move forward. So there is this narrative where some of these people were recommending the vaccine heavily, Asimahal Trah.
Early on, I would say Dr. Robert Malone. I mean, he was he may not have been promoting it too heavily, but early on he was I think I just went dark.
Yeah, he seemed to be promoting masks and vaccines. And then later, maybe a couple of years into it, he said, now we've got to be careful about administering this to children.
And so I just was thinking that a lot of the leaders in the vaccine skeptic movement, if you will, might have been sort of controlled oppositions.
And this was Michael Yeeden's observation too, when he wrote on a Substack comment that he found people like Dale Bigtree and so forth to be kind of limited hangouts where they'll say we've got to make vaccines safer.
And in fact, Dale had a goal in one of his projects with ICANN to try to make mandated vaccines safer.
So in other words, we're supposed to presume that vaccine mandates are OK.
We just want to make sure they're safe so that when they force us to take them, we'll be safe rather than attacking the whole principle of vaccine mandates from the outset, which is my position.
I don't think any health mandates where you're forced to administer something into your body, especially by injection, are ever justified.
So and I'm not again, I'm not trying to be critical of these people. A lot of them, again, are doing tremendous work.
I mean, Robert Malone and Steve Kersh are doing amazing work. But there's this general theme that I would sometimes write about on Substack.
Alex Berenson, for example, he did a lot of great work exposing problems with the COVID vaccines, but his position was always they failed.
They were a valiant effort. We tried our best.
Everyone designing the vaccines is just a fantastic person and they just failed.
We'll have to try again. I see this instead as a deliberate bioweapon operation.
And the reason for that is, well, not only these signs that show that we're being lied to constantly from every angle,
but also I had read some articles in, for example, MIT's technology review, maybe 20 years ago,
where the head of the Soviet bioweapons program had come over during the fall of the Berlin Wall to the US and defected here.
And he was giving information on what sort of program they were designing.
And this article basically explained a lot of the bioweapons they were designing in terms of viruses and vaccines were not instant kill agents.
They were, you know, you think of in warfare, people getting anthrax or getting some kind of terrible disease that kills quickly.
But some of the programs this gentleman was talking about them designing in the 1980s were long term kill operations,
such as causing an increase in type two diabetes, an increase in obesity, more Alzheimer's, et cetera.
That just so happens that's what we're seeing throughout the Western world.
We're seeing an increase in all of these chronic diseases. Can we say that it's definitely due to a bioweapon?
No, it's very hard to trace this. But if that's what these countries bioweapons programs were aimed at, and we happen to be seeing this,
we need to be very skeptical about any vaccine program where they say you must take this.
And so, you know, I definitely was resisting this.
And as a result, I was writing a lot on Twitter starting in 2020, and I got taken down for about 16 months from between 2022 and 2023.
And then this was when all the censorship on Twitter and Facebook was occurring under the Biden administration.
And then when Elon bought Twitter, maybe six months later, I got my account back.
But I'm heavily shadow banned. I lost like 200 followers.
I think I had like close to 8000 followers and I dropped down to around 7400 and I got up to 7600.
I'm not motivated to really write on Twitter anymore. I used to put up research papers and findings concerning COVID.
It was all peer reviewed and it was basically counter narrative. It was explaining why these could potentially be dangerous.
And the administration didn't want any of that. So they were banning people. I'm sure many here in this audience were banned as well.
And so now I get very few views. I used to get like a few thousand views on a tweet.
Now I get maybe 50 or 100 if I, you know, over weeks. So it's just effectively putting the brakes on our communicating with others.
Substack is better. It definitely seems not to censor as much.
But there again, I think their search algorithm and their the way they promote certain authors is geared to get some people just a few thousand followers and others, hundreds of thousands.
So but you had, for example, the CDC purposely withholding two years worth of critical data because they didn't want to cause vaccine hesitancy.
You had the FDA giving their reasons for approving the vaccine for ages five to 11, including things like vaccine equity and appeasing parents who are beyond eager to vaccinate their kids.
In other words, it's not based on any kind of clinical endpoint. It was like we're giving it so that we can make sure there's equity across ethnic groups and races.
And we're approving it also because the parents want it, you know, as if the parents don't rely on the physicians and the regulators to make sure things are safe.
It's just these preposterous reasons were put forth.
And then the FDA, of course, asked a federal judge to give it 75 years, more than 75 years until 2097 to release data on the COVID-19 trial data for Pfizer.
It's just a score of other things that made one realize this is not right. And it's a bioweapon operation.
Now, I have relatives who are busy with their families and they don't think about this sort of thing.
And they just hear what the government tells them to do or what their doctor tells them to do in terms of taking vaccines.
And they go ahead with it. And so the difficulty is we hear who know that there's tyranny involved.
We are doing our best to communicate this to people, but it doesn't really sometimes get out to the average citizen.
So, you know, this is a challenge that we all have. And part of this is because we're throttled on social media.
We can't really get things out like we'd like to. But my position is I'm opposed to all of these vaccine mandates.
It's not that I don't believe in vaccines. I shouldn't say believe in. It's not that I don't see utility in vaccines in theory.
But the problem is they can be a vehicle or harm if a malign agency chooses to do that.
So just like, you know, if someone says. Drink all the fluoridated water you can so that you don't get dental caries that can ignore all the evidence of lowered IQ in children.
And now we've got many, many papers showing decreased IQ in children drinking fluoridated water in certain regions.
In fact, the US government came out with a document analyzing those studies and the conclusion was that this is potentially harmful.
And that was suppressed by Rachel Levine when she was HHS secretary during the Biden administration.
She refused to publish it. And so, you know, that the masking is another thing.
You know, these masks that have titanium nanoparticles that can shed, they cause cancer in animals and they also have microplastics that they shed, which have been known to be associated with cardiovascular disease and cardiovascular events, including stroke and MI.
So and they also don't effectively block aerosolized infections or reduce infection rates.
So they don't block the viruses.
You had Bill Gates bribing the legislature in Nigeria, some of the legislators in Nigeria explained to the press that he gave them $10 million to impose vaccine mandates where Nigerians wouldn't be able to get into a grocery store or go to school or get medical care unless they took a vaccine.
This is a direct result of one would think bribes given by the Gates Foundation.
So anyway, these are just examples I'm sure you're all familiar with.
But I think the aggregate of evidence points toward this being a bioweapon operation.
And the average person on the street has no idea about this.
I mean, they just think, you know, whatever the doctor tells me to do, I'll do.
And I got to tell you, as a physician, I get letters from the Board of Medicine all the time, emails, and I got them during COVID.
Pardon me.
And they would say, starting on Monday, you can give these vaccines to six months to 12 year olds, you know, and they were sort of excited about it like this is really going to be helpful.
And in theory, it sounds great if you could protect children from any kind of bad disease.
But the facts were not support that the data that was published did not support that.
So this is what I'm concerned about.
If it's clear that there's an intelligence agency or set of them imposing these kinds of tyrannical measures on us that are harmful, the lockdowns were absolutely harmful.
They result in huge transfers of wealth among certain people and the decimation of thousands of businesses, probably millions across the US, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand.
And it was supposed to think, oh, this is for our own good.
But it absolutely was not.
So once you see this, you have to be suspicious, unfortunately, about every new vaccine mandate.
I'm totally suspicious of everyone that comes out now.
And I hope that R.F.K. Junior can get some of his goals accomplished, the ones that he's been stating for years.
But it seems he's probably hamstrung by certain people in the administration.
You know, he's not able to get through some of the things he wants to do because you have the Senate, you know, Senator Bill Cassidy and others who are heavily tied with the pharma industry, preventing him from touching the vaccine schedule.
For children. And the thing is, it comes probably with good intentions.
I think Senator Bill Cassidy probably thinks we better not change the vaccine schedule for children because children will die, will have a lot of outbreaks and will see diseases.
And that could, in fact, be true.
But the problem is, while you're doing good, an intelligence agency can be slipping in something that's bad.
And that's why we need to address more fully the autism epidemic and other chronic diseases that have been associated with, if not caused by, vaccines.
So I guess I can leave it there.
But that's kind of a brief overview.
Very good. Well, there's lots of issues you've raised very, very insightfully, James.
I'm sure there'll be plenty of people who will have questions for you.
One that I have to that I have for you before Stephen goes for his first set of questions is the question of ownership of IP.
And since you're a patent lawyer, this on the sub stack platform, it's been it's been suggested to me that you have to be careful of that IP ownership of what you publish on.
Substack is allegedly owned by Substack or or your subscribers you don't have access to.
What's the current position with that?
And then the second question maybe is a shorter question or no, someone else will have the answer.
You mentioned the issue of microplastics and the harm they do.
And certainly we've had reference in these meetings to microplastics link to strokes.
OK, so you just touched on it.
Just someone might have some data on that because one of the issues, one of the reasons why industrial hemp is going to be important because hemp can remove plastics from our environment and the question of microplastics of the harm it's causing human beings.
So touch on the microplastics first and then what you know about the IP ownership on the sub stack platform.
Sure. So microplastics are very interesting and they're everywhere.
And there was an autopsy study showing the average American adult has about 10 grams of microplastics in their brain.
We're not sure that as far as we know, that may not be impairing neural function, but it's possible that it could if the total burden gets too high.
You know, in other words, it's intercalated between glial cells and neurons and may not be interfering with synapses, for example.
But just like with beta amyloid, when you get a high enough burden, you can start to see problems.
You know, in other words, like with Alzheimer's, Tau is the initial aggregating protein that seems to cause symptoms and beta amyloid seems to be a kind of a compensatory reaction and not necessarily a bad one early.
And then once it aggregates too much outside cells, it starts to crush neurons and prevent axonal transport.
So the same thing could be true of microplastics.
There was a study and I published on sub stack maybe about a year ago that associated microplastics with.
Because it was found in carotid biopsies.
So they took patients who had strokes and they had an I think they did a cohort series prospective where they followed a whole bunch of people who got strokes.
And then they did biopsies on the carotid and they found I think it was about I believe 3.5 or 3.7 fold risk of having a thrombotic stroke if you have microplastics in your carotid artery.
And so, you know, those who.
Yeah, it was when they had other biopsies done, I guess they probably compared it to a group who had biopsies not for stroke.
And that's a rare group that would have that.
But they somehow determined there was an increased risk.
Now it's an association we don't know necessarily that it's causal, but it seems to be possible.
And they're also finding it in coronary arterial occlusions.
So, you know, imagine it's probably getting into under the endothelial cells like cholesterol plaques do and maybe causing problems in a similar way and possibly inducing thrombosis.
You know, if you get a like a broken region of the endothelium, either due to microplastics or cholesterol plaques, it can induce a clot, which can be the final coup de grace when you get a myocardial infarction or a thrombotic stroke.
But that latter statement is a bit speculative regarding microplastics.
I don't think we know enough for sure, but there is an association for sure between microplastics and cardiovascular events, including stroke.
On the SUBSTAC, when I first started it about five years ago almost, there was a statement that the copyright in all articles remains with the author.
They're not taking it from the author.
Now, I don't know if they've changed that policy.
I suspect if they did change it, you'd see a lot of people migrating away because you've got some big authors there, Barry Wise and Alex Berenson, and they don't want to surrender their copyright to someone else who can monetize it and they can't.
So the last I read, which again is almost five years ago, was the copyright would be retained by the author of each article.
So I hope that's still true.
And I have not heard anything since.
And what about your ability to access your subscribers other than through that platform?
If you're thrown off SUBSTAC, do you know who your tribe is?
That's a good question.
That's a good question. If you're thrown off, they might keep those.
Right now we have access to the email addresses of all the subscribers, so we could email them.
And you can download it, I believe. If you wanted to get a copy, I think you can download it onto an Excel spreadsheet.
But if they threw you off for some reason that they gave, like you've breached their terms of service, they may not give you access to it.
So all right. So my recommendation then that's interesting because I've been resisting going onto SUBSTAC for that reason.
So any of you on the SUBSTAC platform, if you can download the emails, please do. You must have control of your email addresses.
You cannot rely on any platform.
So just download it methodically once a month. Get them there so you can communicate with those people who love you, James.
So there you are. There's a piece of suggestion. All right.
So the first gets the next 15 minutes. Stephen, well done for getting James here. Show us your face.
Oh, sorry. I thought I had shown it. Well, I did show it. Yeah.
You did.
Yeah. So I'm sorry about that. And James, it's a real honor to have you speak to us.
I just listened to you. And it's just so obvious to me that you have enormous authenticity.
And and and and it seems obvious also to me that you couldn't tell a lie if you tried.
I don't know how I know, but I just know. And he's a lawyer, Stephen. He's a lawyer.
Yeah. But I think what's so brilliant about you and your presentation tonight is that you are by nature a scientist as well as a medical doctor.
But that you're so you're happy to go into the detail of the science, which I'm not really interested in.
I like the big picture stuff, but you're very good at big picture as well.
So you can see that because they couldn't satisfy you over 9 11, you knew they were lying to you and the people about that.
You could see the same thing going on in 2020 with Covid.
I understand that because that's exactly how I operate. But the unusual thing about you, James, and you're probably not aware of it, is that it's not very common for people who are good with science as you are.
You know, there's quotes and studies here, there and everywhere. Great memory for all these authors as well.
And then understand the ethics of medicine, of the practice of medicine, the absolutely necessary necessity of having of being very careful about the ethics, as indeed the American prosecutors illustrated that the Nuremberg trials, the doctor's trial in particular.
They were assigned the doctor's trial, and that was a huge responsibility because what they were investigating, what the court, the case was about was for the doctors, the doctors trial.
And seven doctors were hanged on the 2nd of June 1948 for human medical experimentation. They were found guilty of human, essentially human medical experimentation.
And out of that verdict, as I understand it, the American prosecutors, to their great credit, and this should be highlighted in America, I think, they made sure that the Nuremberg Code emerged out of that.
And that was a brilliant document. And it was intentionally designed so that it was indirigible and nobody could negate it in the future for obvious reasons.
But what did they do? They buried it in the Helsinki agreements and goodness knows what else. And now everybody's telling me, but when I was saying in 2020, 2021, the Nuremberg Code applies here.
There was no informed consent for any of these measures, including the lockdowns. And it was absolutely outrageous that they did what they did. And we have to hold these people to account.
But it was how I knew was because of the Nuremberg Code. And yet when I was telling my colleagues about the Nuremberg Code, they said it doesn't apply in the United States or France or Italy, whatever, you know, of course it applies.
That was the intention of it. And I think it's very important that we highlight the Nuremberg Code and that American prosecutors were the ones responsible for its production.
And so I think that would go down very well with Trump.
He would give him a get out. And, you know, we could say as doctors, me in the UK, you in the US, and we're both radiologists, by the way.
That's pretty amazing. So we could say that every doctor in the world should have known what was in the Nuremberg Code, but didn't.
They should have known about informed consent. And they should also have known that there was no way that we could obtain informed consent as doctors because we didn't know what was in the vaccines and certainly not in all the vaccines from all the companies.
And so and actually that was one.
If you could just comment maybe on bits of that, I don't know what you whatever you think is most important.
Sure. Thank you, Stephen. With regard to the Nuremberg Code, it's a very important document. But interestingly, it's considered equivalent to what they call model laws.
Like the American Bar Association will come up with model rules which states and bar associations can adopt or choose not to.
Another example is the Uniform Trade Secret Act. It's a document formed by lawyers who've scoured the literature on trade secret cases and come up with a set of rules that everyone should abide by.
But it's up to the individual states here in the US to adopt forms of them. So most states, virtually all states, sorry, all states have some trade secret law.
Many of them have adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act in whole or in part.
So similarly with the Nuremberg Code, what has to happen is the federal government and the states have to adopt the portions of that that they wish to.
And fortunately, most states, as I understand it, do have informed consent laws. They're written into statute.
But the Nuremberg Code itself is not binding law of itself.
So you have to have a mirroring statute in the federal voter regulations or in the state law.
So you're right. The lack of informed consent by forcing people to take vaccines without understanding what the side effects were, which apparently the makers say they didn't know either.
But also we found out a lot of the known effects were hidden and censored.
And Naomi Wolf would say deliberately so from the Pfizer vaccine. A lot of the deaths were hidden.
This is a violation of all these state laws that require informed consent.
But no prosecutors have done anything about it.
You know, I'm glad that Dr. Kirk Moore was let off by Pam Bondi, but he was getting ready to have a terrible penalty imposed on him for, you know, not giving COVID vaccines to his patients and instead giving them a substitute and producing vaccine cards that said they were vaccinated with COVID vaccines when he was actually protecting them.
So in a sense, he was acting sort of like Schindler during the Holocaust, trying to save people.
And fortunately, Trump and Bondi let him off.
But if we were still under the Biden administration, I don't think that would have been his fate.
And it's very unfortunate because he and we are just trying to do no harm and also trying to get adequate information to provide informed consent.
But those behind the vaccine bioweapon operation, I would submit, don't care about informed consent.
They want you to just take it and shut up and or you don't get to go to your job or go to school.
So I guess that's my main comment on Nuremberg.
So most of the doctors I was talking to in 2020 and 2021 and 2022 had never read the Nuremberg Code.
So when I sent it to them and they saw that informed consent was the first of the 10 points which are specifically raised by the Nuremberg Code.
And as I understood it, the American prosecutors intended that the Nuremberg Code would be indigestible so that human medical experimentation was absolutely forbidden in the future.
But of course, these miscreants had other ideas and they, in my opinion, you know, what was intended to be indigestible for very good reasons became dispensable and was buried in whatever the Helsinki Code, you know.
So, but if you read it carefully, the Nuremberg Code is very well formulated.
It's extremely well phrased. It's quite short.
And you can see that the most important thing is informed consent.
But there are other things and we're talking about human medical experimentation here, which is exactly what was going on in 2020, of course.
So can I ask you one thing that's always puzzled me and I haven't had a straight answer on this question.
How could we possibly, I'm not accusing you, James, of not doing your homework or anything.
I'm just wondering why people don't understand this.
So I was arguing in 2020, 2021, that informed consent was impossible to obtain by any doctor in the world because he or she had no idea what was in these shots and certainly not what was in all of them from all the different companies.
So I had people saying, talking about what was in the shots, you know, like you were talking about, like protein and all the rest of it, you know.
Why didn't they pay greater attention to this and that?
And I asked some people who shall remain nameless what, why, where were they getting the information from?
And so eventually I realized that I was right that they were getting the information from the very people who were lying to us on so many other things.
So my thought was, why are we trusting what they're saying?
If they get a chance, they'll lead us the wrong way and hide the most dangerous thing or whatever.
So I just wondered, you were talking about the spike protein and the various things.
I'm not criticizing in any way, James.
I tried to look for people's hearts and whether it's in the right place and yours definitely is.
But I just was a little bit mystified as to why, how you could be so certain that what they said was in this shots was in the shots.
And I know even in California and I know you've I think you're at the Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Los Angeles where I worked as a porter when I was 19.
Not currently, but I've had rotations through there.
Yeah, but you're a very well qualified American doctor.
I know that because you qualify the MGH and Harvard.
My son is there. Well, not as a doctor, he's a physicist.
So anyway, now I've forgotten what I was going to say.
Oh, yes. So I respect you as a scientist.
I think you're always searching for the truth, but sometimes even the very best get misled.
You know, their mind forgets a plant, if you like, you know, or the non exist.
So how did you know what was in the shots when you didn't have access to microscopes and all the rest of it?
So, Stephen, I didn't fully know what was in the shots.
My point about the spike protein was if you accept their narrative that this DNA or sorry, RNA is going to encode the spike protein.
This is what the government said. This is what all the vaccine companies said.
It was to me evidence of a bio weapon operation that four of the vaccine companies were all in agreement that they're not going to remove any dangerous epitopes or regions of the protein that in the published literature show blood clots, amyloid aggregation,
Rheon disease, cancer causing.
So the literature showing that these regions of the spike protein are causing tremendous disease and all these companies are saying by their own admission, we're all going to put the full length spike protein in.
In what sense are they competing? How could one company say we're going to get a bigger market share for the COVID vaccine?
I understand that, but the point I'm making, Jim, the point I'm trying to make.
Yeah, sorry.
The point I'm trying to make is how do you so you're saying that they were putting these ridiculous, essentially ridiculous ideas forward and forgetting to do the obvious on the information they supply.
The point I'm trying to make is how could the individual doctors rely on any information in a time of mass treason, as far as I can see, all over the world and propaganda and lies everywhere.
Why wasn't it a lie, for example, that what they were saying that they were what they were saying was in the, you know, leading people astray, if you like, and designedly so.
I don't know if you understand what I mean. I just couldn't understand how the scientists were so kind of into what was in talking about the spike protein lipid nanoparticle and all the rest of it.
And the only way they knew was because they had believed what they were told by the very people who were torturing everybody.
Absolutely. And, Stephen, what I argued in around 2020, 2021 was that if what they're saying is true, that these are lipid nanoparticles.
And we know at least that part's true. There are lipid nanoparticles. A lot of scientists have subsequently seen that they are.
But their distribution around the body is massive. It's not confined to the deltoid muscle in the arm.
It goes to the brain, the ovaries, it accumulates in the adrenals and so forth. So that's just the carrier part.
But if you take what the vaccine companies are telling you is true, they're not telling you how long the mRNA or the modified RNA persists in the body.
So that was the reason I was saying we shouldn't accept these vaccines from the beginning.
And even to some extent, before they were launched, I put some things on Twitter saying if these things really encode the spike protein full length as they claim they will, this is going to be a problem for autoimmunity at least.
And so when they came out, everyone was just saying, rah, rah, let's go forward.
No one was saying how long the spike protein that's encoded would persist if it's encoded at all.
In other words, they could be lying about all of this. But assuming what they're saying is true, they're still providing inadequate information.
They're still providing information that indicates harm is likely to result.
So that's the funny thing about this. Not only were they lying about a lot of things.
I mean, people have claimed they found heavy metals in there.
I mean, there's a German working group that Dr. Mark Trosi has posted on starting a couple of years ago, finding all kinds of high concentrations of cadmium, lead, beryllium, you know, platinum, all kinds of heavy metals that are dangerous and have no place in the human body.
They don't participate in any enzymatic reactions or anything.
So we already knew that they were causing harm.
But even if we took at face value what the manufacturers and the government were telling us, they're still with evident harm because it's like you're saying you're going to encode the full-leg spike protein, despite the fact that these papers say it's going to do all this harm and you're not taking out any dangerous regions.
And you're right. We don't know for sure if that's what they were doing.
So there was Mike Adams has done an analysis of some vaccine vials a couple of years ago where he said there's no phosphate in any of them, meaning there's no mRNA.
So if they're mRNA vaccine vials, you should find some phosphate when you do an elemental analysis by mass spectroscopy.
And he said there was no phosphate. So at least the vials he found had something in them, but it was not modified RNA.
So there's lies galore and it's very hard to know what to think.
So my posture has been resist this. Don't take these vaccines. Get them off the market.
And that's been my posture pretty much from the beginning.
At first I was saying, well, if everyone's saying this is safe, including the CDC director and the FDA panels, could I be mistaken?
But yet the literature was screaming that these things were going to be harmful by implication.
So, yes, I suppose what I'm saying, James, just so that you understand, I'm not doing this for fun.
So you had very sophisticated reasons for thinking that there was something very much amiss.
But what I'm saying is that we're both medical doctors and there was still a lack of informed consent, which we both knew about.
So why not call out the informed consent and then everything falls into place?
Oh, absolutely. That was definitely a different.
Another angle is that all of these mandates for vaccines, for masks, for lockdowns, there's no informed consent.
In other words, when they say we're going to lock you down, that's a medical intervention.
And they're not telling you what the effects are. Absolutely.
Stunting learning in children and causing massive economic damage and psychological damages, increasing suicides, increasing child abuse, all these things.
No informed consent on that either. So you're right. That's another important theme.
But it gives us huge credibility when talking to if we got a chance to speak to Trump personally, you know, and people we trust around him.
It gives us huge credibility because we can actually point to the very thing that was missing most, exactly what was encased, encoded in the Nuremberg Code.
And guess who was responsible for the Nuremberg Code? American prosecutors.
Right. Yeah. And you'll find that in all the state laws as well.
In fact, I think Latopo in Florida said at one point a few years ago, he wanted to prosecute some people and maybe the vaccine companies for lying.
And somehow that got just pushed aside and it never went forward.
But he was aware, you know, the Surgeon General of Florida, that these things are not what they were stated to be.
And people did not have informed consent.
And in fact, that's, as I understand it, Latopo's primary reason for ending Florida childhood vaccine mandates a couple of weeks ago is that there's just no informed consent.
We don't know what these things do. No one has come out and done a thorough, you know, we're just told they don't cause autism.
But then when you do these depositions of the vaccine scientists, they say, well, I don't really know that. I didn't really analyze this, you know.
So it's nobody has analyzed any of these shots and certainly not all the patches.
Absolutely. We can't assure patients that any of them are safe.
And that's also true of the damn drugs which are produced by the very same people.
Yes. Another important thing that not that many people talk about is not only were the batches found to have differential toxicities by Craig Particouper and Sasha Latopova and Team Enigma.
But if you look at the Pfizer vaccine contracts with the EU and with the US, there's a section in there saying the vaccine shall not be serialized.
Now, there's a law in the US that requires all cartons or vials for drugs to have a barcode.
So you can identify pretty much individual doses or small units of doses rather than just batches, which could have millions of vials on them.
And that was violated. It was redacted in the contracts.
But someone in Italy released those contracts unredacted on the Internet and it says the vaccines will not be serialized.
So the EU and the US government agreed to hide serial numbers so they couldn't be authenticated.
They couldn't be traced on an individual dose or vial basis.
So usually you'll see a barcode on all cartons of vaccine vials. You're supposed to.
That's the US law. But now they're not doing that for COVID vaccines.
That's another indicator that this is a bioweapon operation I would submit.
Yes. So I think we'll let.
Shall we take some questions? Is Charles still there? It's five o'clock in the morning.
No, I'm here.
And then I can come back later maybe.
That's very good, Stephen. That's 16, 17 minutes already. That's good.
By the way, Stephen, I'm getting very excited. You know why?
Because on the 5th of October, my meetings, instead of starting at 5 a.m., will be starting in Melbourne at 6 a.m.
Yes. And then a couple of weeks later it will be 7 a.m.
Is it 7 a.m.? I'm getting excited.
All right. Thank you, Stephen. Jerry is our favorite Irish doctor here, James.
I happen to be the only Irish doctor, which makes it very easy for me to be the favorite doctor.
Hiya, James. I am just to fit you in, I'm a GP from Ireland who was suspended four and a half years ago from the medical register for my refusal to go along with the hoax of COVID pathogenicity.
I just refused to mask or refuse to social distance or refuse to go along with the whole charade.
And I was suspended from the medical register temporarily for four and a half years.
But I'm thrilled to hear you talk and call out people for changing their stances.
You know, it takes a degree of bravery and it takes a degree of, well, honesty and courage.
And it's great to hear you actually calling people out and saying you seem to have changed your tune. Why is that?
So first of all, I applaud you for that. The second thing, like you, I was suspended from Twitter rather.
Yeah, it was from Twitter then for eight months in 2020 until most came along.
But and I came back and I have 54,000 followers. Sorry.
Yeah, I have 54,000 followers on Twitter, but I get a couple of hundred replies or, you know,
acknowledgments, maybe a couple of thousand up to three or four thousand.
Well, with 54,000 followers, you would imagine that you would get a lot more unless I boost it.
And I boost, I often boost in which in effect turns my tweets into an ad.
But again, I firmly believe that there is and it's not just an algorithm.
I think there's somebody there watching me in my paranoia.
And I believe I'm probably too dangerous because when I put up tweets, they are my own.
I write my own. I don't copy and paste.
I'm not one of those people that's copy and pasting something else.
So in effect, I'm manufacturing or creating my own thing.
So I do believe that like you, I am shadow banned.
But, you know, to get to the idea, you're talking to a bio weapon.
I as a GP who worked for 40 years would say that initially, of course, the vaccine is a bio weapon.
There's absolutely no doubt.
But the the the the gene therapy masquerading as a vaccine is a bio weapon.
But in reality, it started out as a psychological operation.
I know because I as a GP in the community for 40 years and, you know, the the hallmark of expertise is pattern recognition.
And after 40 years, no matter how dumb you are, you're going to get pattern recognition.
And I recognize there was no pattern or no recognition of a viral, a serious viral pathogenic virus in the community in 2020.
And I said that and I said to everybody.
And one of the red flags is that they didn't contradict me.
The Irish College of General Practitioners, who in effect whose job it was to keep my my thinking error free, didn't correct me.
And that obviously said, yes, there's something there.
So I say it's great to hear you calling out to be believing about a charity and that, you know, who with his barring to Great Barrington declaration,
I signed with reservations because he was saying there was a virus there and I was saying there is nothing there.
There is no pathogenic virus in my community.
Absolutely, there was there was no virus of any pathogenicity in my community.
And I refuse to do the PCR test because I don't my due diligence.
And again, it goes back to your idea of how do you how do you find these things out?
Steve was saying, well, how do you find out? You do your due diligence.
You actually read up on the PCR test and you realize that it is not it is not useful or in any way can it diagnose the existence of a disease state.
So that's what I did in March, April, May of 2020 and refused to do.
I got a PCR test done on nobody.
So, you know, that is where we run in parallel, except that I as a GP would have a different perspective, perhaps as you do, you know, as for informed consent.
Of course, there was no informed consent because informed consent requires information.
That's the nature of informed consent. And we had no information.
The assistant chief medical officer in Ireland came at the launch of the virus of the vaccine and told us that they knew nothing about it.
It's on record that the chief medical officer, Ronan Cleaner, assistant chief medical officer, did not know anything about the virus.
His words were, the only we do know is that 64 percent of people say that they implicitly trust their GP and we want you guys to get behind it.
But they knew nothing about it. So the absence of information informed consent is it's an oxymoron.
Yeah, very good, Gerry. Very good on informed consent.
That is the reality. Sorry, I know I'm expected to ask you questions, but it's as I've been around the business for too long.
So, as I say, I think I'll just leave it at that.
But I just want to congratulate you. And I'm thrilled to hear you being prepared to call out people, particularly people.
I would say that we, every doctor in the world, had our major biggest diagnostic conundrum or dilemma in 2020.
And 99.9 percent of them failed. They didn't diagnose.
Pardon? Terrible failure rate, I agree, but it was 99.99.
They just failed. You know, they failed a bigger exam than the final med.
Absolutely. Catastrophically, they failed it.
Yeah. And they're all trying to jump on the bandwagon.
I'm fortunate in that from 2020, I was writing to the ICGP. I was writing to the Department of Health.
I was writing to everybody. And the High Court, the Irish High Court, have been good enough to officially register those emails.
So I can't change my story. But they can't have it failed.
Gerry, we will move on. But could you tell us whatever you can at the moment and tell James, because James referred to Kirk Moore, whose case against him by the government was stopped.
What's happening? Just give us a one minute of where you're at with your case that's been dropped by the Irish Medical Council.
Well, I was brought before the Irish Medical Council and before the High Court on the basis of one complaint where I was telling the truth to a patient.
I told him it was a con and a hoax. The pathogenicity. I wouldn't say there was no virus. I was saying that the virus had no pathogenicity of any relevance.
And this guy then decided that after four years, he withdrew his complaint.
The Medical Council were thrilled that he withdrew his complaint because that meant that they didn't bring me into court.
So they just turned around and said, yeah, we're dropping the complaint out four and a half years in effect.
I lost my practice. I lost my staff. I lost my I sold my clinic. Everything was gone.
And, you know, fairly massive financial loss to me.
I was fortunate insofar as I had had pensions and that that I could fall back on.
But overall, so now they're in a situation where I'm kind of left in the doldrums.
And in consultation with Charles, we've had some in-depth discussions on that.
We are thinking I am. Charles is not.
Even though I have no doubt that he would happily participate in any compensation I might get, you know, he'd be lucky.
Unless you've got a contract, Charles, you know, I'm not aware of my having signed any contract.
I'm coming back to I'm coming back to Ireland in February, Jerry.
I like the subtracting Charles, you know, unless you've got it in writing.
But what we hope to actually sue some members of the Medical Council for the lack of due diligence.
Yeah, you need to do that, Jerry. Very important.
Yeah, well, that's that. Unfortunately, I they won't give me my DSARS.
They won't give me my my information.
And I believe that there's some smoking gun there.
Well, you have the right size information. Oh, maybe it's different in Ireland.
But you've got the equivalent of GDPR, haven't you?
So you can do a subject.
Hang on, Stephen. It's all been done, you know.
All right. Hang on, Stephen. Anyway, thanks, James. Thanks for being there.
I started the theory.
The reason why I wanted you to share that, Stephen, is not for Stephen, for you to analyze legal stuff, because it's complex.
But perhaps James might have an insight into the wrongful attacks on doctors in the US system, James.
Sure. Well, Jerry, thanks for telling your story.
It's a pleasure meeting you.
And I'm sorry to hear what happened to your practice and what the board did to you in the US.
In the US, there's this concept of sovereign immunity where a lot of government agencies are immune from harms caused by actions that they undertake in their official duties, which is unfortunate in many cases.
Now, the boards tend to, in some cases, be tied to the government, but in some cases they are private.
But typically they're related to the state government.
And so they will often, if you say you didn't do due diligence when you prosecuted me and when you did X, Y, and Z, they'll often claim sovereign immunity.
What that usually does, though, is that applies more to the individual members.
So if you try to say the board chairman and the individual people on the panel who went after me, I'm going to sue them personally, they're usually protected by sovereign immunity in the US.
But you can often go after the board itself as an entity and say what you did was unfair.
You didn't gather sufficient evidence.
You didn't analyze it properly.
And you might be able to get damages from the board itself.
There are cases like that.
But going after the individual members, which many people would love to do, is often met with a defense of sovereign immunity where, hey, we were just doing what our official duties were, so you can't go after us.
It's the same reason.
Oh, go ahead.
My understanding of it, and I've put some research into it, that remarkably they don't have an implied immunity or a sovereign immunity in Ireland.
And in fact, they are under, they are obliged to go along the medical council guidelines.
And the medical council, that is where it seems to come back to the, so my chances of taking on the medical council per se are less hopeful than me taking on the medical members of the medical council.
The non-medical members can actually get away with the concept that they were following medical advice.
The medical members of the medical council are obliged to treat, to have done their due diligence on everything I said and everything I do.
So what they have to prove is that they had done their due diligence.
If they had not done their due diligence in 2021, obviously it's only a one year gap between March of 21, March of 21 when they suspended me.
Those people have to be able to prove that they had done their due diligence.
And if they had done their due diligence, they would have said to the president of the High Court that I was right on quite a number of points.
If they didn't do that and they had done their due diligence, then they're in a situation where it's a malicious prosecution.
So if they withheld exculpatory evidence on me from the president of the High Court, it then turns into the areas of malicious prosecution, given that I've had massive financial loss and psychological loss and whatever.
So it's an interesting case. And the concept of whether I win or lose is probably not as important as actually exposing it.
Jerry, can I just say one thing? Jerry, you should bring the case anyway so that you change public opinion when they watch the other case.
You could bring people like Kirk Moore and our friend today, James Hill, as expert witnesses.
And they would be gobsmacked. They wouldn't know how to counter Kirk Moore and James Hill.
I don't think I'd bring Kirk Moore quite frankly. He's a cosmetic surgeon who went into, we had him on here and he was destitute and went into giving, signing on to give the vaccines, because it's clinical close down.
So I've got certain views on that. But the, no, I would bring on Mike Eden and I would bring on, yeah, I've been in contact with, well, probably a dozen high class witnesses.
And the likes of you, James, may well be dragged in to try and give, you know, to substantiate my case. But as Stephen says, it's a matter, there are two courts.
There's the court, the legal court, but then it's the court of public opinion.
And if we can actually get this out into the court of public opinion, because it is opening up.
The truth is coming out. The walls, the dam of dishonesty is breaking and we are beginning to seep around it.
So, you know, yeah, I do intend to take the case and it may well cost me a quarter of a million.
But at the end of the day, I do intend to take the case.
It sounds like you have a good case.
I think I have. So does Charles.
Very important, Jerry. Very well paid for his work, you know.
Jerry, you're saying about they should have done their due diligence. They can't have done their due diligence because there was no informed consent.
Oh, well, no, no, we're talking about a different thing. We're talking about the pathogenicity of the virus.
Oh, right. OK. Well, dying like this is one step ahead of that.
And this is what I keep coming back to that we must we cannot let them away with the initial psychological operation of shoving sticks up people's noses to terrify them and masking and social distancing and all that.
That is the primary crime from a general practice point of view.
Yes, there was no informed consent for that either precisely.
Yeah, of course. That that is an experiment as well. Yes, that is an experiment under the concept of experiments and under the concept of the new and big Nuremberg code that the actual masking social distancing was in itself a an experiment.
Yes, because it's the first time unprecedented. It had never been done in the history of medicine before.
So, again, yes, you're dead right, Stephen. That is, you know, but I think when we talk about informed consent, we are generally talking about the administration of the gene therapy masquerading as a vaccine.
Yes, but also these medical measures. They were absolutely.
Yeah, so I think you've got a great case, Jerry, if you've got the, the, the energy and the courage to bring a case like that. I think it would do fantastically well with public with the public.
Oh, well, we do intend to and I say, Charles and I have been in discussion on this and he regularly rings me about half seven to bloody morning you know to tell me about things.
It is bright ideas. Charles wakes up with an idea and then decides, or rather, he's going to bed with an idea and he decides to come to share with me and someone I actually are.
Thank you.
Me like that Jerry is mean like that.
He is a horrible person, horrible person.
Okay.
On we go. Julie. Thank you, Jerry.
Hello, everybody. Thank you for being here. Dr. Hill.
Julie three, I'm out in Northern California, and I'm probably the one health care provider on this entire call that actually bought the lies. So I was fully bamboozled.
I was a patient advocate out here in Chico, California, and low medical center.
And not only did I take the shots, but I actually worked at the mass vaccination clinics, passing out syringes to nurses to give the shot.
So a lot of PTSD I have from, you know, basically watching 56,000 members of my community personally get injected with the poison and my two shots of Moderna left me with the lesion on the brain.
Microweangipathy, tinnitus, both my retinas detached.
I've had five eye surgeries. It's a tragedy.
My mom died from four shots and then I had to get fired from this beloved job of being a patient ambassador because they wanted me to take a booster.
And by that point, I knew I was poisoned.
So it's just I want people locked up and I've got enough evidence here locally grassroots, butte County to again get some people criminally charged.
I'm just looking for lawyers.
But anyway, that's not that's another here or there.
So and then so I've got two questions.
So because now I spent the last three and a half years fighting mad pissed off.
I want, you know, again, I got all this evidence and research and knowledge and I traveled the state with Ronald DeFons, Jr.
So August the 9th, I was hospitalized with severe anemia.
I, you know, again, I'm not one to want to walk into this hospital ever again.
I drive by it and I have a basically want to have a meltdown.
But my hemoglobin dropped to 2.4 and I had no choice.
So I get admitted and now I'm hooked up to six bags of transfused blood.
And now two weeks later, I've got a spike antibody test that's positive at 16,664.
I basically given myself a freaking booster by getting transfused blood.
So I believe our blood supplies are tainted.
Can you give any of your input on do you believe our blood supplies are tainted?
And is there anything people can kind of do to preemptively get ready for that?
And I have a second question when you're done with that.
Sure. That's a great question.
I'm so sorry to hear what happened to you. And yeah, it's awful.
But so many people were deceived and suffered greatly.
And sorry about your mother as well.
With regard to the blood supply, I need to look at the latest on this.
For the longest time, the Red Cross said it doesn't matter whether someone's vaccinated.
We don't care if they have circulating spike protein or other things.
We're just going to go ahead and take their blood and transfuse it.
But it is a problem to the extent that you get vaccinated blood that has a lot of spike protein,
to the extent that it's, you know, depending on what kind of fragment you're getting
or whether you're getting the whole length.
A lot of people have fragments of it, which can still be pathogenic.
And I need to look at what the current status of that policy is,
because the last I looked about a year ago, they were saying,
we're still going to continue to not screen for that.
Now, you know, there are ways of taking that out of your blood through therapeutic plasma exchange,
which is a little bit, you know, it's involved because you have to actually remove your plasma,
including all those proteins, and then replace it with albumin, which is clean.
And there's no spike protein there.
There's another way of doing it, which is available in the UK,
where it's basically an adsorbent column where they don't remove your plasma,
but they run it past a resin column that binds to a lot of cytokines, spike protein, things like that.
It also removes microplastics, which is very interesting.
Yeah, I have a patent client, actually.
The name of the company is called Marker AG, and they have a clinic in London
that just opened up about a year ago, and it's doing very well.
And so it has a CE mark. It doesn't have FDA approval yet here.
It has emergency use authorization for COVID, interestingly.
They were using this column in the ICU for treating COVID sepsis, and they were improving outcomes.
So they got EUA from the FDA for this in the US.
They don't have full approval, though, here yet, but in London,
and they're opening up more clinics, too, in Asia and the EU, or in Europe, including the UK.
They're basically just taking your blood, passing it, whole blood, through it.
It's binding some of these proteins, many of them unwanted, a few of them you might want.
It does not bind albumin significantly.
So your main serum protein, which is albumin, keeps going through and goes back into your bloodstream.
But a lot of people report that they feel much better.
People who have had COVID shot either have TPE, the Therapeutic Plasma Exchange.
Here in the States, you can get that. You just need a physician to authorize it.
The problem is it's got potential risks.
So you have to be sort of in, you have to tell the physician you're in bad shape.
I've had all these vaccines. I had this transfusion, and I feel sick, and I've got fatigue, etc.
If your symptoms are sufficient, you can get TPE here in the US.
But it's a risk-benefit analysis.
So over in the UK, anyone could just walk in in the London shop where they do this.
That's marker AG's column. I think they call it Clarify Clinics.
So you look up on the Internet, Clarify Clinics.
And people are reporting that after the COVID vaccine, they feel better.
And this is anecdotal, right? This is not a published study to my knowledge yet.
But they're feeling better after they get their plasma run through this column to remove some of these excess proteins.
That's fascinating.
So right now I've got Dr. Thorpe, Dr. James Thorpe kind of helping me with and giving me the protocols, right?
More of the supplements to take.
So I'm going to get my blood retested here in a few weeks, kind of see if that stuff works.
But yeah, that's fascinating. I'd never heard of any of that stuff.
And yeah, if I go to the UK, Stephen, I'm staying at your house just so be prepared for that.
So here's my second question. So the CDC, right?
We have this ACIP committee that met on Thursday and Friday and all high hopes.
I mean, seriously, for them to do the right thing.
And specific to the to the COVID vaccine discussion on Friday and Dr. Reza Falevi, I love I adore him and Dr.
Mahoon and we had some really good fighters on that committee on Friday, went through this whole, you know,
six hour meeting about the harms of this bio weapon COVID shot clearly spelled out, laid out.
And then they basically at the end of the meeting, I think failed miserably when all they did was say,
well, if you're over 65, you need to get you know, you use individual decision making or shared clinical,
whatever that all meant. And then under 65 do the same.
But, you know, just look at more risk reward. I'm like, what did they just do?
Nothing. And the only the only vote that we had that had some legs to it was the prescription vote, right?
That because of all these harms that we just laid out going forward, if you want to get your COVID vaccine,
get a prescription. And the vote came down six, six tie.
And Dr. Koldorf said no, because he was the tying vote.
I'm like, oh, my God, that was like me and Albert Benavides were going nuts.
It was like our one shot at forcing people with kids to go to a doctor and get a prescription and then go into the pharmacy and get the shot.
It was really sad. It was a sad state.
And so what is your thoughts on this ACIP committee and what came down?
Because a lot of people like a Steve Kersh are celebrating like we don't have universal, you know, COVID recommendations.
Well, yeah, but they're still available. I'm in California where Newsom just signed AB 144, making us a vaccine sanctuary state.
He locked in vaccine guidelines to before Trump because he's so, you know, politically incorrect.
So whatever. But yeah. So what are your thoughts on the CDC?
And do we have any hope that they're just going to say stop the dang shots?
Well, great question. I just saw the news reports.
I haven't read the official proceedings from that.
But my understanding is, as you mentioned, they haven't taken them off the market and they're not even close to that.
But I suppose Steve Kersh is right that if you get an incremental victory, it's better than nothing.
But yeah, it's we're far from that because of, I guess, the influence of the pharma companies.
You know, it's funny, Koldorf was for a long time suggesting that the vaccines were still effective for the elderly.
And I've seen a lot of deaths, though, after the shot in the elderly.
And it's hard to ascribe to that. People will say, well, it's just the other conditions.
And, you know, and that's the brilliance, if you will, kind of the sick brilliance of this operation is that they can kill people without anyone being able to ascribe it to the vaccine necessarily.
They'll say, oh, that person just had a lot of comorbidities or they were elderly or they had COVID super infection despite the shot.
And of course, it makes you more susceptible to COVID when you've had the shot.
Yeah, my sister just texted me yesterday and said she's on her third bout of COVID.
And unfortunately, I don't know whether she got the vaccine.
I was telling all my family members not to get it.
But I have a couple of family members that kind of just gravitate toward, you know, I don't talk to them as much.
And they're sort of gravitating toward the recommendations of in the media.
So, yeah, it's it's a shame.
But, yeah, I don't have a great.
It's you know, it is a tragedy.
My family was destroyed because when my mom died, I knew it was a vaccine healthy woman.
Right. Yes, she was 80, but she was completely healthy.
One hundred and twenty pounds, no underlying conditions, no nothing wrong with her.
She went on vacation. Her heart stopped after and she had four shots.
And that was the only vaccine she ever took in her entire lifetime.
And I knew and I was screaming at the pathologist.
You got to check for her blood. Right.
And Wyoming state pathologists still has her blood samples waiting for some test that I can send to him and, you know, definitively say not that it really matters.
She did live a great life. But oh, my gosh, my family was destroyed.
They're like, why are you screaming and yelling?
I'm like, why are you not? This is the matrix of our family that just died.
Are you insane? What if she was shot with four bullets from a gun?
Wouldn't we want to investigate? Nobody wanted to do a dang thing.
It's such a crime against humanity across the board.
But thank you for being here and Charles and Stephen, thank you for hosting as usual.
So sorry.
Any comments? James has a great speech from them.
Yeah, I'm just so sorry to hear what happened to your mother.
It's just tragic. And everybody was fooled.
Not everybody, but many people were fooled by this.
We all trusted the establishment.
You know, and what I found is a lot of my physician colleagues who believed in the vaccine just were too busy to investigate on their own.
And they pretty much relied on their board who would be sending them emails saying the COVID vaccine is now available for your patients.
You could start recommending that they go to the pharmacy on Tuesday and so forth.
So we all just kind of assumed that our boards and our medical societies for our particular specialties were extremely well informed.
They did their due diligence and they must be giving us good recommendations.
And most doctors just did not have a chance to question it.
I think about all the OBGYNs, besides Dr. Thorpe doing the studies he's done and finding the tremendous problems when this is administered to pregnant women in terms of fetal deformities and miscarriages and stillbirths and so forth.
And very few obstetrics and gynecologists knew this.
And part of the reason was ACOG, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, was paid $40 million by the Biden administration to promote these things.
And they didn't disclose that to their members.
So this came out probably a year or two ago, several years into the vaccine rollout, where they were saying to pregnant women, you should take it.
And this has never been done before. Pregnant women weren't even part of the vaccine trial.
So for them to recommend this, it was all coming from ACOG and ACOG was being paid by the government.
And most OBGYNs were too busy to look into it.
And so they went along with it.
So it's just a colossal tragedy.
And again, I'm sorry about what happened to your family.
Couldn't you bring a case against the Board of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, obstetricians?
No, I'm just asking. Obviously, you'd have to think carefully about that.
I would have to see whether I have standing, you know, so I have to be someone that's aggrieved by them.
So it might be, though, pregnant women.
You could have class action by women who've had bad outcomes from pregnancies, you know, in terms of spontaneous abortions and so forth.
That would be a very interesting thing to do.
And in fact, Erin Seery, the lawyer who's been going after some of these companies and exposing that a lot of these vaccines are tied to autism in ways that have been concealed,
would be a good lawyer potentially to take that up to a class action on behalf of women who've had bad OBGYN outcomes.
And you've got all the people who've suffered through James Thorpe.
Yes. Oh, yeah. He knows a lot.
He's very angry about this, but he's not a lawyer.
Yeah, I'd be happy to help him if you want to put us together.
Yeah, OK. That's top of my list now.
James, James, that's that's good.
Steven will put you together with Jim Thorpe.
James, on that issue that Julie's talking about the current state of play in Australia or so in America.
Of employers, I'm looking at the legality of this of employers, particularly of nurses saying that you can't be employed here unless you've had your full suite of coverage shots or any shots for that matter.
Now, you know, employers have the right to say we'll only employ people with a degree, we'll only employ people on certain terms.
What's your sense?
And so so there's a huge shortage of nurses and doctors in Australia, for example.
But what's the legality?
I don't know what the status in you and what the position is in the UK of companies requiring jabs to have been had by applicants for jobs.
It's a great question.
It's a great question. So that is usually governed at the state level.
So each state has its own rules.
And I'll tell you a quick anecdote. My son was graduated from college during covid and he got a fantastic job offer from BNP Perrybaugh Bank in New York.
And he did all the interviews and they said, we're happy to bring you on.
And they said, but one thing you have to get your covid shots and all the boosters.
And he knew for me that these were a no go.
So he told them, no, I don't want that.
They said, well, you're going to have to have an exemption.
So he got both a religious exemption from a Catholic priest who made some fantastic points about bodily autonomy and personal decision making and informed consent.
And he included all these church doctrines of not taking something onto your body without, you know, it's violating the temple of God and all these things.
And he also got a medical exemption or attempted to based on the fact that he's had anaphylactic reactions to other things like he's allergic to nuts.
Now, that was deemed by a lawyer sitting at Greenberg Turing, a young lawyer.
She's probably 30 years old.
She judged his two exemption letters and said, nope, not sufficient.
You can't work here unless you get the suite of covid vaccines and boosters to date.
So he didn't take the job and he had to take a lesser paying job.
He's happy now, but that was a great missed opportunity.
And we looked at the time into this idea of is there anything we can do?
And at the time you had coexistent with that, these federal mandates that Biden was imposing on the military, on federal workers.
Finally, those got repealed.
But individual states were very slow to take those off.
So as far as I know, it's still state by state regulation issue.
And, you know, like with Lattapoe, the surgeon general who just decreed that in Florida, no county, no city, no school board can mandate vaccines any longer.
So that's kind of the governor, Ron DeSantis, signed that apparently.
So this is now state law that nobody can mandate these in any private or public job or facility.
I think the other states, particularly New York, are still not there yet.
And California, too. California is atrocious.
They want to have everybody vaccinated.
So, oh, and as you know, there are or you may have heard, there are six states in the U.S.
where vaccine mandates can have no personal exemptions.
So it's California, New York, I think, Maryland, Virginia, a few others.
But they and Washington, they're not allowing you if there's any vaccine mandate.
And I don't think this is necessarily for private employers, but this is for schools in particular.
If a child says I've got a conscience of subjection or my parent is a Buddhist or whatever and they don't want the vaccine, it never works anymore in these six states.
And this is total tyranny. Oh, and I wrote an article on Substack a few weeks ago about where this came from.
And you're not going to believe it. But this push for ending vaccine mandate exemptions came from Israel, believe it or not.
Israelis who are very big on vaccine passports, you may recall during covid Netanyahu was saying we're going to lead the way on vaccine passports and also Israeli data was what drove the boosters.
In fact, Biden recommended to the U.S. that they start taking boosters in 2021 before we had any data on whether boosters would be necessary.
And that came directly from Israel. This was in the press.
So I just think it's noteworthy that we know there's various political forces that are influencing the mandates, the lack of exemptions to mandates and what you can do to get out of them.
So I'm sorry that's an unsatisfactory answer, Charles, but that's kind of the extent of my knowledge.
But in short, everything that you just described, these states doing these exemptions and no exemptions and the mandates, it's all criminal.
We need to remember it's all criminal.
Totally. I agree 100 percent, Stephen.
So so the issue, everybody, and I know it's quite problematic, but the issue is you don't have to go and work for someone who requires you.
So this is not a jab. This is not mandatory.
There's not being imposed on you because you don't have to work here like your son didn't have to work at BAB Paribas.
I saw an interesting comment in the chat that it's a it's a Freemason bank.
However, so so it's worthy.
So it's not it's not unlawful.
It might be unethical, immoral, blah, blah.
But companies can do that.
They couldn't they would not be able to put on somebody an obligation that you can only work here if you have murdered somebody.
OK, so that wouldn't be a valid requirement.
You could take that.
But it's certain I don't know of any legal process, James, and you're confirming that that it's unlawful to say you can only work here if you've decided to poison yourself with a bioweapon.
Well, one important addition I just thought of, Charles, is there are successful lawsuits where people have already been at a job.
There's one nurse who was there for six years and she was told at a hospital or an HMO chain, she was told you have to get vaccines up to the current booster or you're fired.
She objected. They fired her and she sued in one.
I don't know the amount, but it was in the millions.
And the reason was the court found, and I don't know which state this was, but they said they had it was wrong for them to condition her employment on the taking of this thing that she had the voluntary right to refuse.
That does not apply, apparently, though, to new jobs, where, as you said, they don't have to hire you.
You don't have to work there.
So they can say you to work here, you've got to take it.
And there's never been a suit that I've seen in the US that's successful that says that's wrong.
But once you're there, you have an expectation that they'll fire you only for cause.
Oh, by the way, this is going to tend to be mainly the case for employees who have contracts.
So physicians, lawyers, accountants, you know, where they're working at a company under a contract rather than an at will employee like someone at McDonald's who can be who can leave when they want and they can be fired when they want.
However, this could be tested where someone would say is a McDonald's manager and they have been there for 20 years and then they've required to take a vaccine and they refuse.
They might be able to sue because they've got this longstanding relationship that goes beyond at will employment.
No, thank you.
I think that you could find lawyers who would think that there would be a case that it's wrong for firms to deprive people of access to jobs within their firm, even if they haven't worked there before, on the basis of government fraud or whatever or corporation fraud.
So so and it is fraud. We know that because there was no informed consent.
So they tried to do the same thing with my son in Harvard, MGH.
And it's absolutely outrageous. He was receiving an email a day from the bastards at the PR section of MGH.
I think it was telling him that if he didn't take the vaccine, he would lose his job.
And that went on for months and months. And in the end, he couldn't talk about anything else.
And our time will come. We'll see what ended up happening.
Did he end up taking the vaccine?
Unfortunately, yes. One.
Yeah. And then they were chasing him for months for the second one.
And I said, right, this is it, Robert, because unfortunately, he had to kind of.
How should I say?
Deny me to actually keep his job, but he loved, you know, if you've got a job in your sights, or, you know, so for Robert, it's absolutely perfect as Harvard and MGH.
They recognized his talents and they headhunted him from the UK.
And and then they take advantage because he loves his job.
And I thought it was absolutely outrageous.
But our time will come. Yeah, totally agree.
All right. We have to change public opinion first before we can take these people on successfully.
And what we have to realize, we must change public opinion.
We can't do it in the courts.
We have to change public opinion and then the judges will realize they've got no escape.
And then suddenly you'll find the cases going the other way.
Yeah, as we've said here, Stephen and James, you've we've said it numerous times.
The courts follow culture. They don't drive culture.
So that's Stephen's quite right that public opinion has an impact on on judges' thinking on cultural matters.
All right, James, next.
Oh, thanks. Hey, really great presentation, James.
Thanks very much for the information.
Are you familiar with the genetic specificity of the SARS-CoV-2 spike in relationship to the ACE2 receptor?
Yes, somewhat.
And I also have an article called COVID's Ethnic Bioweapon Operation,
where there's eight peer reviewed papers showing the specificity for ACE2 variants for higher hydrostatic binding affinity for some genetic variants of ACE2 than others.
And it's distributed across ethnic groups.
Yes, that's very correct.
And so this and I agree with you pointing toward six size intelligence networks as a as a I guess designer of this.
The question is, what allows our United States intelligence agencies to kill off the population?
What would warrant that?
Because it seems to be that they're authorized to do so somehow.
What authorizes them?
And then and then, as I said, I'm also a former I'm an interventional radiologist and a former flight surgeon in the Navy.
And I can give you some more information about exactly what happened in February and March.
It appears that the DOD knew that this was a bio weapon, even up to the level of the Joint Chiefs.
And refused to allow the anti parasitics, the anti parasitic medications to be used.
And those anti parasitic medications may have protected you from the immune system damage, which may be triggering toxoplasmosis infestation.
And I can go into that later with you in private if you'd like, including Susan Yerres, who was just fired by the CDC.
Her expertise is in toxoplasmosis.
Interesting.
Immune system damage causes infestation with toxoplasmosis to become awakened.
And if you watch that movie, what was it called?
Where the deer are looking at you.
Deer infested with toxoplasmosis are no longer scared of humans.
Mice infested with toxoplasmosis.
This appears to be a takedown of the immune system to get us infested by vaccine, by viruses, excuse me, by parasites.
And more information on that.
Yeah, I would love that. Well, Jim, nice to meet you.
And it's a great question. So I wrote a couple of articles on Substack over the last few years on this issue of who's behind this.
So Sasha Latopova and others, Katherine Watt, Debbie Green, I think it is, have written articles about how the DOD is behind this vaccine development and rollout, of course.
And how Sasha's position is that the FDA approval of this or EUA is just a theater.
It's not even actually, you know, it's pro forma and they actually didn't need to approve anything because this was all authorized by the HHS secretary, which initially triggered the DOD to take over.
So they were the ones who obtained all of the OEM manufacturers, all the people involved in producing components of vaccines.
It was all done through BARDA, you know, so it's government and military combined.
So the question is, who's controlling the DOD? Like, why would our own DOD be trying to harm American citizens?
And so one of the articles I wrote had to do with what we saw after 9-11 and who was sort of in control of the DOD.
And this goes back to the speech that General Wesley Clark made when he was speaking to the, I think it was the National Press Club.
And he also gave an interview with Amy Goodman of Democracy Now, where he said that, you know, right after 9-11, he went into the Pentagon and said, what's going on here?
He was like Supreme Allied NATO commander, and then he had stepped down, but he still had good contacts within the Joint Chiefs.
And he went in to see the Pentagon officials and he was told, we're going to go into Iraq.
And I think this might have even been before Afghanistan.
But I think it might have could have been right after Afghanistan and before Iraq.
So we're going to go into Iraq. And he said, why? Did they have anything to do with 9-11?
And the general he was speaking to said, no. He said, well, then why is it? He goes, I don't really know.
And then he showed them that five country, seven countries in five years take down that was planned.
And Wesley Clark's statement was this was not an American policy, implication being this is driven by foreign interests.
And if I may say so on this group, without repercussions, I mean, it's pretty clear that it's Israel that's controlling much of this.
And basically, you look at how almost all of our politicians are paid off through AIPAC, with the exceptions of Thomas Massey and Marjorie Taylor Greene.
There's a few other Congress people who don't take foreign lobby money, but they're sort of silent on this issue where they go along with whatever policies Israel wants.
And I must say, first off, I am not anti-Semitic. I love Jewish people. I love Israeli people.
They're my friends. They're my colleagues. They're my patients. They're clients. You know, I love them. I work with them.
So I have nothing against Jewish people or Israeli people.
But we do have this problem where they're controlling foreign policy. They're controlling domestic policy.
If you look at Whitney Webb's revelations, they're controlling our critical infrastructure.
They're in control of our nuclear facilities, our water treatment facilities, our electrical grids.
And Netanyahu has given speeches on this where they want the ability to have a button that they could push, where they could shut off the infrastructure of a whole country if they chose to.
And that's been a goal of theirs for a long time.
And I would suggest that they're also heavily involved in 9-11. And heavily involved is an understatement.
I would say check out the article by Wyatt Peterson on owns.com or check out the Christopher Bolin's work where they go into these networks that were controlling the buildings, the security, the airports, you know, all of this stuff.
And so I think that the control of NATO is driven by them, our DOD, MI6, CIA, FBI.
I mean, you look at Cash Patel. He pretty much said before he came in, as did Don Bambangino, one of my highest priorities is Israel.
You know, he's supposed to be an American FBI director.
And what he's been doing is, you know, burying the Epstein network information, putting out a phony Charlie Kirk narrative, it appears, with this shooter and embedding this 33 symbolism.
Have you seen that? Where he said the other day, it's been 33 hours that we've done this.
I put up a post maybe a year or two ago about COVID, the COVID announcements that were all tied to this 33.
You had Governor Newsom, Governor Whitmer, Governor Andrew Cuomo. They were all saying we have 33 new cases, 33 deaths across the state.
Today marks 33 infections. You know, it was everything was 33 from all angles.
The implication is there's like a Freemasonic overlay here.
Now, I don't know all the answers, but these networks, I think they're not only harming us, they're ritualizing it.
And they're sort of having that 33 symbolism might have been to signal that the operations are telling the other people in the network the operations are go.
Let's move forward.
So the question really is how do we stop this and how do we prevent you've written in your your sub stack about the Deagle report and how we're going to have a sharp drop off in our population.
This is, I think you only wrote about that in 2021. I just glance through your sub stacks.
But the issue is how do we prevent the death at this time? And are we and and and I believe it's somewhat the parrot and the anti parasitics hydroxy chloroquine and zinc anti parasitic ivermectin.
And now night is oxonite night is oxonite stops the replication of hepatitis naturally rid your body of hepatitis night is oxonite stops the replication of measles virus night is oxonite stops the replication of Ebola.
Do you have any do you agree with the anti parasitics being part of this way that we can protect our immune systems.
Do you have any additional offerings as how we can protect ourselves from what seems to be a Rainbow Six operation on killing our immune system.
I agree with you on the anti parasitics and I used ivermectin during the height of COVID both on myself and on others and people in my family and they seem to do well on it.
Just one dose of ivermectin typically made symptoms improve overnight.
And I know that's anecdotal but you know here Corey has a good side on this.
I think it's c19early.com where he has hundreds of studies and the bulk of them if you analyze them sort of as a meta analysis show a benefit.
Now there are the official studies that came out through Lancet and New England Journal that said oh no benefit to ivermectin for COVID and so forth.
But here Corey has said those were designed to fail.
They either use too low a dose or they weren't powered to find an effect.
So I think that the bulk of the evidence indicates that they're trying to suppress this and it is effective and not as oxenol.
I need to look into that more.
I was focused more on ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine during the pandemic and I have got prescriptions for all my family members and many of them used it to good success.
And again you'd need a large trial to show whether that was truly an effect.
But anecdotally it seems to be working.
And Pierre Corey has done masterful work on this the way he's assembled the data and continues to do so and critique the studies, the big studies showing no effect ostensibly.
He's critiqued it.
What you said about how they're trying to eventually get toxoplasmosis to harm us and how it's affecting animals is fascinating and it's very consistent with the bioweapon literature.
I mean if you read about how these governments try to make bioweapons they're using fish, they're using parasites, they're using all kinds of horrendous things.
Yeah.
So we can talk more offline about some of those things.
But yeah they're terrible.
And I think that what worries me is I think about what's the end game here?
What is the DOD going along with?
What is our Congress going along with?
And I sort of became familiar with the work of Adam Green a couple years ago.
He talks a lot about what the rabbis, the Orthodox rabbis say is planned for the world.
And they frame it as prophecy, but you might also frame it as something that humans are bringing about without any intervention of any kind of divine being.
It's a plan that humans are enacting and they're calling it fulfillment of prophecy.
So that's kind of a fascinating way to look at it.
And unfortunately what they talk about is the destruction of Europe and America.
And it's consistent with what we've seen over the last 10 years with mass illegal immigration, letting prisoners out of jail and not punishing them and appointing the sorrows prosecutors who won't get rid of cash bail and they won't prosecute people.
They'll let people off with very light sentences.
They'll punish, like what's happening in the UK, you hear about this in other parts of Europe, they'll punish a woman who's been raped or complaining about her rapist.
They'll put her in jail or and the rapist is let off.
So this kind of thing is intended, it appears, to destroy Europe, destroy America.
And that's what the rabbis say it's going to happen as fulfillment of prophecy, they say.
And part of that includes this war of Gog and Magog, which they say will involve Iran, China and Russia against the US and Europe.
Now, this is the rabbi saying that this is what God's going to do through prophecy.
But I think some of these folks are working through our government agencies.
And you have the politicians saying, like Mike Huckabee, basically, all these prophecies are what God wants.
You know, this is our ambassador to Israel.
And Marco Rubio, basically, Secretary of State, kind of going along with whatever they want to do, rarely objecting.
Just the other day, I think he objected to Israeli bombing of Qatar very minimally, like, oh, that was up to the Israelis and we didn't have any say in it.
But pretty much he supports everything else they'll do.
And again, I'm not opposed to Israel and not opposed to Israelis.
So I want to make that clear.
I don't want people to think I'm, you know, anti-Semitic.
But I'm trying to put together the fragments of evidence or where this is leading.
James?
Yes.
Is it possible that it's the other way around?
So we, so people like you and others are saying that, I'm asking, why is USA so beholden to Israel?
A tiny country.
And why it's got so much influence, it seems.
And it's a nuclear power, of course.
But I wonder whether it's the other way around.
Is it possible that, is it just possible that Israel is USA's proxy state?
So it gives USA plausible deny or certain people within the USA plausible deniability to push things, saying, actually, giving the appearance of Israel putting pressure on the USA.
Is it the other way around, you think?
Is it possible?
I've heard that theory, Stephen, and I've also heard the theory that it's actually England.
You know, it's the crown who's really running the US and Israel as vassal states.
I guess the one counterfactual piece of evidence I would submit is who is most supportive of mass immigration into Europe and America?
And is that happening in Israel?
Israel prevents that.
They don't want that kind of destruction in their country by ethnic conflicts and people coming in, you know, intermarrying and so forth.
But this is pushed very heavily in the US and England.
And so looking at what Alejandro Mayorkas did, the Homeland Security Secretary under Biden, where he flooded, according to custom border protection agents, including, what's his name?
The guy who, J.J. Carroll.
Between 30 and 45 million new illegal border invaders came during just those four years of Biden.
Would the US do that to itself and tell Israel, don't do that to yourself?
Or would it be the other way around?
Would there be a network of folks who say they want to see Europe and America destroyed as revenge for destroying the Second Temple?
I'm using their words.
This is not my construction.
So it's possible that USA, even if it did, was operating Israel as a kind of proxy state with plausible deniability for everything, you know, suggesting always to the public that it's the other way around, you know, to certain members.
They wouldn't want to destroy Israel.
It's small enough.
It's very useful.
So very useful to certain people within the US.
But I think what you're talking about, the illegal immigration, that's in my opinion, that's they're trying to push.
You know, we've seen COVID-19 was the Trojan horse for totalitarianism.
And it was very much in my mind a Trojan horse for Chinese type totalitarianism.
But I can't understand that so few people want to call out China.
I don't understand that.
But I think so you got the Chinese communists, you got Chinese socialism or whatever, you know, socialism becomes Chinese communism and everything is so negative.
You know, the left are crazy, you know, they're violent as well.
If people disagree with them.
But I've seen people like this.
They're so invested in the ideology of Marxism that they lose all humanity.
Yes.
And I guess one argument concerning that is that who brought Marxism, totalitarianism, socialism into China around, I guess, the 1930s or 40s?
I don't know the full history.
But what I've heard, it was a lot of New York.
There's a lot of history.
Yeah, a lot of history there.
And you also look at much of Asia where they don't allow this kind of ethnic mass immigration where it undermines the host population.
The culture.
It's obvious, isn't it?
It's very obvious that it's going to destroy the country.
Exactly.
So what's fascinated me, and I don't know all the answers, but some of this work by Adam Green, he's got a few channels like Bitshoot and Rumble and Odyssey called No More News, spelled K-N-O-W.
And he puts up videos of the rabbis talking.
And they're saying Europe and America must be destroyed because of revenge for the Second Temple's destruction in 70 A.D.
And what they say they're doing is moving the chess pieces in place.
And they say it's God doing it.
But obviously, it's through human intervention to cause these policies to effectuate that goal.
And you look at just the financial difficulties we're in that could lead to disaster with our debt.
You look at the ethnic conflict, the softness on crime.
Now, I know Trump's trying to reverse part of that, but some of his promises are not actually coming true.
He said he would have mass deportations.
That's not happening.
I know part of that's because he's constrained by the courts.
But also, I think there's maybe a little bit of feigning action when there's very little of it happening.
I mean, if 40 million plus came in during Biden, we've gotten rid of about 10,000.
We're not really going to take much of a bite out of that.
I think even Trump's admitted it's going to be hugely costly to get rid of all these people.
But he gave the impression that he was doing it.
But I think it'd be very hard to keep it up.
And you're kind of opposing human beings' humanity by deporting huge numbers of people.
So it becomes very difficult to justify in the end with people crying about leaving.
You can just imagine.
Yeah, I don't think they'd say that it's more difficult to get rid of.
Yeah.
And I hope I don't sound insensitive to those people because there's a lot of families and everything in their impact.
It's a very hard problem.
They should never have been allowed in in the first place.
Correct. Yes, that's it.
Yeah.
So, but as to who's in charge, I don't really know.
But it seems like the evidence weighs more in favor of this tail wagging the US dog rather than vice versa.
Yeah.
Yeah, it might appear like that, but do you think it actually could be the other way around?
Well, I guess very clever, wouldn't it?
Yeah. Well, I think what's happened is you have the Israeli influence in our government so heavily through the military and through both administrations, you know, Republican and Democrat.
You know, this Charlie Kirk thing has been fascinating.
If you listen to some of the people who were Charlie Kirk's friends like Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson.
Amazing. Very interesting.
Yeah. And they say that he told us he was being bullied by Netanyahu and he didn't like what's happening.
And he was speaking out a lot about things like October 7th being a standout order and the Epstein files were a massade, Epstein was a massade operation.
And he spoke out a lot about these things.
And, you know, so the thought is maybe they got rid of him because instantly you had Ben Shapiro and the Daily Wire come in and say, we're going to pick up his bloody microphone where he left off.
And it just seems very entrived.
So I'm not drawing any conclusions and I hope no one mistakes what I'm saying.
But these are just things that they could have.
I think we need to look for evidence.
Yeah, that's true.
But I do think that these people, you know, it just seems so unlikely that a small country like Israel would be controlling America to the extent that apparently is.
I just don't believe it.
But there's something going on. So I thought, well, actually, is it the other way around?
Yeah.
Do you see the amounts of money going to the politicians?
There's a Twitter account called or ex account called Track APEC.
So it's at Track APEC and they show the amounts that these guys are getting.
And Trump got over three million.
And I think Marco Rubio got like one and a half million or one point eight million.
It's just a lot of money coming in to them.
They're also apparently getting a lot of insider information once they're in Congress.
I mean, you've got Nancy Pelosi with a net worth of whatever it is, 500 billion, and their salary is like one hundred seventy five thousand a year.
So turning point USA was also funded by Israel, wasn't it?
And so as I understood it, Netanyahu on the basis of not very much invited a very short notice like, you know, oh, I'm going to invite Charlie Kirk to Israel.
Yes. And so I was very interested in what I haven't heard the end of that.
But I tend to kind of so interesting.
She's very bright, isn't she?
She says that Netanyahu offered turning point one hundred fifty million and that Charlie Kirk turned it down and he offered him to come to Israel.
And he'd been to Israel many times before.
And he turned it down this most recent time, like a week before he was killed.
And that could be the motive for killing him.
It's possible. Well, did you hear about the Bill Ackman intervention?
So because he was speaking out about a lot of these things, Bill Ackman and some other folks met with him and sort of said, you have to stop talking like this.
You know, you can't threaten him. Yeah.
Yeah. Or, yeah, maybe not quite a threat, but it was implied.
Yeah. And then after that, that's when Netanyahu called him.
So, you know, I'm not saying that, like you say, we need evidence, but these are interesting circumstantial factors.
I thought Candice Owen was very good at putting forward a very plausible story, even if she's not correct.
I think it's worth thinking about. Anyway, thank you.
So, so there's no problem if you want to ask a question of our guests.
That's no problem at all. But if you want to push your own narrative endlessly, then there is a problem and we'll throw you out again.
I don't want to challenge anyone.
Right. We'll ask a question of the guests. Then we're not interested in your narrative, Anders.
Well, right. OK. Ask the question, Anders.
I will ask the questions. I will ask the questions. OK.
So I'm really happy to hear that you were on the top really today, Stephen.
You were really, really good. And I would say hello, James. I'm Anders from Norway.
I have done a lot of research and not saying I'm knowing it all.
But I see that you know a lot of it. So I'm really happy to see your way of talking.
You have presented a way of talking which kind of, I would say, makes a case where, you know, I talked to Francis Boyle several times.
You know Francis Boyle. You know him. Yes. Yes.
I worked with him back in April, May 2021.
And he was not really a fancy for, let's say, the British and American communities because he was outstanding,
clear. And I worked with Robert Young. I worked with, let's say, the great Rainer Fulmish.
And I was really in this. I spent five thousand hours of research and I would say I know a little bit.
And you know a lot, you know, you know a lot. So you seem to know.
And you kind of maybe use your words carefully so that you don't tell too much.
But I understand you. You really know a lot more than what you say.
I really respect you for that. It's a very wise way of talking.
And let's say what is really on. So you are a scientist. I'm a scientist.
Stephen Frost is scientist or let's say medical doctor.
And there are all these people out there and you have gone much deeper today in saying a lot of things and what is not normally spoken.
So so do you understand that that? OK, you are a radiologist, you know.
Stephen Frost is radiologist. I have studied radiology in very big detail.
And I know that radiology is the main harm for a lot of diseases for 150 years or so.
So if you go into Arthur Fieftelberger's story and many others, you will see that.
So my question to you is, do you realize that we can take down a lot of these harmful, let's say, practices,
not based on vaccines because they are protected by the Vaccine Act and the PREP Act.
You talk about Sasha Latipova, you talk about Catherine Watt.
I know them both and James Rogusky very well, you know.
So but do you understand that the real possibility to take them down is through the uninformed situation that we don't know about radiation,
that the real harm, a lot of the harm is coming from radiation.
Do you do you understand that or have you seen evidence of that?
Or do you still need to see more evidence of that, that these vaccines, they contained magnetic materials which act as antennas along with these 4G, 5G.
And the real harm is a combination of the 5G, 4G and the magnetic material in the JABs.
Do you understand what I'm saying?
Yes, Anders. Thank you. It's nice to meet you.
I have looked into that and I have one article from probably a year ago on the heavy metal findings of the German working group
and their interaction with microwave radiation, 5G, 4G and higher.
And there's both a thermal conductivity that these heavy metals can have under microwave radiation and millimeter of radiation and electrical conductivity.
So as far as magnetic materials are concerned, I'm familiar with the reports that people were having the vaccine administered and they would have their keys stick to their arm and so forth.
But I didn't see confirmation of that.
You know, I heard Peter McCullough say that those reports are unconfirmed.
And to my knowledge, the magnetic properties of what's in the vaccine has not been formally confirmed.
I could be wrong about that. And you could tell me that you found better research on that.
But the initial reports, you may recall on TikTok and Instagram and Twitter, everyone was having all their keys sticking to their skin right after the vaccine.
They said it was magnetism. Some of that supposedly was fake.
You know, they were faking. But we do know based on some reports that there are heavy metals that are thermally conducted and electrically conducted under 5G and similar frequency electromagnetic radiation.
And regarding harms of radiation, yeah, you're right.
I mean, you know that when Wilhelm Renken invented the X-ray in the late 1800s, people didn't understand the harms.
And they were really doing fluoroscopy on one another.
And they were causing all kinds of problems, leukemias, lymphomas, as well as skin burns and so forth.
Once we understood the harms of X-ray radiation, we got better shielding and lower power equipment.
But yeah, I'm fascinated by and concerned about this idea that the 5G towers that have been put everywhere have dual use.
It's not only for communication, but it could also be used to harm us.
And there's a few researchers on this. One guy named Mark, I don't know his last name, but he's saying these things have been set up to triangulate on people.
Mark Steele, my friend.
Mark Steele, yes, yes. I have an article about him.
I think it may be the same article on 5G that's on my Substack.
And, you know, his findings are concerning.
The only thing is, before I can publicly pronounce something, I'll say this is what this person says.
This is what that person has found.
It still awaits further confirmation, you know, because it's hard to go out on a limb and say the goal of these vaccines is to set us up for 5G killings.
But that's what Mark Steele's proposing. And I think he could be right.
I just don't know yet if it's confirmed.
But it's definitely clear that heavy metals in a person's body injected through a vaccine can cause great harm through thermal conduction and electrical conduction by electromagnetic radiation in the millimeter wave and microwave ranges.
So you're absolutely right that that's a concern.
Thank you very much. I'd just like to add a little bit.
I was about to meet Rainer Fulmisch in Tijuana in late October 2023.
And he was applying for a passport where he wanted to go to UK to see Barry Trower for the third time.
And I would only say that this is my knowledge that, let's say, James, Stephen and whoever understands radiation, this is radiation harm.
And this has been going on for a long time.
And let's say I'm looking for you to go into this because if we want to go into the harm of the JABs and all of that, we need to understand that the harm is not just the JABs.
It is the electromagnetic EMR, synchronistic, working with those JABs.
And I have spent 5000 hours and I can say this is conclusive and I hope that the world will see it soon.
Well, I can put you in touch with James Hill and you can send all the stuff you've got to him and then we can rely on James to at least pass comments which are worth hearing.
That would be great. Thank you very much, Anders.
So, OK, thank you, Anders, for your question.
Ellen Cawley, same applies to you, Ellen.
If you're going to talk about you and how brilliant you are, then we're not interested.
We want a question from you for our guests.
We honor our guests.
Yes, well, definitely.
Thank you.
I do really honor what you've said.
I'm also, I write on Substack for the last five years.
I'm primarily a deep state analyst, you know, have been friends with Peter Dale Scott and...
Yeah, we're not really interested.
Right, but also Christopher Bolin.
So what I'm, I guess, getting to the question is, you know, Israel is one area I appreciate you getting at because, and I've given talks on it at this College of Complexes the other night.
It's a free speech forum summarizing my background is 40 years of market research, strategic analysis experience.
So I look at this as a generalist as a, you know, and from the beginning heard Francis Boyle saying it was a biological warfare lab and and have confirmed all of this.
And, you know, but so the big question is, what are we going to do?
How are we going to stop it legally using the courts?
And what our group, a group of us, Jim is on this, or I'm sorry, I'm blanking.
Tom Rodman is on this call.
As with truthactionproject.org.
It's every Tuesday night we have a tap talk, you can go there by going to events.
I'd love to have you as the presenter.
It's a group that grew out of...
We're not interested in the group.
This is the problem.
And we need to have the question.
Okay, so getting at how we're going to solve this.
We brought presenters, we're focused on COVID, how to as an operation designed to kill us.
And also it relates with the legal, we've got a $50 million, a man who's got raising up to $50 million who says he knows how to prosecute 9-11 as a inside job.
He's taken on the government before.
And we also want to bring in Daniel Sheehan who's taken on the CIA and the institutions too.
The judges won't take the cases.
But that's what our group is organizing for action.
Ellen, what is it that you don't understand?
We don't want to hear about your group.
We've heard it many times before for endless hours.
We want the question.
Okay.
So okay, one simple question is looking at, you know, how is it killing us?
That's what we have to prove in courts as like Ron Johnson said, even with 9-11, you have to tie it up in a boat.
So even taking toxic plasmosis, I just got a cat.
I speculate whether this cat was designed by the CIA to kill old ladies, you know, but I am taking ivermectin.
I'm trying to figure out how much to get to my cat.
You know, I've taken the smaller dose.
That's what I did when I got COVID.
Thankfully, this Truth Action Project or group called the Truth Group, that's who was she was early on.
I will not take the vaccine.
And I'm like, thank God I'm hearing people talking about it.
Okay.
So you want to we need the question.
What is it you don't understand, Ellen?
Well, okay.
I don't know. What is the question?
It's got a question mark after it.
I am just like you.
I'm a whistleblower trying to save the world.
How can we save the world?
Okay.
That's all I want to know.
Leave it there, Stephen.
Ellen, thank you.
And it's nice to meet you.
And I'm fascinated by the groups you mentioned.
And if you want to send me more information, I'd love to learn more.
How can we save the world?
Gosh, I need your input from everyone here more than ever.
In my own little way, I'm just kind of writing Substack to make people aware.
I mentioned to Charles in an email that my concern is, you know, I'm actively practicing medicine, actively practicing law in the US.
I'm a partner in a law firm.
You know, my job could be taken away by one of these intelligence agencies if they wanted to do this to me.
Hopefully that doesn't happen.
But I've seen this happen to countless doctors.
I mean, many are on this call and it's it's dreadful.
So we're up against big forces.
But as Stephen said, by focusing on the lack of informed consent, trying to bring cases in the courts is good.
You mentioned proving that the COVID vaccine killed people.
I mean, Dr. McCullough has that one autopsy series where I think it was 74 percent of everyone who died within a few weeks of taking the vaccine.
And autopsy evidence that the vaccine was causal in the death.
So there is pretty good evidence and more is coming out all the time about the vaccines being directly tied to these harms.
And what happens is you you'll hear the rebuttal that, well, it's associated with the harms.
We don't know if it was a cause.
Well, you can know based on Bradford Hill criteria where you've got a temporal association between taking the vaccine and developing a brain injury within two weeks versus developing a brain injury and then taking the vaccine two weeks later.
There's as Steve Kershens pointed out, there's no child with autism or brain injury who reports getting that brain injury two weeks before taking a vaccine.
It's always within two weeks after taking it.
So you have this association between taking the COVID vaccines and then someone dying or someone having these terrible outcomes, which also have a pathogenic basis.
There's a physiologic reason why the vaccine would cause these things we're seeing, such as autoimmune disease.
And the problem is we just have this government and vaccine makers who are so resistant to this.
And they've built up legal structures to prevent liability under the PrEP Act and under the vaccine, the Childhood Vaccine Safety Act of 1986.
So these things need to be repealed. I think Kennedy wants to do that.
He's just facing a lot of resistance and I wish him the best of luck.
I do see he's got handlers like Rabbi Shmuley, who he says is his spiritual advisor.
You know, that's kind of seems a little bit fraught with issues.
So these are just general ideas throwing out. I don't know the solution.
I think it's a multi-pronged attack. We have to try to save the world through legal means, medical means, the public opinion, changing it, trying to get some voice in the media.
That's very hard. The media is very tightly controlled.
And now we see TikTok just been moved into the hands of Larry Ellison.
They said, oh, the reason for requiring the TikTok be sold to investors was because of Chinese backdoors, Chinese control.
Doesn't seem like that was the reason.
It was because TikTok was saying a lot of things about Israel and other things going on with Gaza and so forth.
A little too much free speech, the argument goes.
And that's why they wanted to transfer to people who would be more sympathetic to these things.
So did you hear that Trump today said that he cut a deal with China and they're giving it so that they'll let American investors control it.
But he also mentioned that Charlie Kirk helped him win a lot of new young people for his MAGA movement using TikTok.
So it's the corruption of both the political parties through the media and definitely through Israel, the influence of that.
I've been researching it since the Promise software, which Christopher Boland, I think he knows about.
People to make this argument, Adam Green, Christopher Boland, Mike Adams, all the ones talking about Israel.
Israel took the software, the Promise software in 1980 was given that by Ed Meese and William Casey.
They gave it to the head of military intelligence who put a Trojan horse in it through Wacken Hut and Michael Reconoscudo and this whole Danny Casolaro story.
It's a long story, but this is how they've controlled the stock market, the campaign finances since 1980.
Bush had it, Clinton had it. They used it for systematics to control all the money through the treasury systems.
So and up to Palantir now, and they've got to keep this secret because if the world knew they're all part of this global coup d'etat, right?
That's a global coup d'etat by the intelligence agencies, MI6.
They say that this is why Rothschild is in the Bank of International Settlements and the city of London.
When they created Israel in 1948, through actually Victor Rothschild was said to be the fifth man in the Cambridge Group.
But that it's through the Bank of International Settlements that they've been to create this forever war and then bring about this Fourth Reich.
The best one on this is James Perloff. He's a Christian deep state analyst, but he did an analysis of Christian Zionism.
And this Zionist, he says it's a Luciferian force that is really behind the orchestration of using, creating world wars, this strategy of tension.
They financed both sides, but this psychological operation where we disagree within our own families about whether vaccines are good or bad.
They really captured us and brainwashed us through culture and opinions.
But that's why I think the best way to get it is, you know, it's a hard story.
But, you know, we had Christopher Boland in our group.
This is a movement, this 9-11 truth movement that they've stopped because it really, we're also proving that Kennedy assassinations were done by them.
You know, you mentioned UN's review, but Laurent Guignol wrote, years of deep state.
He's the best on this.
He's excellent. Yeah. His work on JFK, RFK, JFK Junior's assassination, 9-11, even Charlie Kirk now is excellent.
Oh, good, good. It reminds me of that. But this group, Truth Action Project, we talk about it, we're planning it, and we're going to get it into court.
Daniel Sheehan also has said, as part of Lawyers for 9-11 inquiry, he said $4 million, he could prove it because he, in the 80s, was using RACO, racketeer influence, corruption laws or laws against them.
He was with the Christic Institute. Look up Daniel Sheehan and Romero Institute, but they turned it around on him using all their legal means, counter sued, you know.
So he started the Romero Institute where he is teaching college students exactly how they do this, you know, how they killed Kennedy.
And also people should watch Operation Terror, a movie made by a libertarian candidate who studied, the movie shows how an operation works in the case of 9-11.
But the world. Thank you, Ellen. We need to go on to the next question now. Sorry. So, but I think that was a good question. How can we save the world? Yeah, exactly. I understand.
So I think a lot of people understand. So, Marv, you're next. Oh, Andrš, I don't know whether you've left your hand up, Andrš, but if you've got a very quick point to make, you can go ahead, Marv.
I want to ask you from your doctor's hat. Isn't inflammation the killer of all of this mirrored of health consequences from the vaccine?
Isn't the vascular inflammation the real killer, the brain, the sexual organs? Isn't that what's really doing it? Those, what do they call it? The pee things.
They produce all of these, what do you call it? And that creates this inflammation that's, I mean, inflammation is a killer in lots of other things. But anyway, I just wanted to ask you about that.
Right. Well, nice to meet you, Marv. Yeah, inflammation is kind of a hormetic thing where a small amount of it can be good.
Too little of it is bad because you need inflammation to fight infections and cancer. In other words, your immune system's monitoring the development of cancer cells and infections.
And so some inflammation is useful. Excess inflammation is problematic, especially like you see in autoimmune diseases. And in some cases where somebody overreacts to an infection, you know, they need to tamp it down a bit with steroids.
But yeah, many of the mechanisms attributed to COVID shot harms relate to inflammation. And, you know, there's the cancer mechanisms. There's something like 12 mechanisms by which COVID vaccines are suspected to cause cancer, including spike protein inhibition of P53 protein, which is basically a cancer suppressor protein produced by the P53 gene.
And then the BRCA1 and 2, the breast cancer genes that you heard a lot about a few years ago, and Angelina Jolie was getting tested for it. And women who had this had a very high risk of getting breast cancer or ovarian cancer.
So they would do prophylactic mastectomies. Turns out the spike protein inhibits BRCA1 and 2, and therefore increases the risk of breast cancer and ovarian cancer. And there's a whole bunch of other mechanisms.
But yeah, inflammation is kind of an end result of many of these mechanisms where you're going to either get autoimmune disease. Now the pre-ontogenic thing that Luc Montagnier pointed out, which appears to be happening, which is where a fragment of the spike protein can act as an infectious protein to move among neurons, kind of like mad cow disease or CJD, which is Creutzfeld-Jakob disease.
We are seeing an uptick in CJD cases, unusually, following the vaccine launch. So starting in around 2021, there's been an uptick in CJD cases. And we, scientists are saying they're not sure that's what the cause is, but it's associated with it.
And we do know the spike protein does have this amyloogenic property where it can misfold and it can start to aggregate with other fragments and build up in the brain or in other tissues.
So when it's in the brain, they call it a pre-ont disease, like mad cow disease or bovine spongiform encephalopathy. And there's inflammation involved in that too.
Once you start crushing cells and invading cells, you start to get the immune system coming around and trying to produce inflammation to contain it. And then if it gets out of hand, then it can be also pathogenic.
We're also seeing autoimmune things in the brain, such as multiple sclerosis and some other autoimmune diseases, these polyneuropathies, where you're getting T cells coming and attacking certain neurons and glial cells.
So, yeah, inflammation is kind of a common pathway to cause harm, although a little bit of it's necessary.
Very good. Thank you.
Yeah. Good lesson on inflammation, Marv. So Marv's in Oregon, I think. It's pretty woke there, isn't it, Marv?
Well, Oregon's got a reputation because of the Portland metro area, but we're really a red state. When you get out of Portland and Eugene, we're pretty red. Thanks.
The problem is most people live in Portland and Eugene, don't they?
Yeah. So the next question is... So Anders, I don't know whether you wanted to say something for a minute, because there's another someone I don't recognize, DJAMILALT.
Short question, Steven. Thank you. Thank you.
So, James, it was a great honor to listen to you today, and I would say that you have a very good revelation of what you see, and you've been probably careful not to tell everything what you really know, but I understand that.
So what I see is that you are really into understanding what you see.
Right.
And you are still a little bit afraid of telling everything you see, which is okay. So what I will say is that the radiology, which you know, which is suppressed, maybe.
I don't know. I would say that the suppression of radiology is quite big. And I'm not quite sure what I will tell you, but I will share it with you in the email if I am allowed to.
Yes, sure.
I'm really happy to do that. Thank you.
So Anders, if you send it to me, I'll forward it on to James, and you'll know I've sent it. I'll copy you in.
Thank you. Thank you.
And if I look as though I might have forgotten because you don't get the email, then just send another email Anders to ask me to do it. Okay. To remind me.
So, but thank you for your contribution. I'm glad we've made amended some bridges, at least to some extent. So DJA, I'm sorry, I don't know what it is. It ends with PAIR anyway.
Yeah, my name is Jamila Le PAIR. Thank you very much for letting me be on this platform. It was, I was invited by Meike Terhorst, who's a Dutch lawyer.
And she and I are sort of involved with Rainer Vlumig following his case.
I've been going to his hearing since June in 2024.
And today there was every Sunday, there's a Swiss channel that broadcasts that has interviews with Rainer Vlumig that are taped and then he broadcasts them.
And today they said that they just found out that the so-called extradition or no, no, the expulsion order in Mexico was non-existent.
There was no, the German government never extradited and there was no expulsion.
So I had to, I couldn't follow the whole thing because I wanted to be on this platform and I'll look into it.
But I just wanted to ask Mr. Hill, is there anything you can do? Sorry, I'm a bit hoarse.
As a foreign person, if it is true that he wasn't, how do you say, deported and he wasn't extradited.
We knew he was kidnapped.
Yeah, but now it's official, you know, we now know that there actually, there are no documents whatsoever.
So are they going to let him go then?
Well, they haven't yet. The hope is, of course, he will fight his battle in Germany.
But I was just wondering if there's anything outsiders can do with this kind of information to help his case.
And it's a question to the lawyers or Mr. Hill on this panel.
Dr. Hill, yes, go ahead.
Nice to meet you, Jamila.
Jamila, sorry, it's my parents fault.
Nice to meet you. Yeah, well, in the US, we have a procedure called habeas corpus,
which is where you go into a court when someone is detained and ask the court to demand that the prosecution explained why this person is being detained.
And if it sounds like he doesn't have a deportation order or an extradition order, maybe he has no orders keeping him in there.
It must have to explain why. I don't know if you have the same rules.
And this would be in Mexico. Is this where it would be brought?
Well, the case is, of course, in Germany, because he was kidnapped to Germany.
But I was just because I just heard the news and I need to sign off soon and also wanted to bring up his name again so that.
But the people the people who kidnapped him in Mexico and I think they went through the United States, they were in transit through Texas, was it?
I can't quite remember the people who kidnapped him in Mexico, as I understand it, were paid by the German state.
Yeah. Yeah. Wow. It was a rendition.
It was extraordinary rendition, in other words.
Yes. Yeah, that's what it was. But it was labeled as a deportation.
Yeah. So in the US, we have these laws now concerning terrorists where they can be taken from almost anywhere in the world.
It's not clear that this is legal internationally, but in practice, they're sometimes taking people from other places, bringing them to the US or to other countries and holding them indefinitely without charges.
Now, that violates all sorts of principles under the US Constitution of due process, the Fifth Amendment, the 14th Amendment and so forth.
But the rationale has been, well, this is for emergencies after 9-11, where we have to take people and we need to hold them potentially forever without an indictment or a trial or even a hearing, which is outrageous from a due process standpoint.
So I'm not sure if Germany has the same sort of rule where they would try to say Reiner is a terrorist, so we're holding him indefinitely under this emergency act.
That might be what they would say in the US, but that's outrageous to categorize him as that.
So I would hope that they would not apply such a terrorism law and would instead say that the judge would say to the prosecutor, why are you keeping him here?
There's no indictment here, there's no deportation order, what have you.
So, you mean deportation out of Germany?
No, out of Mexico. They went to a German embassy in Mexico to renew a passport, and the next thing they were being kidnapped from the German embassy to the airport, to America and then to Germany.
And the people who kidnapped him, who took him to Germany, where he was arrested immediately by the German state, they were paid by the German state.
And then he was held against all international conventions, as I understand it.
They had no, they couldn't justify where they were holding him for over a year, and then they had a trial and then he was found guilty and then he was sentenced to five years in prison or something.
Crazy.
Three years and nine months. But it's an extraordinary case because also he was in preliminary imprisonment, and he was in isolation for half a year.
Yes, in shickles.
There's a maximum of 15 days in Germany.
And because he hadn't behaved very well in the court, I mean it's absolutely ridiculous.
They took away the five of the months that he was already in there, they said we were not going to subtract that of your prison sentence.
It was so petty, wasn't it pathetic.
Well, petty, it's outrageous because he was in isolation for half a year.
And he wasn't even guilty at that time, and now he's found guilty, but for nothing. I mean, the whole thing is constructed.
It sounds to me like they were gaslighting the German public and seeing whether they could get a reaction from them, and they didn't get one, as far as I understand.
Well, I mean, the case is all silenced. I mean, if you go there, the public tribune is very small.
There's no media. There's only independent media like me and some others. And we have, of course, a small following, so it doesn't get widespread.
And then even, you know, from July, the lawyers of Reiner Fülmich weren't even allowed to verbally present evidence anymore.
You know, they had to do everything written, which made the absurd situation that we were sitting there in, you know, as journalists.
And then the lawyers of Reiner Fülmich would say, well, we now want to discuss this.
And so they would hand the judges pieces of paper. Then the judges would say, OK, we have to adjourn.
We have to discuss what is on this paper.
There was a break. Then they would discuss. Then they would come back and say, we accept it or we don't accept it.
Is there any more? And then more papers would come. So the whole day that we didn't know what was said.
It was a play. It was so essentially it was to me, it was psychological torture of a German citizen by his own government.
And it was deliberate and it was evil. And someone needs to pay for that.
And now they're trying to climb out of it, of course, saying, oh, well, because there was no deportation order, you should never have left Mexico.
No, it doesn't come from them. It's what Reiner and some of his friends found out.
So, I mean, he's going to present that, of course, to the judges.
But the way no request for deportation. I see. OK.
Well, they paid for the people who.
What's the word?
There there was a sort of thing about deportation, except they never read it in his language.
They read it in Spanish to him, which he can't fluently speak.
And the judge was supposed to translate it.
I mean, you have to know what's in those in the deportation papers to see what he has done wrong, because he must have done a crime to be deported, which he hadn't done.
And I think they've now translated it and they've dug into some information from the government and they found there is absolutely nothing there and either an extradition request nor a deportation official deportation thing.
But I mean, that's what I've preliminary got from this here from this broadcast before I came on here.
But I just wanted to raise there's a new development, although we don't know what effect it's going to have.
Yes, in the US, somebody could go into court tomorrow under habeas corpus and demand to know why he's being held.
And if the government can't explain why, yes, be released immediately.
Doesn't sound like the German courts have those same protections, unfortunately, for defendants.
But I think they might do.
But they will say, well, you're held for these financial so-called crimes that they say he's done and he hasn't.
But also the United States, if he transited USA, then presumably USA is complicit in the illegal detention and transfer of Brian Ofulmik to Germany.
He might have a good chance of a lawsuit here and winning one if he proved that it's illegal.
The US behaved illegally. Yeah.
Well, he was he was taken from he landed on Tijuana Airport.
And when they came out of the plane and Reiner was taken by some guards who didn't know him, they had to look at a picture to see if they had the right guy.
Then they flew him to Mexico.
There he had this sort of deportation process.
And then they flew him to New Mexico.
And from there, there was a Lufthansa flight with two Mexican guards going to Frankfurt where he was arrested.
So they did go via United States.
So that's young.
So that might be the weakest point of the whole case.
You could attack them in America, given that they have these protections, according to James.
Would America have known?
I mean, if Mexico doesn't matter whether they knew or not, they were involved in the in the legal transfer of a human being from Mexico to Germany.
Isn't Reiner American?
I thought he was American and German.
He was practicing law in America and California and Germany.
He's he can also thought that.
But I think he's got green.
He's not American, but he can practice in America.
He's admitted to the bar.
And he's also got a green card, I think.
But some people say that he's got American citizenship.
I don't think he has.
But it sounds kind of like the Julian Assange case where it was so hard for the worst thing was to be, you know, it's brought by America.
The court system is is what, you know, the Department of Justice is supposedly worse than, you know, worse than other places.
Right. Well, at least that was an official extradition procedure.
And this is sort of neither here nor there.
Well, Jamila, you need to read the letters that we had published.
When I say we, we had I had a group before this called Doctors for Assange.
And we had doctors from all over the world signing two letters, two huge letters to the Lancet of all.
And we were highlighting the psychological torture of Julian Assange by four governments.
And I'm sorry to say that the United States didn't come out of it very well, but Sweden came out of it absolutely abysmally.
So did Australia and England.
And of course, the United Kingdom, yes.
So this is always there.
The deep state and the Patriot Act, you know, they the Patriot Act basically gave, you know, America the ability to, as Christopher Boland said, fight the war on terror.
You know, it is a war of terror on the war on terror to use, you know, it's what the Nazis did, which is a war of all against all.
Carl Schmitt, you know, endless false narratives.
Yeah, it's just crazy stuff.
But just to be clear, Dr. Hill, do you think if America wasn't aware of this transfer in New Mexico, you can still walk into it?
They should have been aware of it. That's just the point.
But go ahead, James, you say what you think.
You're a lawyer. I'm not.
Sure. Yeah, it depends on what actually was done by Americans.
It's possible that this Lufthansa flight taking off from New Mexico was a normal flight that carried US passengers ordinarily.
And the US Air Traffic Control didn't know that there was any kind of foreign person being placed on there.
So, yeah, it would sort of depend on what was known.
But it's very possible that the Mexican police or the people who were aiding Germany were cooperating with New Mexico police.
And that's where you might find some liability if they did something illegal.
If, for example, the chief of the New Mexico police in that city or the sheriff, they have a lot of sheriffs in that state, said, oh, yeah, that's fine.
You can bring that guy over here. He's a green card in America.
You can bring him from Mexico and take him off against his will to Germany.
There might be liability there against the state and the county in New Mexico.
So what would happen in that case? Say if he went, if he did that, what would be the result then?
It would be a lawsuit where he could prove that.
But for the actions of New Mexico, who knowingly allowed this to happen because they knew that I was being taken against my will,
I would not have suffered this long sentence.
And so he might argue that the damages that ensue from that, his solitary confinement, his deprivation of his liberty and so forth, should be paid for by New Mexico.
Now, they might reduce that because of some culpability that he has.
But he hasn't been shown to be guilty, right, of anything.
He wasn't charged with anything to start with.
He wouldn't disclose what the charges were.
They have ruled that he's guilty and he's gotten three years and nine months imprisonment, but he's appealed that.
You know, the appealing process is now ongoing, is going on at the moment.
So the biggest defense might be that New Mexico could say we were working with the German government under a treaty to transfer prisoners for each other.
You know, they might have that kind of defense.
But if they don't and they did something illegal, then he could ask for damages, potentially in the millions of dollars.
But it would sort of be up to a jury to decide.
But if the jury hears the story, they might say this is awful what New Mexican sheriffs did.
They should not have done that because it's an American resident, the green card.
And he suffered all of this loss.
So he's entitled to, you know, 10 million.
But again, there's all of these defenses like, oh, we have a treaty with Germany and we're supposed to cooperate and transfer prisoners, that kind of thing.
But they could award, the court in the USA could award or the jury could award what's it called?
Punitive.
No, the special kind of damages where you're trying to deter this kind of behavior in the future.
So you punitive damages.
Yeah.
You call it something else, I think.
Yeah, no punitive is one, there's deterrent damages, compensatory, consequential.
And yeah, punitive would be basically you did something outrageous.
So we're going to trouble the damages.
Give you a hundred million dollar fine or something.
Or award a hundred million dollars.
Anyway.
Yeah.
Thank you, Jamila.
Are you in contact with the lawyers?
Yeah, and with Reiner Fuhlmich from time to time.
So, well, yes, okay.
Well, of course, he wouldn't be able to speak to anyone when he's in prison, but he can call.
Can he?
Well, he has a list of, I think, 10 people he's allowed to call.
Yeah, but I don't think he'd be allowed to ring an American attorney.
No, no, no, no. His lawyers will do that for him.
But I'll pass it on to his lawyers for sure.
Yeah.
So thank you very much, Dr. Hale.
Jamila, you might like to check that the lawyers he's got are good lawyers because I can't believe it's gone this far.
Well, they've fought a very steep uphill battle because the judge just closed the case.
Well, even more reason to fight like a tiger.
Sorry?
Even more reason to fight like a tiger when the judges and the courts are behaving wrongly.
Yes, but if they silent you or if they suddenly change the charge and if they then say, okay, we're closing all the witness hearings, you know, the defense has never had their witnesses heard.
And the guy who stole the money from Rainer Fülmich, so he could...
Well, he hasn't had a fair trial then, has he?
But anyway, wow.
And it's just incredible what's happened to him.
It's on a par almost with Julian Assange.
So I really recommend you need to find the letters in the Lancet about the psychological torture of Julian Assange because the same applies to Rainer Fülmich.
Yes, we agree on that.
Okay.
Thank you very much for having me and wish you a good night.
Jamila, if you just email me, then I can send you the letters in the Lancet.
You need to see them.
They're really important.
Julian Assange is free and Rainer isn't.
I'm working on Rainer Fülmich now.
Yes, but I need...
So Rainer Fülmich needs to see the letters in the Lancet that we published.
They were 30 pages long with the addenda and they are relevant to his case.
I've always said it, but nobody's found them.
I haven't been contacted by the lawyers, by Rainer.
I'd be very happy to help them.
Okay.
I will email you and pass it on to the lawyers.
Thank you very much.
Bye bye, everybody.
Bye.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
So James, we're very grateful to you.
Unfortunately, we've got over 20 minutes over what we should have done.
We're supposed to finish at half past.
Charles enforces it, but I don't even know what the time is, so I can't enforce it.
And anyway, sometimes I think we're discussing something really important,
and that was important now what Jamila brought up, so hope you don't mind.
And I just wanted to ask you...
So we create a video and we'll send a copy to you.
When I say we create it, we just put the record on and then end it.
We don't do much with it unless the guest is really exercised about something.
And then we try to protect the guest, which includes, you know,
considering his or her views on what's been...
I think it's been pretty safe today, though, don't you think?
Yes, I think so.
Not that we're looking to be safe, because we need...
I really think in these times we need to take risks,
because without the risks and the suffering, we are not creative.
It's no use being comfortable all the time, because you're not creative when you're comfortable.
So even if you are challenged by what happened in 2020, that's enough.
To some extent, even we have been psychologically tortured by our own government,
and we paid a huge price on our side, too.
I thought for a long time that we weren't affected by it, you know,
because we understood what was going on, at least to some extent.
I thought we wouldn't be affected, but then I realised that actually in 2020, my world just collapsed.
It was shocking to me. It was really, really shocking.
It took me a while to realise that I too had been psychologically tortured by these bastards.
Absolutely. Yeah, I felt the same way. It was just horrifying.
Yes, and it felt, I have to say, the overwhelming feeling I had in 2020 was loneliness,
because I didn't know anyone around here who thought as I did,
but they hadn't been involved in the whistleblowing case for five and a half years against the British government,
so I understood what lies were.
And I think you told me, oh yes, you were on the 9-11 thing. Yes.
So we all have this kind of training for 2020.
So when 2020 hit, we were miles ahead of all the other people.
Yeah, it was a lonely time. That's true.
Yes, the overwhelming feeling was of loneliness.
And I was thinking to myself, one of my friends was Mike Eden,
and he was kind of really devastated in it, but I thought he was much worse than me, you know.
So I thought he was...
But I kind of, like three years later, I realised, well actually,
that's why I'm kind of really exercised about it still,
because I want to get these bastards accountable for what they've done.
It's really terrible what they've done.
And so we're creating these videos to create a record.
And I hope you'll like this video.
I mean, it's not perfect, but it is a record, and it's very interesting to other human beings,
and particularly in the future, when public opinion starts to turn on these issues, on these vital issues.
And then we'll start watching these videos, I hope,
because then, rather than us constantly having to educate people, you know, or try to,
we can just say, well, watch that video, or watch that series of videos.
Right. And hopefully this will all be behind us.
Yes.
I think we have some way to go. So I don't know what you think the answer is.
I think, as I said on the phone when we spoke, was it yesterday?
Yeah, I think it was yesterday.
And I said that in times of intense propaganda,
it's our responsibility, when we even understand just a little bit of what's been going on,
to create a counter propaganda, a counter narrative to the false narratives that we've been fed.
So there's nothing that says that we can't create a counter narrative.
But have we done it? No, we've singularly failed to do that.
And I think we need to get together to try to decide what are our most important points to hammer home with the public,
because we're not going to be able to hammer home like 500 points with the public.
We have to find maybe five points, which are so obvious that they have, we managed to change public opinion.
And I can talk to you about changing public opinion, because we did manage to do that.
Hi, everyone. Judge Ambrone Apolitanio here for Judging Freedom.
Today is Monday, September 15th, 2025.
Max Blumenthal is here with the report of his latest investigations on the Texas.
Just two seconds, though.
Jim, I don't know who is this. Two seconds.
Who's that speaking?
That was Raneef. Must have accidentally brought up her judge, Apolitanio, and then got her audio on.
Yeah, I'm just trying to get the. Can we?
It was Raneef, was it? Raneef. Yeah.
So anyway, so James, I wanted to ask you, so I think you're a little bit unusual.
I don't think you fully understand that any more than I could see what people saw in me.
But I just wonder, looking back, what do you think influenced you most?
So I think what's fascinating to me about you is that you're a very well qualified medical doctor,
but you're also a scientist and you're a lawyer as well.
And you're very well. You've got a very good education on the on the political side of it as well.
So I think you're extremely well educated, but you care.
You're very good at communicating as well.
So I think you have a lot of the things that we need and you're very reasonable.
Well, you come over as very reasonable.
And some of the time I don't come over like that.
I'm sorry to say, but I don't really apologize because it's me.
And I think we have to be accept who we are and be authentic.
It's very important to be as you know, you can't try to be authentic,
but you may come over as being authentic by your undiluted personality.
If you understand me. Yes.
You come across very authentic to me, Stephen.
And you too with me.
So I think we should.
I can't see this.
I come over as authentic, but you know, I think other people see it.
They either see it or they don't see it.
I think we learn to recognize our allies, especially in dangerous times like these.
Yes.
This is an amazing group.
Who influenced you, James?
I would like to know who influenced you, if anybody.
Who or what influenced you most?
Regarding these topics, would you say?
So I've kind of pointed out some of your good points, you know, some of the...
Why do you think you are like you are?
Because you're pretty unusual.
Oh, thank you.
I had an ICU professor one time in medical school who said,
the good doctors are the ones who keep reading throughout their lives and the
doctors who are not so good stop reading and they don't remain open to new
information.
And so that stuck with me and I've always tried to sort of continue learning
and reading every day.
I mean, I feel like the amount of information I'm taking in every day is no
less than it was in medical school.
You know, there's so much out there.
It's like a fire hose, you know.
Yeah.
And you've got a very good memory.
So you're kind of getting weighed down with all this information.
But you're still able to see the big picture.
Well, trying to.
It can be overwhelming.
The other problem is we all get so busy sometimes with our jobs that things get
crowded out, you know.
So when, for example, COVID was happening in the throes of it with the lockdowns
and everything, so many people were just so busy they didn't have time to think
about the tyranny aspect.
They just thought this is what I must do.
The government's telling me there's a bad virus.
And so this is probably just something I should expect and that I deserve, you
know, to be to have my job lost because of this virus.
And that just never fit with me.
But the difficulty is when we have to earn a living, we have to just have very
little time to focus on these issues.
So I try to do this as much as possible, but I still have a lot of deadlines to
meet every day with work.
And so but I'm really glad to connect with you and this group because you're all
seeing the despotism that we face and trying to come up with solutions.
And that's unusual.
So these days in California, James, in Los Angeles, I think you're in Los
Angeles, but I'm not sure about that.
Oh, you're also in Las Vegas.
I think so.
So do you meet many people who you feel you're in tune with?
Or is it like me, you know, like in North Wales where I am in the United
Kingdom?
You know, there are some people I'm connecting with now who are open to a lot
of the stuff we're talking about, but there aren't very many.
And it does seem to be the case that a lot of people seem to have lost their
ability, they seem to have lost any ability they ever had to think reasonably,
you know, and consider all that they seem to want to adopt an idea or a belief
and never change it ever again.
Yeah, I have six younger brothers and sisters whom I text every day and most
of them are complete agreement with what's been going on.
And I'm not sure.
With you or with the post-NAC?
With me.
So we'll text each other about what's going on in the news or what was
happening with COVID.
And at first I think they didn't quite get why I was objecting or why I
disagreed.
And now they read the substacks so they sort of understand some of the
reasoning and some of the evidence better.
And they're completely on board with seeing these problems.
And so the loneliness is diminished now that I have a few brothers who are
understanding of this in agreement.
The problem is they're also busy with their families and their careers, so
it's hard to really spend too much time.
But we'll send each other a news article maybe once or twice a day or
something we see on Twitter or X that talks about some of these outrageous
policies.
We see a lot of that with California with the way Governor Newsom just
continues to tighten the grip on things.
And the whole thing with the Malibu fires and the fact that everyone was
removed, now they're building low-income housing and they won't grant permits
to rebuild yet from the state.
It's an operation to just remove people's wealth and transfer it.
So yeah, I do have some sympathetic siblings, which is great.
Regarding colleagues, I have a couple of doctors I speak with about these
things, but they will say, oh, yes, this is bad.
But they don't really think about how to address it and what we can do to
change it.
And it's a hard problem, so I don't blame them.
So they don't see what's happening in existential terms like you and I do?
Yes.
They also sort of don't see who's behind it.
And it can be confusing.
So I don't blame them fully there.
But they'll just think it's the Bill Gates or Klaus Schwab or Gavin Newsom or
Joe Biden.
And they don't see kind of the folks above them pulling the strings.
And again, those string pullers are concealed for the most part, so it can be
difficult to know.
So what I'll do is...
You've got five brothers and sisters, is that right?
Six.
Six siblings.
Seven of you.
Yes.
So it sounds to me like you're...
And they all vaguely agree with you.
Well, that sounds to be pretty unusual, especially in California.
I have two that are kind of educationally handicapped.
Might have been a result of the vaccines as children.
But they're living in board and care homes now, so they're not really attuned
to this.
But the other five children, you know, I'm the oldest, are pretty much in
agreement with this.
So, and your parents?
They're both deceased, unfortunately.
But they must have been pretty unusual to have five children who agree with
each other after all this nonsense, and especially in California.
Yeah, actually, my father was killed in 1979 in California.
And my mother died of pancreatic cancer in 05, so they didn't live through
COVID, fortunately.
I mean, I wish they could have lived, of course, but at least they didn't see
some of the bad things that came later.
So your father was killed, did you say?
Yeah, he was murdered, kidnapped and murdered, or was never solved by the
Pasadena police.
Just taken from a bar and brought to Brookside Country Club, which is near
the Rose Bowl, and shot with a shotgun.
And so, I think that's the kind of thing that's been going on in my family
for a long time.
And so.
And nobody knew why?
No.
I mean, we had a couple theories.
One was he might have been gambling with the wrong people, but from what I
understand, they don't usually kill you for a gambling debt.
They'll threaten you and try to get the money some other way.
And another possibility is my mother and father were going through a divorce,
and it's possible that he was dating a girlfriend of the wrong type of person.
It's just a theory, but that's the kind of thing that I understand could get
someone killed in that community.
So your father was, did you say, sorry, I don't want to get this wrong, he was
going through a divorce, or sorry?
Yes, he was going through a divorce from my mother.
So he actually moved out of the house, was living in Hollywood, and he was also
drinking a fair amount.
So he was an alcoholic and would go to these bars and probably deal with the
wrong people.
James, what were your parents?
Were they teachers or doctors?
My father was a high school teacher and my mother was a dietitian until she got
married and stopped working to start having kids.
And how many of your siblings did medicine like you?
Oh, only I did that.
And I have one who's a rocket engineer.
So, James, to get into, so you were brought up as a family in California, yes?
Yes.
And then from there you get a place at Harvard Medical School.
That takes some doing, I think, doesn't it?
It was a lot of work, yes.
And did you qualify for grants from Harvard?
Well, so I was there for residency, for my radiology.
I was at USC, University of Southern California, for medical school.
Yes.
So USC is Los Angeles?
Yes, that's in Los Angeles.
Just Los Angeles, is it?
Yeah, University of Southern California in Los Angeles.
They call it Keck School of Medicine now.
But I thought they put University of Southern California in other places as well, don't they?
Well, they have University of California in Los Angeles, UCLA, part of the UCLA.
Part of the UCLA, yes.
Yes.
There's like five UC medical schools, San Francisco, San Diego, Riverside, LA.
Yeah.
So when I was 19 years old, I worked at the Cedars of Lebanon Hospital in Hollywood, California.
Yes.
And now Cedars-Sinai, right?
Cedars-Sinai now, yeah, which is one of the most famous hospitals in America, isn't it?
And I was a porter.
Yeah, that's excellent.
My parents were pretty good on bringing us up, not to be racially biased, you know.
So we didn't even notice that we were working with black porters.
There were no white porters except us, two of us.
Interesting.
Yeah, we didn't think anything of it.
But I remember the lady in the canteen, she thought we were a bit unnew.
Well, I think she liked us because we were British and we were respectful.
I don't know.
But she never charged us for the food at the canteen.
Wow, nice.
We didn't ask why.
We just thanked her.
That's awesome.
Funny, isn't it?
Yeah.
So whether she knew we were working with the black porters, you know.
So this was at a time when there was still some, you know, there are still prejudice in some states now in America.
Yes, there is, unfortunately.
You think?
Yeah, that reminds me, you were in...
So the LA police, I'm in Chicago and have studied the way they estimate one third of the people in prison, black people in Brown, are innocent, were put in there by the police.
So what do you think about your father being picked up by the police and killed?
I mean...
He wasn't picked up by the police.
He wasn't?
No, he was kidnapped by presumably his killer and taken to a golf course country club near the Rose Bowl and killed.
And then they drove his car to another bar and wiped the prints and left it there.
And the police found the car like a day later.
But they found the tire tracks and everything and a few clues.
I've always wanted to find out if they could go back and get some DNA evidence, but it's unlikely because there were very few things that the person would have touched.
How old were you then, James?
I was 19.
That was a tough time because my six younger brothers and sisters were all under 18.
They were all in school.
And I was in school and working.
And then when that happened, I had to take a year off from school to just work full time for the family because there was no real income.
What year was that?
1979.
Okay.
Yeah.
Oh, that's terrible, James.
So we're very sorry about that, of course.
Oh, yeah, no problem.
I haven't talked about that in many years.
So thanks for asking about it.
What I think is, you know, what I've studied is through the 80s, the intelligence.
Ellen, we need to finish now.
But it's relative.
It's relevant.
No, but James has been.
The way the intelligence agencies really work.
I was just wondering if that might have sparked your interest and willingness to research the deep state, right?
Right.
And in terms of that, these are state crimes against democracy and humanity.
Right.
I think a lot of times being woken up as a as a truth action, you know, investigator.
And then we're trying to wind down now, not wind up.
We're trying to wind down, Ellen.
Okay.
Right.
Okay.
Thank you.
That Gary has a question.
I know Tom had one.
So yeah, this isn't your group, Ellen, essentially.
This is what the problem is.
Come on here.
You act as if this is your group.
This is my group.
And I need to run it as I feel is the right way to run it.
Okay.
Thank you so much.
So, James, thank you very much for talking to us.
I think I hope we'll be able to work together.
I guess so.
And thank you.
It was just great.
Thank you so much.
The pleasure was mine and nice meeting you all.
And I hope I get to work with you in the future and we'll talk soon.
Steven.
Thank you so much.
Yes.
Thank you.
Yes.
Bye bye.
Bye.
I can leave it running now if people want to talk.
Okay.
Thank you.
Yeah.
Can I say something?
Yeah, of course, Gary.
So anybody can say what they like now.
I was.
I was just going to say to James that I thought that was so important.
What he said in answer to your question,
Steven on why he's different that he continues gathering information.
And I was wondering if there might have been a couple of examples of
things that you've been doing.
I think that's a good question.
I was wondering if he's just going to go with the information.
And I was wondering if there might have been a couple of examples of
things that he's read this last week that come to mind and what
what sources he tends to go to.
What sources and publications he tends to pay most attention to,
I guess.
But it's okay.
I think that's a good question.