So there is in the Australian media, I'm certainly enjoying watching Sean Hannity going on Sky
here in Australia and Laura Ingraham and some wonderful, wonderful material.
And you know, I urge all of you to appreciate the good things that Trump does and stop expecting
perfection.
Yeah, I like lefties losing it.
Isn't it fantastic?
And so, you know, the perfect is the enemy of good.
It is good, as I said a couple of days ago, that men can't compete against women in sport.
It's good that the borders are shut.
It's good that children's trafficking is being attacked.
Right?
And, and to then say, yeah, but well, no, you know, it is a, it's
classic line.
You can always find shit in life.
If you look for shit, there's plenty of shit.
If you focus on shit, your life will be shit.
So anyway, that's a message for the recording.
So let's get this show on the road.
Welcome to everybody to Medical Doctors for COVID Ethics International.
In today's discussion, this group was founded by Dr. Steven Frost almost four years ago
with a desire to pursue truth, ethics, justice, freedom and health.
Steven has stood up against government and power over the years and has been a whistleblower
and activist, his medical specialty is radiology.
At this time, we remember Rainer Fulmick unlawfully incarcerated in a German jail, undergoing a
show trial.
We call on his immediate release from jail.
Publicize his situation as much as you are able.
I'm Charles Coviss, the moderator of this group.
I'm Australasian passion provocateur.
We love passionate people here and there are plenty of passionate people.
I practiced law for 30 years, 20 years before changing career 31 years ago and over the
last 14 years, I've helped parents and viewers to strategize remedies for vaccine damage
and damage from bad medical advice.
Bad medical advice is now the number one killer of people in America, ahead of heart attacks
and cancer and diabetes.
I'm also the CEO of an industrial hemp company.
We comprise lots of professions here and we're from all around the world.
Many of us thought that vaccines were okay.
Now, many of us proudly say, yes, we are passionate anti-vaxxers.
And as the evidence of Stanley Plotkin, the alleged godfather of vaccines in America has
confirmed, no vaccine ever in the history of mankind has been properly tested for safety
or efficacy, safety and efficacy.
None, none, zero.
If this is your first time here, welcome and feel free to introduce yourself in the chat
and where you're from.
If you publish a newsletter or a podcast or you have a radio TV show, put it in the chat
so we can follow you.
Most of us understand we're in the middle of World War III and the medical science battle
is only one of 12 battle fronts of this latest world war.
I assess we're five years into a seven year war.
So gird your loins everybody, be up for the next two years and look after your health.
There's nothing more important as I've got a friend of mine with a beautiful young wife
who's going through some cancer problem and that's when you realise health is pretty good
thing to have.
As the Dalai Lama would say, you Westerners are crazy.
You spend your, you spend your health chasing wealth and then when you've got your health,
you want to use it to get your wealth back.
Most of us understand the development of science and the science is never settled.
The meeting runs for two and a half hours after which for those with the time, Tom Rodman
runs a video telegram meeting.
Tom puts the links into the chat if you're able to join.
We'll listen to our guest presenter today, Alexander Makouris, who I will introduce in
the moment for as long as Alex wishes to speak.
And then we have Q&A, Stephen Frost, by long established tradition, asks the first questions
for 15 minutes.
This is a free speech environment with appropriate moderating.
Free speech is crucially important in our fight to preserve our human freedoms.
Some of you, some of you have yet to learn what appropriate moderating is, but as the
years go on, it's getting better.
If you're offended by anything, be offended.
We are lovingly not interested.
We reject the offence industry that requires nobody to say anything that may offend another.
Similarly, we reject the triggering industry.
Don't you dare say anything, Alexander, that may trigger someone to do something.
They are both fraudulent attacks on free speech.
However, we come with an attitude and perspective of love, not fear.
Fear is the opposite of love.
Fear squashes you and enslaves you.
Love, on the other hand, expands you and liberates you.
And I might say, fear, as many of you know, fear also makes you very unhealthy.
It makes you sick.
It drives disease in your body.
So come from love, not fear.
These twice weekly meetings are not just talkfists.
An extraordinary range of actions and initiatives have been generated from linkages made by
attendees in these meetings.
If you have a solution or a product or links or resources that will help people put the
details in the chat, the meeting is recorded and is uploaded onto the Rumble channel.
Now welcome to our guest presenter today, Alexander McCourus.
We thank you, Alexander, for giving us your time and sharing your wisdom and insights.
And for the purposes of the recording, I will give you a little bit of a little bit of your
interesting background and you can tell us some more of that depending on where your
mood takes you.
So Alexander was born in Athens in Greece on the 20th of March, 1961, everybody.
So the 20th of March, send him a birthday card, put it in your diary.
He arrived in London in September 1968 when he was seven years of age.
He educated at the University College London, graduated B.A.
Modern History and First Class Honours in 1982 when he was 21.
He passed his solicitor finals in 1987 and was called to the bar in 2006.
He was a political adviser, speechwriter to the Minister of Culture in Greece, 1981 to
1994.
In private legal practice for 10 years, he was duty solicitor through all the courts of
justice for nine years.
He's been a writer, commentator on Russian and world affairs for the last 12 years.
He's the co-founder of the Duran website, 2016 and the Duran channel, 2018.
So wonderful background. Interesting.
My background is Hungarian, Alexander, although I'm both I was born in Australia, but both
parents are Hungarians, president of the Australia Hungry Chamber of Commerce.
And it's wonderful having that exposure to a couple of cultures.
And the only culture, as you well know, as an expert on culture, is the culture in
yoghurt. But anyway, you can explain culture to us, Stephen.
Thank you for creating this group and for organising Alexander to be with us today.
Alexander, over to you and you can share your screen if you wish.
Alexander, can I just say a quick word to Charles?
So I noticed that President Trump has there's been an executive order to restore plastic
straws in America. Did you see that?
I did. Well, it's highly significant, I think.
And I was wondering, Charles, whether you think we should try to get a message to Trump
and ask him whether you could create an executive order to order Germany to release the
Ranapalmik.
Yes, there is an excellent idea and there are steps being taken to that end.
And people are writing to Donald Trump, people are linked in this meeting.
I know that they've been doing that.
And what is clear is that we have to make noise.
So let's make noise.
And it's our connections and there's so many things to do.
But I think the plastic straw paper straw is a beautiful tip of the spear example of
300 Spartans.
Let's find the pressure point.
I remind you all, how does a lion kill an elephant?
Because a lion can't kill an elephant.
What the lion does is take a bite out of an elephant's foot and waits for the elephant
to bleed to death.
Plastic straws, paper straws, this whole climate emergency fraud can bleed to
death. And perhaps plastic straws are going to be the lion's bite that brings the
elephant down because there are so many people making so much money making our lives
miserable in the name of a fraudulent climate emergency.
And I say that for those of you watching the recording who think I'm ignorant, I've
been a trustee of a renewable energy company since 1992, 22 years, and I've been an
owner of an organic farm for 49 years since 1976.
So I have a debate with anybody about the nonsense of climate emergency.
There is no such thing.
So the plastic straw, that's a good metaphor, Stephen, plastic straw and rhino formic.
Alexander, let's go.
We're all ears for as long as you wish to speak to us.
And we love GA. Well, you know what we love.
I know exactly what you love.
A lot, lots of things to say.
Firstly, talking about free speech, talking about freedom.
I think I just wanted to say a few things about myself, which I haven't mentioned,
which wasn't in that bio.
Briefly, we were talking about freedom.
The reason I came to London in 1968 was because there was a military coup in my country.
That's the same Greece in 1967.
My parents were opposed to the military government.
They were out of the country.
I was not.
I was six and I was placed in detention, house arrest for one and a half years.
So when that starts, when that starts in your life, you begin to think about lots of things.
You worry about freedom, obviously, liberty.
You can't leave your home.
You can't go to see movies.
You can't walk with your family out in a park.
You can't do those kind of things.
So that makes you think about freedom.
It also makes you think about issues of power and due process and all of those things,
because, of course, dictatorships can be very arbitrary things.
When I came to Britain in 1968 as a child of seven, it was quite extraordinary to experience
suddenly the extraordinary access of freedom that I found in England at that time.
And one of the most remarkable things that has happened since then is that especially
over the last 30 years, with every single year that passes, with every single month
that passes, you see that freedom gradually whittle away.
It's not as bad as I remember it being in Greece when I was a child.
We're not in a dictatorship yet, but it is becoming more like one all the time.
And also, obviously, dictatorships do not like free speech.
That is a given.
But dictatorships get offended by free speech.
And what you were saying in your introduction about the fact that sometimes
people will say things that are offensive, but that is a function of free speech.
Well, that used to be fully understood.
And it was part of the legal theory of free speech, that the very nature of free speech
was the ability to say things that other people will find offensive.
Now, that has been challenged.
It's challenged every day.
It's challenged by the mayor of London, Mr. Sadiq Khan, who says that the purpose
of speech is to ensure that people are comfortable.
Comfortable being, of course, the opposite of being offended.
So if you say things that might offend people, you're making them uncomfortable.
And that is wrong, or so we're told.
And increasingly, it is the target of, if you like, the new law.
Because speech has been radically, the laws on speech in England have been radically
shifted over the last 30 years.
Now, this summer, something very extraordinary, rather frightening happened in Britain.
I just want to speak about this too.
And that is that there was an incident, there was a violent incident involving a man who
stabbed three children.
That led to various protests.
Not, I think, very big protests.
There was a huge outcry orchestrated by the government itself.
There was talk about riots.
I can say quite certainly that there were very few riots, extremely little violence,
probably no more violence over the course of the summer than one saw happen in Britain
generally.
In Britain, we often get riots in the summer.
But people were arrested.
They were put through what you might call assembly line justice.
Cases were decided within half an hour.
People were sent to prison.
Really quite astonishing things were done.
And now we get increasingly people prosecuted for what they put up on social media.
Inconsequential, unimportant things.
But they get attacked for it all the time.
And of course, all of this has come and it is not a coincidence.
After the events of the so-called pandemic, the restrictions that took place then, which
were, of course, also ferociously opposed.
So with every day, I see that free speech that we used to have gradually whittled away
in Britain.
It is a country which prides itself on having been a pioneer in free speech.
But no more or so it seems to me.
So that is what I wanted to say.
Excellent, Alexander.
So Alexander, I have not had a chance to speak to you, but I would have asked you whether
you wanted to make a presentation or whether you wanted to take questions from the press
or from the press.
I have just made a small presentation, but I can, I mean, if people want to ask me questions,
I am very happy to, both from you and from everyone else, about the situation in Britain,
about how changes have happened, about the situation in the world.
I should say, this is perhaps a presentation, but we are in a period of extraordinary change.
And I think that is what we are going to be doing in the future.
Perhaps a presentation, but we are in a period of extraordinary change.
Alexander, I have got a question now, which I will forget if I do not ask now.
And that is, do you think that what happened in 2020, i.e. global coup d'etat, was necessary,
was absolutely necessary for the Southport incident which you talked about, you know,
the killing of three children and the subsequent riots which were not riots,
and the cancelling of free speech and the cancelling of justice.
Do you think that would have been, would it have been possible for that to happen
without what happened in 2020, i.e. the lockdowns and the isolation of human beings?
I think that events, the lockdown, the isolation of human beings was part of a trend
that had already begun before. And I think that is an important thing to say.
Restrictions on social media, for example, were already being imposed.
Restrictions on protests. There was a major turning point in the late 1990s,
at the time when the Blair government started to introduce various restrictions.
But there is no doubt whatsoever that the events of 2020 were a huge step forward in that process.
And we have never been the same country since that we were before.
I mean, it has been a dramatic shift, and a dramatic shift towards government and governmental power,
and it also showed to government that they could impose restrictions of that nature,
and they could do it, that there would be minimal process if they did it.
So, Alexander, have you worked out why it is that there has been such a dramatic change in the UK,
in particular? And are you aware of the significance of isolating human beings?
So I'm a doctor, you're not, I don't think. But I, we were taught this at medical school,
you must not isolate human beings. It's extremely dangerous.
So we were lucky to have a professor who could talk about that, but he talked about
isolation in prisons, and then they decided to isolate human beings all around the world,
in every country just about. And I could see, it took me a while to realise it, but
I was really exercised about the injections. But actually, I think now that
it was the isolation of human beings and the breaking of habits, because human beings are very,
how shall I say, they're very in love with their own habits, and they don't change them easily.
But when they have a break of, say, even a month, that's enough to break their habits
of a lifetime, and they can't get back, they can't find themselves. I just wonder what you think
about the, you know, had you appreciated the importance of isolating human beings?
And was it a deliberate strategy on behalf of all these governments?
Well, it was a deliberate, I think it was a, I think it was a deliberate strategy. I don't mean
that every single official of the governments were, you know, united behind it, or every single
minister was. But certainly, I do think that there was an agenda being played out during that time,
and the machinery, the mechanics of it had already been prepared for some time. And I have no doubt
of this at all. I mean, the fact that it was done, that it was unrolled so fast, so quickly,
in so many places, it's not something that is improvised at the last moment or happens
spontaneously. By the way, if you've worked as I did for 12 years in all courts of justice,
you've seen that when things like that do happen, people do discuss them in advance. There is
planning and discussion and that kind of thing. I've been surprised repeatedly to find that things
which happen not only are planned in advance, but they're discussed quite openly in advance.
I've seen that many times. Now about isolation. Remember, I'm Greek. I was brought up in a very
old fashioned way. I remember being taught that Aristotle said that humanity, that people are
social animals. That is the nature of us, that we are social animals. In Greece, again,
and I'm talking about, you know, by heritage, we have this concept of polytheia. Polytheia,
which of course evolves into politics, is a much, much more social thing than this. It involves
the bringing together of the community. It isn't just about politics. It is about life.
It is about absolutely everything that goes to make us human. It is part of the nature of humanity
that we are in interacting constantly with each other. So if you do take that away,
you break down humanity. And that is exactly what happened or what was attempted.
Oh, thank you so much for that. I think maybe your... Sorry, go on, Charles.
Steve, I'm thinking so people, you know, you can ask questions, but it might be rather go for 15
minutes. People might put their hands up so that we have a flowing conversation, Steven.
Jerry can do it, yeah, and take the pressure off me.
Correct. Jerry. Let's go, Jerry. Jerry, Sebastian, I have some questions for Alexander as well. So
let's do it that way. Hello, Alexander. Maybe I'll put on my camera so you've got some sort of
idea who I am. Hey, everybody, I'm so excited. I'm going to be in Dublin with Jerry on the 26th and
27th of February. And you're going to be one very, very intoxicated man, I can assure you.
Honestly, you're going to have one hell of a hangover when I'm finished pouring Guinness into you.
Alexander, I just want to say to you a number of things I want to say. Number one, I've watched you
and Alex over the last three or four years. And you look so familiar to me. You're like my brother.
You know, I'm looking at you and I think this guy is so familiar, his voice, every movement,
every I know so much about you. And I remember when I used to see the pram there behind you.
Yeah, well, I remember the use of a pram sat there behind you. What have you got? Twins?
Do you have twins? I had twins and then I had a third child. So we've got three children.
All girls. You really got the hang of it, haven't you? Absolutely.
How old are they now? What age are they? Well, the twins are three. The third child is now 18 months.
Is that right? Yeah. It really is fabulous. I tell you, Alexander, it's when you get to
be a grandfather, you really appreciate your children. You know, no, I just want to say to you,
first of all, your expertise in Ukraine is absolutely fabulous. I don't understand how
you get so much work and you must have a lot of information coming into the background because
you are without a doubt a world or the world expert on what's going on over there. Partly,
you know, I can say that with a degree of certainty in that I've watched you
since the beginning of the war. You've been right all along.
Well, that's nice to be told. I have an awful lot of help from many, many people
over the period of time that this conflict has worked out. All sorts of people and I can't
unfortunately talk about all of them, who they are. But people from Britain, from Germany,
from the United States have come, all kinds of people with all kinds of levels of expertise.
And of course, I've had longstanding connections with Russia. I should say I'm not a Russianist
myself. My wife is. She speaks Russian. She's not Russian. She speaks Russian, but she knows the
universities in Russia. She knows the academic world. And through those contacts, I've had a
sort of shape understanding of Russian opinion. And of course, I've learnt to understand the Russian
political language, which is not the same as the political language in the West. So when you
understand Russia, you understand Ukraine, because the two are still so connected to each other in so
many ways that it does help you to, if you understand the one, you begin to understand the
other. Yeah, that's I've been surprised at your pronunciation of the, like, how you get your tongue
around the names of those towns that have been taken, week or day in, day out, truly remarkable.
I often wondered, you know, we actually pronouncing them right, you know, I suppose your wife would
obviously know that your pronunciation was right. And the other thing I've noticed over the years
is that you very carefully skirted around COVID, which is probably wise for you in a sense. You
stayed out of that area. So perhaps I'll introduce myself. I'm Dr. Gerry Waters from Ireland,
a Selberge in Ireland. And five years ago, I recognised that there was no virus as such in
my community, whatever about any other community, that was worthy of the lockdowns to facing,
the masks, the social distancing. There was no virus there. There was nothing there. There was
no need. There's no requirement for special drugs, no requirement for any of that. And I said so.
In so doing, I incurred the wrath of the Irish Medical Council. And when they introduced the
vaccine, I refused to administer the vaccine. I was suspended from the Irish Medical Register
in March of 2021 and have been suspended since. I'm in the process of going through
a legal proceedings with the Medical Council. And it kind of looks like they're going to just drop
the case after four years of me being punished. So the reason I'm telling you this, Alexander,
is that I'm as close an expert as you can get to actually what happened. Because the reality of
epidemiologists and virologists and experts in anything, they all go on the GP's diagnosis.
And the whole point, the whole crux of the COVID hoax was the deaths, the actual number of people
dying. Nobody but nobody died from COVID per se. Take it from me for somebody who spent 40 years
on the cold, at the cold face of general practice. Pretty much nobody died from COVID. And we were
told to do as a three card trick of a certification. We were told to put down COVID as a cause of death
based on the PCR test, which in effect was a con and a hoax. The inventor of the PCR test
told us not to use it as a screening test. And we went on and not only did we use it as a screening
test, I mean, we, I mean, the profession went on and used it, cycled 20 times more. And each time
you cycle those things, you double the number of particles found. So what I'm saying to you is,
you know, as I say, I'm about as close as an expert as you can get to the pathogenicity of the virus.
And, you know, I say, I'm telling you this because I know over the last four years, you've been
listening to you. And I think, I wonder what does Alexander really think about this? But in his
wisdom, he decided to stay out of it. Well, can I just say straightforwardly,
goes straight back to the issue of free speech, because there is no free speech on this issue.
There is still no free speech on this issue. If you have listened to my programs as carefully
as I'm sure you have, you will have noticed that there are many moments when I discuss
political events completely unrelated to the COVID issue. And I say, I am now choosing my words
carefully. And I have to do this all the time. One of the most exhausting and troubling things
is that I'm constantly having to second guess what the sensors, because they do exist. They may be
sensors in the form of a machine, the so-called algorithm, but behind the algorithm, there are
people, what they will permit you and what they won't. Now, that puts you in a very, very difficult
position. Do you discuss something? Do you go straight out and talk about it? I am not a doctor,
remember, I have no medical background. Perhaps on the COVID issue, what I say does not carry much
authority. But do I go about it? Do I discuss it? Do I discuss all those medical things, and then
get deplatformed? Because that's definitely what would have happened. Or do I skirt the issue
and avoid doing so and discuss other things, which I feel I need to discuss?
Well, it is a terrible position to be in. It is a shameful decision to be in. You will always have
doubts about the choices you make. You will ask yourself, have you been a coward? Or have you
done the right thing? We took the decision on the Duran that we would
avoid getting too deeply into the subject, precisely in order to be deplatformed.
It is as simple as that. That is the reality. I've been completely honest about this with you.
That was the decision we had to make. And can I just say the free speech issue has not changed?
We still are unsure what exactly we can say about COVID on YouTube. We are still unsure
what we can say in any public forum about COVID. It is the pressure which you have experienced,
obviously, as a doctor, which is on a completely different scale. And by the way, can I just say,
what a terrible thing that was? And what a terrible indictment of the entire legal
and medical culture of Ireland. It is that that should have been done to you. And this is
particularly shameful in a country like Ireland with its particular history, which we all know.
Well, the fact remains, as I said, that those pressures are still there. I hope that they're
abating. I hope that we will now have proper investigations. I hope that now that Robert
Kennedy looks like he's going to be health secretary in the United States, it's likely that he will be
confirmed. I hope the proper investigations will be launched. I hope that people will look into
exactly what did happen. I hope that people look into the whole question of the vaccines,
which was a particularly disastrous thing. The vaccines have been a catastrophe, in my opinion.
And I think that the public is now ready for it. But that's what I can say.
I got to admit, you're dead right. You're perfectly right to stay quiet on that.
No, I'm not perfectly. I am not perfectly right. No, I'm not. I cannot use the word perfectly
right. It is impossible. Perfect is impossible words to use in this. You had to make a decision.
As I said, we were, we decided on the Duran that we were performing a useful service discussing,
talking about politics, talking about the geopolitical realities of the world. And
we decided that we weren't going to risk our voice, losing our voice on that, in order to discuss a
topic which we were not expert on. But to say that it was a perfect decision, or even the right
decision, I'm not sure that it was. Just to say. But you're there. You're still there. We're still
there. You're still there. And you're still telling us. And you're channeling information to us.
You know, those of us who hope you should get it. Jerry, you missed the point. So he hasn't defeated
the tyranny though, the COVID tyranny. That's what he means. But the same token, there are some
of us still out there fighting. And I do believe that Aleksandra and Alex have added so much to the
overall knowledge of what's going on in the Ukraine that they were right. I'll stick to the idea.
You're perfectly right to stick to your knowledge. Can I say something about the
Ukraine conflict? Because of course, there is a connection with COVID again, which is lies.
Lies told about COVID. Lies told about Ukraine. Lies told about the whole geopolitical issue.
Now, we were able on the Duran to expose many of the lies that were told about Ukraine,
about the conflict in Ukraine, about the entire way in which certain policies were being conducted.
Now, the people who were telling those lies, the lies about the politics, about the policy,
are the same people who were telling the lies about COVID. Not maybe exactly the same people,
but they come from the same stable. Consider the fact that Dr. Fauci has now been pardoned
by the very same president who was himself involved so deeply in the conflict in Ukraine.
We can expose some lies on certain issues. We can't expose all lies on all issues. Everybody has a
part to play. But of course, if you undermine lies in one area, then that perhaps, well,
one wants to believe, I'm not sure how far I do believe, but it does make people more skeptical
about some of the things that they're told, more questioning of the lies that they're told about
other issues. It is a fact, and I can say this absolutely, that if you are looking at the people
who were most skeptical about the narratives that were spun over the war in Ukraine, you will find
that they are the same people who came to be most skeptical about the lies that were told about COVID.
But we can't leave out global climate change. As I often say, I ran in two elections,
a European election and a general election here in Ireland recently, and I tried to take on the greens.
Any situation, I had no aspirations to be a politician. I wouldn't make a good politician
because I'm just not a nice enough person. I attacked them every time on the anthropogenic
global climate change, primarily because when I was in university in the 70s, when you were a child,
they were telling us about global cooling, that we were expecting glaciers down to the
Empire State Building and right down into New York and that. And then after seven or eight years of
this, of my knowledge of it, they turned around and they told us, no, no, no, it wasn't going to be
global cooling, it's going to be global warming. And Michael Mann came along with his hockey stick,
which of course has now proven to be totally, absolutely, completely false on the basis of the
tree rings that he used. So what I'm saying to you is these exact same people had in my lifetime,
my scientific lifetime, the global cooling, global warming and then climate change.
And again, as you say, it's all about the lies. And I will claim that each of us have to fight
our area of expertise. And how can I say as a medical doctor that I can fight
having expertise in climate change, primarily because I did chemistry in the early 70s
and I followed through the chemistry of climate change since.
I think you're dead right in avoiding those areas.
Well, can I say on climate change, actually, I have personally spoken out against the issue
of climate change in several formats and several values. Maybe not so much on the Durand because
people don't look to it there. But I actually have some background in this. And I'll tell you what
it is. It's just chance. But, you know, when I was a student in the 1970s, as one does, one
goes and looks and reads some unusual literature. And there was a shop very near my university,
a very good shop where they used to sell Soviet publications in English. And I bought one,
which is a magazine called Sputnik, which the Soviets used to pump out all the time.
And I found there and I still got that copy of that magazine somewhere. I found there an article
by a Soviet scientist which discussed climate change. This was in 1978. And I could tell you
for an absolute fact, I've still got that article somewhere and I've pointed it out and I've read
it out in several places. Every single thing you hear about climate change, every point that's made
about carbon, about whatever, it's there in that article. It's exactly there. And of course,
it predicts it gives a timeline, which of course is completely wrong. Because remember, this was
written in the late 1970s. But I think that scientist who wrote that article was writing
in good faith. Climate science was very much in its infancy then. He didn't quite know.
And I've read about him elsewhere. I think he was a genuine scientist. He got it wrong.
But somewhere, somehow, somebody picked this all up. And you know, when I say this particular
Russian scientist, there were others. Somebody picked it up and ran with the story. And a cult
was developed out of it. Because that's what climate change is. It's a cult.
Well, there's a lot of money behind it, remember. There's a huge amount of money.
Net zero. There's billions depending on the net zero concept. So it is a cult, but it's a highly
paying cult. But so was Covid. So was the vaccine. So is Ukraine. Always there is money behind
anything. Covid was more than that. I do believe that there was a Malthusian element of Covid.
You know, the Malthus idea of reducing populations and that. I'm firmly convinced with my medical
background. Just to say, I think there is a deeply misanthropic aspect to the whole
climate change thing. Human beings are wrecking the climate. We are destroying nature. We are
seen as destroying nature. We must be combated and resisted. We can't use plastic straws or
anything of that kind. I mean, there is a. It is very much there. So yes, I absolutely agree
about Covid. There is a there was a Malthusian quality to it and very much a controlling
quality. But there is a bit there is misanthropy about the whole environmental movement.
Human beings are seen as a problem. Yes, they, you know, they create, they disrupt the climate.
They litter the environment. They must be kept away from the open spaces. They can't be allowed
to build houses or cut down trees or do any of those things. Unfortunately, there is an element
of truth in it that we do. We do tend to be rather distrusting. Well, of course, I'm not saying and
Charles, I was hearing was somebody who's run an organic farm and I'm not against these things.
All I'm saying is that when it's taken to the level of fanaticism, which it is with some people,
it has a particularly. We're not going to shame Charles. We're not going to manage to shame Charles.
No, I'm all in favour of organic things. I go for bio organic lines, you know, the bio organic
lines for example. I prefer organic. Anyway, I've rung as much as I can out of Alexander.
I'm going to you're going to have to go if I left if I've left any information in his brain at all,
somebody's going to have to ring it out of them. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Well
done. Well done, Jerry and well done on your on your fight. And I'm training to be able to drink
more Guinness. So I mean, I'm in training, Stephen. Okay, thank you, Jerry. Good. Sebastian.
Alexander, one of the things I've realised in the last five years, it took me a while to realise it.
So it's interesting that we've never spoken, you and I, but you have and I haven't watched your
videos either apart from the one I saw recently, which led to me asking whether we could have you
as a guest. And but it seems to me that that you so you're talking about cults, and we have this
platform here or whatever you want to call this group. And we've had twice weekly meetings for
three and a half years or whatever, religiously almost. So you could argue we've got a cult too.
But one of the things that I've come to realise is that human beings have been amazingly disappointing
in my eyes since 2020. It took 2020 to make me realise it. But also they have a dangerous
predilection for deadly cults. Oh, this is absolutely true. And it has always been true
at all times throughout history. People have come together and believed in cults and other
irrational things. I am not someone who despairs of humanity in general. I think that over time,
you always see things like that starts to come up against objections and resistance
and opposition. And eventually, the sort of contrary wave comes and people go back and they
look back and they say, Is it really possible that we believed all those things? Is it really
possible that we were fed all these stories that we accepted them? It's true. So, you know, I
understand. I understand the point. Human beings are, well, we are what we are. We have a capacity
to believe, to accept authority, to accept what we are told is learned authority. This is one of the
great things about COVID and indeed about climate science, which we were talking about, is that,
of course, the people who promote these things come with tremendous trappings of knowledge and
scholarship and, you know, prestige because they have all kinds of important positions.
And they tell us that they're experts about these things. And most of us, because we're not experts,
and we are modest about our own knowledge, we are very inclined to believe that. But in time,
as I said, humanity, I think, figures it out. That is my own view. And by the way,
can I just quickly say, whatever you are, whatever this group is, it's absolutely not a cult.
A cult, by definition, is not an organization. It's not a group of people who engage in dialogue
discussion and criticism and who are prepared to say offensive things.
Okay, Alexander, that is not what cults do.
Here's the question for you. Have you looked up the etymology of the word cult?
No, I have not. I'll be interested.
It comes from the word to cultivate. Okay, so it's people who nurture, support, cultivate. So,
you know, it's it's a, but then it's been hijacked, of course, the meaning of it. But that
was his origins.
Interesting.
Yeah.
Interesting.
Okay, Sebastian, come on. Grill Alexander. I've got lots of questions for him as well,
Stephen. So don't worry, I've got I've got sticks to make.
We've got people who know about totalitarianism, not least Yevgeny Legedin, who's also an expert
on the classics in world literature. He spoke for four hours on one of our meetings about books.
And so I encourage all the people who are on now to ask questions. Sometimes they get a bit shy,
Alexander. Maybe it's your British accent.
They're not shy. Come on, Sebastian.
Good evening, Alexander, and great to see you again.
Great to see you.
We actually just finished a two hour live stream with Aaron Matty, and here we are again.
I just like to follow up on Jerry's on Jerry's comments a while ago, that, you know, Alexander
and Alex did not follow up on COVID. We actually did, but we did not do it on YouTube because of
reasons of the logarithms. But we did have Dr. Thomas Binger as well as Dr. Peter McCullar on
Rumble, as well as on Locals.com, where we are primarily doing the work. And so they tried,
we tried to circumvent YouTube. And when it comes to expertise, and the word has fallen quite a
few times, Alexander always started off his, you know, when this Ukraine thing started,
the SNO started. I'm not a military expert. I do remember that so very well. But he has actually,
he was very, very interested in the whole topic of what was happening in Ukraine, what was happening
all around the world, not only Ukraine, because there are multiple conflict zones in the world.
And the knowledge that he has gained over the years, even because I was or am a military
person, I had to tip my hat off to Alexander because he was a very, very, very, very, very
I'm a military person. I had to tip my hat off to Alexander because he has seen things and
predicted outcomes. And Alex as well, because both of them are the Durand, they work as a team.
And these things have actually come through. And his knowledge towards the Russian diplomacy,
the language, exceptional. And really, that is the coming back to the expertise, Jerry,
it is a matter of fighting the war, but choosing your battles correctly and carefully.
And that's what we're all doing. I mean, it's here, the international doctors, we call it ethics.
It's the Durand for geopolitics. Everyone is fighting the battle that they can fight
and trying to win it. But Alexander, I would like to ask you, don't you find it paradox,
maybe even cynical that we in the free world, which we know as the West, that we live in,
that we're slowly, this freedom is slowly dying out while simultaneously, we have the eastern world,
which used to be dictated by communism. They were subjugated by the communists, that they are
actually heroine, the old values of faith, freedom of speech, humanity, family, religion,
everything that West had, we're losing while the communist, ex communist states are losing.
Where do you think this is going to end? And do you see any hope for the rest of the Western
world to regain these old values? These are enormous questions, if I could say.
But why have the eastern states, why people have the people in the east held on to these things
more? Because I think they have done, by the way, I mean, if you follow Russian debate, it is actually
surprisingly open, much more so in some respects than it is in the West. Well, I'm going to suggest
partly it is because they have experienced totalitarianism, and they're more sensitive
to what it is than maybe we are. And they are perhaps more sensitive to the misuse of language
than we are. There was, in Soviet times, there was this expression that you, that officials, that
politicians use what was called is opium language from ESOP, by the way, in other words,
languages is always elusive and elliptical. And this is something that the Russians have known
about. And it makes them particularly not just sensitive to it, but on their guard against it,
in a way that we are we perhaps are not. And of course, it also means, and this is an important
difference in speech, particularly when people talk about politics, I don't just mean politicians,
I mean, people at every level of society, is that when Russians talk about politics, they don't talk
in cliches. Whereas in the West, to a great extent, now we do talk in cliches, when we talk about
politics. And that is an important difference, because of course, cliches are stultifying.
They are a shortcut to avoid thinking about things. And they mean that language is not
straightforward. I'm going to say something further, that if you're talking about Russia,
and you're familiar with Russian literature, there has always been a certain tendency in Russia
towards being straightforward, towards straightforward speech. And with the end
of the Soviet period, this is this appears to be coming back.
And maybe maybe just another follow up on the science. You know, we were subjugated,
it started with the COVID. And of course, it was follow the science and the hubris of one particular
person, who we all know quite well, Anthony Fauci, you know, I am the science. I think that is one of
the reasons why I actually joined this group also, because we have all the experts here. And you can
connect, you can literally connect. We just recently had Richard Jeffs on here on this group.
And he connected all of this pretty much, the different wars, Charles always says, he didn't
say this evening, strangely enough, Charles, that we're fighting a war with seven different,
I think it's seven different battlefields. Well, I did say it. Well, that was different.
And one of those battlefields is geopolitics, or one of them is medicine. And the other one is
fascism, of course. And Jeff, Richard, Richard Jeffs puts it very, very well, he connected it
all to the secret societies. Now, with WEF is one of them, the World Economic Forum, we see the
moving this, you know, this tentacle, this, this, I don't even want to call it an octopus, because
octopus only has eight arms. This is much, much larger than that. But maybe Charles would like to
even expound on that, you know, what these 12 different battlefields are. Well, I'd be very,
very interested to hear. I'll get to quickly before Charles, if Charles does want to speak,
I just get to say quickly, very, very quickly, that I absolutely do think there's been a change
in the world in the West, since as I said, that I remember, which is that suddenly one does sense
that an awful lot of things are going on, which one doesn't know about, that an awful lot of
decisions are made that are not being discussed, that things happen, which don't just happen,
somebody's obviously made the decisions about them. Now, that wasn't true. And I don't think
I'm idealizing, but it wasn't true, you know, before. And it's, it's been developing and
accelerating in ways that I'm not going to pretend I fully understand. But anyway,
if you want to say something, Charles, if you want to, I do. So thank you. Thank you, Sebastian. Yes,
I call this, you know, World War Three, what is this World War Three, or many people have come to
this group out of Canada, that World War Two is ongoing, you know, the Nazis never surrendered.
And that so this could be World War Three, or ongoing World War Two. And I call this the war
against government overreach and one, and the one world government agenda. So that's the war. So
what what have we identified as the war? And the 12 battlefronts, I have them in four groups of three
in priority order. And as you listen to these just quickly, I'll just I'm not going to expand on I'll
just run through them. But you said something, Alexander, Sebastian, you as well, Stephen,
remember, we've talked about this, each one of us, when you go to a war, a real normal war,
you can't fight every battlefront, you make a decision, you get posted somewhere, or you go,
hey, I want to do this bit. In fact, I was watching a, I was watching a film, you know,
like boxes become sergeants to become drill sergeants to train new recruits into a building
army. So the question for each one of us is, what role are you going to play? Now, you can be on one
of these battlefronts. But there are also people who need to be in the background doing fundraising,
doing developing resources, it capabilities. And think about a war, there are people who are
here handling the logistics of food, of feeding the troops. That's a crucial element in a war. So
the 12 legal case, the top three legal cases, harnessing the power of the people to fight back
against government, and then the information battle to get the truth to the people. They're
the first three. The next three battlefronts are politically influencing existing parties,
we're all part of that. Number five, creating new political parties. Number six, the spiritual
battle that we're in, which is the battle of good and evil. Right? So that's, that's a big element
of this. Number seven, scientific medical debates. This is, you know, that's such a distraction. I
I give it as an example of having a debate on the quality of the deck chairs, sorry,
the quality of the timber of the deck chairs on the Titanic. While the Titanic's going down,
we're having a bullshit debate about a virus. So number seven is the scientific medical debate.
Number eight is in business, Alexander, you and I as lawyers, restore the checks and balances in
existing constitutional systems, we don't need to tear down all existing systems. From 1215,
the Magna Carta came, you know, we've got buddy, 800 plus years of, of experience. Number nine,
opposing the new world order agenda and the great reset. Number 10, proper, fair and lawful global
financial system. Number 11, opposing any social credit system. And number 12, opposing the human
augmentation agenda, particularly of Singularity University. So those 12. And then it helps me
keep a framework. And so that people come sometimes come on this course and say, we're
not doing anything. There's amazing work being at Dave Colum, who's going to ask a question in a
moment. The work that he does is extraordinary and sharing a whole new way of looking at,
at life. You know, that's what he's doing. And then Anders, he's going to talk about him and Mark
Steele, they're talking about a deep understanding of 5g and electromagnetic frequencies. So the one
question, so they're the 12 battlefronts, I'll happily send those, I'll post them here so that
it helps us to understand. Now, the question I have for you before we go to Dave,
my father was Hungarian, my parents were Hungarian. And, and I'm in organic farming,
not because I need to save the planet, but because I need to save me. In other words, I knew from
1965, when I went to my first naturopath, and there are naturopaths on this call,
that, that the medical system is literally fucked. I knew that in 1965, I went to this naturopath,
I don't have a doctor, I'm 72. I don't, I've never been to a hospital for ill health, because I knew
what I ate created my body. There's another saying, I've said, it's said that you are what you eat.
That's partly true. It's more accurate to say you are what you don't eliminate. And most people are
literally full of shit. That's why they're unhealthy. Now, quality food is like, I can't
stress enough, Stephen, you know, the community, we should be promoting every meeting here, get
your food supplies in place. Jerry, get your Dublin flute, the Irish food supplies, have secret ways
that you can survive for a year without the system. Now, one question, the Ukraine, my dad,
always said to me that the Ukraine land is so fecund, one of my favorite words in the English
language, that literally, the Ukraine could feed 8 billion people alone. What's your information on
the quality of the soil of the Ukraine? I cannot, I cannot, I cannot give a number, but that it is
extremely fertile, that it is extremely fecund is absolutely true. It was not particularly,
well managed in the past, but potentially, if it was, and it could be, then it would be,
it would be exactly as you said, it is, it's the so called Black Earth zones are enormously important
in potential agricultural terms. And this is undoubtedly a major aspect of the conflict,
because it's seen by some people, you know, the Black Earth zones have been seen by some people as
an important asset, which people are fighting over. We've heard an awful lot about the mineral
worth, wealth of Ukraine, which is probably overstated, by the way, the agricultural,
potential agricultural wealth of Ukraine is not. By the way, this has a very, very long history.
Again, I'm an Athenian, just to say in ancient Athens, Athens imported its food from what is
now Ukraine. The grain ships came to Greece to Athens from Ukraine. And the way we in which
Athens lost its war with Sparta was that the Spartans were able to blockade the ships and
prevent the food from Ukraine, what is what we now call Ukraine reaching Athens. So this is a very,
it's got a very, very long history. I should say that the Black Earth area is in the south of Ukraine.
It's been the most bitterly fought over area. And more and more of it is passing under Russian control.
Thank you. That's the most helpful and I will spend some, you know, being provoked to ask this
question reminds me I'll spend some more time understanding that. But that's a beautiful example.
Beware of the resources that God gives you because there'll be lots of fighting over it. Now talking
about Sparta before we go to Dave Colum, Jerry, my favorite form of poetry is limericks. And I'm
forced, Stephen, to burst into poetry. Since Alexander mentioned Spartan and it goes like this,
there once was a fellow from Sparta who was a really magnificent fatter on the strength of
one being he could fart God save the Queen and Beethoven's moonlight sonata. He could vary with
proper persuasion his fart to suit any occasion. He could fart like a fluke, like fart like a flute,
like a lark, like a lute, this highly far-tistic Caucasian. And it goes off another 13 verses that
I could recite for you here by memory, but I won't. But anyway, thank you for the reference to
Sparta. Thank you very much, Charles. And you won't recite them to us, Charles, because of your
perceived respect for our sensibilities. That's right. I don't want to offend anybody. Respect
for our perceived. Yes, no doubt we'll hear them all in Dublin in a couple of weeks. Wonderful.
Yeah. All right. Dave Colum, what's what's what I asked you this question. What's the origin of
Colum? Scottish, I think. I think it lost a mick. I think it lost the mick along the way.
So I think we're probably from the Highlands somewhere. That's my guess. I actually trace
my roots back through 23andMe to an inbred tribe in the Neander Valley.
So Alexander, Dave is a professor of chemistry at the Library League University. So if you've got
anything that's mystified you since you were at school about chemistry, you can ask him now.
Well, I can. I mean, I should say that chemistry was appallingly badly taught at my school.
We were given a lesson in the periodic table at about the age of 11, and then we were put
in front of bunsen burners and we were doing all kinds of things, experiments, which were
completely meaningless. So theoretical knowledge of chemistry was never provided. And that meant
that the framework of how to understand chemistry was never there. By the way, I just wanted to say
something about experts if people don't mind. I've come to have an opinion about experts,
which is that experts, real experts, are not afraid of debate. It comes back to free speech issues.
If somebody who calls him or herself an expert is trying to suppress views alternative to themselves,
then they are not experts.
So there weren't many experts in the Covid times then?
No, there were not. And that is something that was exposed. And it is a very, very,
very disturbing fact because clearly the people who were dictating the policy and who were telling
us that they were the experts, firstly, they were not experts, but they were in positions of
extraordinary power. It hasn't been officially exposed, Alexander, and that's the problem,
because we need to hold these people to account. But I think people kind of knew that what they
were experiencing was wrong, but they couldn't put a finger on it as to what was wrong.
They weren't well.
Yes, okay.
I think this is going to be one of the great challenges of the Trump administration, if I
can say. I mean, a point has been made that, you know, you mustn't expect perfection from what the
new administration has done. I think it's done an awful lot, actually, in three weeks' time, far
more than I would have expected. But this will be one of its great tests. I mean, it really needs to
actually open the files, open the doors, get us to understand what really happened and to hold those
who did do those things to account properly.
Absolutely. There are very few who do understand what happened, though, I find, Alexander. But I
think the people who are most likely to get there are people like you, who have their minds constantly
open, are willing to hear other ideas and to test and to talk to people, essentially. And that's how
human beings solve their problems. And I think that things have to get worse, arguably, before
they get better. And it's not all to do with logic. You know, we think we have to be incredibly
logical. You said yourself, you'd observe changes, but you couldn't actually work out what the changes
were. You couldn't actually see the red line or whatever. And I agree. I think that human beings
have this amazing capacity to get together, work out what happened, don't actually have to articulate
it, but they kind of feel it. And then they move together to make things better when they had become
terrible, such as, well, for example, in the United States. So people are saying, oh, you know, the UK
is finished and Australia is finished and New Zealand's finished and USA is OK now. But three
weeks ago, they weren't OK. You know, America was lost for four years. And that was a source of great
discomfort to me. Absolutely. To me, to me also, by the way. OK, let's keep moving.
Dave, so our favourite chemistry teacher here, Alexander. By the way, one of Dave's salutary
comments that he makes in his annual review is that someone said of Dave Colin that he could
make a proctology exam lecture interesting. So there you are. And then proceeded to describe
getting my prostate taken out. A couple of things. One is your description of chemistry. It hasn't
changed. You described it to a T. The Ukraine story that you have spelled a lot of ink over,
what's so strange about it to me is that the truth seems to be in plain sight in the sense that
the written records there, I'm ultimately a pro-Putin guy at this point saying, look,
he played the best hand he had at that point. NATO was the problem. And it didn't take a huge
amount of work to figure that out. What caught my eye actually was the mention of the screep
holes poisoning in the bio. And years ago, when that happened, I dug into that. And the first thing
that I noticed was that the claim that it was uniquely Russian technology was the most
outlandish claim on the planet. And so I went out on Twitter and said, they're lying.
And next thing I knew, I was doing weekly George Galloway interviews and Al Jazeera.
I've done a ton of Russian Today interviews. So they could call me anytime they want to yank
to say something bad about something. But it turned out that the organic chemistry behind the
screep hole nerve gas was so simple that I actually put it on an exam in my course and said,
design a synthesis. And they all got full credit. The question I have for you is what the hell was
that all about? My conclusion is that it probably came from port and downs. And it did not look like
it came from the Russians. And people would say, well, if not the Russians, then who? And the
answer is anyone on the planet who wanted to make it look like it came from the Russians.
So what's your take on that? Well, I think that's probably right. I mean, the difficulty with the
script case is that that was a corrupted investigation from the very first moment.
The then Prime Minister, Theresa May, got up in the House of Commons. This is almost as soon as
the script was found unwell. This is before any proper investigation had been launched.
And she said, it is highly likely, those are the famous words, that the Russian government,
that the Russian authorities were involved. Now, I mean, when I worked in the Royal Courts of
Justice, I've had dealings with the police. I know how the police work. I know how senior
police officers work. The Prime Minister comes up and says that in the House of Commons on the basis
of so-called intelligence information, which, of course, we've never seen. The police are going
to take that as a steer, and that's going to shape their entire investigation from that moment
going forward. And that was precisely what happened. Every part of the investigation was clearly
took place with the objective of reaching what was already a pre-decided outcome.
So in that kind of spirit, you can't assume that anything is true. And there hasn't been
actual investigation of the Skripal case. It's not being conducted. I mean, I know about it. By the
way, one thing I do know about is investigations. I used to have to review many, many investigations
when I was at the High Court. You can't say that there's been an investigation. You can't say that
the real leads that exist have been followed through. You don't know how this event came about.
You don't even know exactly what did actually happen. What was the events that took place?
And by the way, what you've said about the fact that, you know, was it Novichok,
you know, that this is not a unique Russian technology. There was an earlier case,
the Litvinenko case, which was a man who was poisoned with polonium. And again, it's not
widely known, but during the public inquiry that was set up to the absolute dismay and astonishment
of the judge who was chairing the inquiry, the government's expert witness came forward and said,
no, it's not true that polonium, whatever it was, which is the chemical that was used against
Litvinenko, that that only originates in Russia. Nor is it particularly difficult to find, nor is
it particularly expensive. It could have been produced in Britain. That's what she said.
And you could, if you read the inquiry reports, you could almost see, you know, the judges,
because the judge again had a preconceived idea of where the investigation was going.
You could almost see his jaw drop. And he mentioned it in his final findings, his final findings,
what the experts said, that he just ignored it and just went back and said, you know,
because it's polonium, that must mean it was the Russian authorities that were involved.
Because polonium, the polonium was the only real evidence that it was the Russians. And it's the
same with the Scripils. The only real evidence that it's the Russians is the fact that it was
supposed to be Norbichok. If you take that away, then the whole case that's constructed starts to
look threadbare. Well, even Porton Downe, guys at the end said, said, no, it's not necessarily
the Russians. The polonium one told me that the only thing you know for sure is it was probably
a state actor, right? It wasn't just wasn't food poisoning from eating shellfish. Yeah. And that
was, was that 2017ish? Was it about then? It was a bit earlier than that. It was a bit,
but I think the inquiry was about that time. So the other thing is there's actually photographic
evidence that the two Ruskies who supposedly did it, that the photos were frauds. And so the whole
case fell apart. We're not very good at that stuff anymore. As Peter Thiel once said, and then
when they failed to shoot Trump, he says, it's really pathetic. We can't even whack anyone anymore.
So Dave and Alexander, what was the point, you know, from Britain's point of view, was that to
kind of prime the public to be anti-Russian so that when the time came, they could unleash the
Ukraine war? Which, again, this is where one just doesn't have the whole motivations. I mean, already
speaking from Britain, already you could see that relations between Britain and Russia were
deteriorating rapidly. What exactly made the British authorities so antagonistic to the Russians at
that particular time? As I said, it's still not clear to me. There's so much going on, but certainly
the whole Skripal affair did play a very important role in poisoning attitudes
in Britain against Russia. Just like the Russian case.
Was the intent in America to influence the UK, one of its allies, you know, to prepare for,
I don't know, so I'm thinking of the North Stream pipeline explosions. We've got someone in this
group called Professor Hans Benjamin Braun. Braun. Braun. He's a professor of theoretical
physics and he did an investigation of his own into the North Stream pipeline explosions and
concluded by 11 different ways that it was a thermonuclear explosion in the centre of Europe.
And guess what? Germany didn't notice and neither did Sweden. Sweden had detected,
they were the first in the world to detect, well partly because of where they were,
the Chernobyl explosion, but they didn't tell the world about the thermonuclear explosion in
the centre of Europe. And I think Hans Benjamin Braun was correct because he distributed all
his evidence to the United Nations and to nations around the world. Nobody came back to him.
No, of course not. As they wouldn't. Which of course, I mean, not even to say presumably
that he's wrong. But if that did happen and it's happened in Truss's time in those three weeks,
so was that the reason she was brought in as Prime Minister for three weeks?
Let's keep moving. Lots of contemplation but great questions. Dave, are you done?
Oh, you're muted, David. Yeah, he's okay. Righto. Now, the
question I have from Dagmar, who's not feeling well, and Dagmar Alexander is a lawyer in Germany
closely involved in the Ryan and Fulmi case. Her question is, before we get to Anders,
do you see the possibility of the monarchy disappearing in England and Europe?
She says, I see the monarchy as an important element of the collective Stockholm syndrome
in Europe. I hope that Diana's sons would set this process in motion when they
realized that their mother had been liquidated by the firm.
The monarchy in Britain as an institution is very, very bound up with the whole structure of the
British state. Bear in mind that we don't have a written document which we can call a constitution.
We have all kinds of legal theories in Britain and conventions and structures, all of which
ultimately originate with the monarchy. So, simply as an administrative act,
doing away with the monarchy would be a challenge. I mean, it has been done before. It was done in
the 1640s, but it would be a difficult thing to do. And I think that the inclination of the British
establishment will be to cling on to it as much as they possibly can and for as long as they
possibly can. One of the great changes that has happened in Britain in my lifetime is you have
seen support for the monarchy amongst the people drain away. In the 1960s, when I came to Britain,
the monarchy was an act, the monarch, the monarchy was an actively popular institution.
I mean, people supported it. It was very much part of their sense of British identity. The Queen was
very highly respected when it was her silver jubilee in 1977. It was massively celebrated
by the people. Today, the monarchy is treated with indifference by most people. And you saw the
difference in the coronation. So, if you go back and look at the film of the coronation in 1953,
when the former Queen was crowned, you see that this was a huge national event involving the
people of Britain. When you look at the coronation of her son, King Charles III,
it passed by almost unnoticed. Hardly anybody really particularly cared. I think it's going
to be very difficult to sustain the monarchy for all the enormous institutional problems
in the event that there is that kind of indifference to it. Eventually, people will say,
why do we need it? What is it for? So, I think probably it is quietly slipping away.
And then what about Europe? The stock exchange? Do you think that's a good thing?
I am not sure, to be honest. I'm going to say this. I think that the monarchy,
as it used to be, was a part of the constitutional legal and cultural landscape
of a Britain that I remembered and which I loved. I should say that. I mean, the Britain I came to
was a country that I loved and felt very connected to. So, though I am not particularly, you know,
royalist or anything of that kind, seeing the whole structure gradually come apart,
I find it very unsettling and I do wonder what will come.
So, Alexander, is that the intention to actually create that unsettling feeling,
unsettled feeling in British people? Was that the intention? And in particular,
I was a bit disturbed about the way that, you know, when the Queen was alive, she was much
admired, you know, even in the latter years of her reign, people had nice things to say about it,
if only because she'd been there for so long. You know, most people, in fact, almost all people in
the UK in the end, had never known anything else, you know, as far as the monarch was concerned.
And so, it just so happened that her son, Prince Charles III, or King Charles III, as he's known
now, he was a very, very poor substitute for the Queen. And the Queen is never mentioned now.
I've never had a monarch die in my lifetime before, so I don't know what, there's nothing to compare
with. But it just seems very odd that she was much revered when she was alive. But now, nobody ever
talks about her. Well, this is absolutely true. I mean, when Victoria died, and when King George
V died, monarchs who had been popular and very revered in the country, the fact that, you know,
their shadow lingered for a very long time, people remembered them and took them very seriously.
I guess it's good to make an observation about the Queen. I think one of the great qualities that the
Queen had was that she never changed. Even as Britain changed around her,
the Queen herself did not. Charles, can you mute this guy, Deli, or whatever his name is?
Yeah, keep going, keep going. Yes. And that meant that she remained, she was some sort of connection
to the Britain of the past. And I think people valued that. And that partly explained the enormous
respect and affection that people felt for her. There is nothing like that that's just passed over
to the present King. And the fact that we don't talk about her, and that the British establishment
is no longer interested in talking about her is perhaps a sign that they don't want us to think
much about our past. So is this about taking people's identity away from them? Yeah, I think
it is probably. Come on, let's keep, we've got lots of questions. Stephen, save that question up.
That's, but you know, you're in the midst of it, Stephen, so I don't know whether we,
leave that, leave that to the end. But it's an important question as lawyers, the constitutional
framework for the UK. Yeah. You know, in same Australia, we don't have a, we don't have a
constitution. Sorry, Australia has a constitution, but no Bill of Rights as such. Now, Anders,
I've said, Stephen, I've said to Anders, he's got some great information that he should do a
presentation due for another update, but he's going to keep this one short. And Anders, please,
what he's been doing his research on will be useful for us to see, Stephen. So he'll be able to.
So I saw in the chat that Anders had written that Robert O. Young, who's been a guest for us,
he's just been sentenced to prison, but you didn't say how many years, Anders, you said for years,
but wasn't. Yeah, so the details are that he was, it was a jury of 12, and it was three accounts,
and he got convicted for all three. And let's say by technicality, a felony is from one year
and above, and this is three felonies.
So yeah, well, why are you talking so cryptically? Just tell us how long was the sentence?
Well, the sentencing of how long is not, it's not done.
Yes, he's been convicted, Stephen, of three felonies. Sentencing is not done.
No, I'd like to know what he was found guilty of.
I don't want to go into it, but let's say it's in the chat, the details.
In the chat, there's an article, Stephen, someone's posted.
Is it about COVID?
It is about him claiming he's a medical doctor and that he's treated patients, and
this is, let's say, yeah, not legal.
Yeah, but he was outspoken during COVID times.
Technically, it's not about that, but you know, we don't really know.
Well, yeah, okay.
Okay, yeah.
All right, Anders, your question.
I have been working very closely with Robert, so just first of January this year, we finally
published our, my research, which is written together with him, which is going into
the combination of both the historic, let's say, EMR, electromagnetic radiation as a
historical factor, as well as the historical vaccinations, about 130 years or so.
So this was done, and I started a new study, which is into fertility,
which I am now into, and I have done a lot of progress in that, and I've been really
shocked to see that the fertility decrease is accelerating, becoming worse in 2024,
while the excess mortality is slowing down.
So, and I can see the trend line, let's say the excess mortality started in 2020 prior
to the JABs, and it was not going up a lot in 2021, but let's say with the third shot in 22,
it accelerated. So there are two strong correlations to the increased amount of 5G
radiation, as well as, let's say, the third shot, and it is a huge variation in the cities
where you have high 5G.
Anders, I don't want you to do your presentation now.
Okay, so.
So this is my finding, so this is huge, so to me, I just want to say that it looks like
it's a much worse situation with the reduction in fertility than those who have been killed by the
JAB so far.
Hmm. I hear about this, about the problems with fertility. It is a much under discussed subject,
in my opinion. You just get the odd article appearing from time to time talking about this,
but people are not really talking about this or addressing it or discussing why it's happening,
and there doesn't seem to be any real explanation that I'm aware of as to why it is happening.
I can't say more.
No, the explanation, the explanation, I'm not a medical doctor, I'm a kind of expert in
computer analysis, but let's say what appears to be strong theories is that we know that this
lipid nanoparticle with all the nanotech was going into the test and ovaries, that's a fact,
it's measured. Second, the radiation goes to the same places and you are radiated with, let's say,
high frequencies with high energy, higher energy in the big cities, so you are likely to have
big problems with, let's say, the creation of new life because there will be a lot of DNA
problems because of the radiation, high radiation.
Mm-hmm. Well, again, I'm not sure that I can add very much to this. All I will say is this,
this is clearly a big major issue. It is very under-reported to the point that one wonders why
it is as under-reported as it is. You would have thought that this would be something that people
would, that, you know, that authorities would be concerned about. They seem to be completely
unconcerned about it. And that, you know, that in itself begs many questions as to why. But that's
really all I can say. I mean, it's not, it's something I've heard about. I don't think I'm
able to comment more about it than that. Okay, thank you, Anders. So Anders is going to do a
presentation, everybody, because his research is wonderful and gives us useful tools and will be
useful for the lawyers in cases to come. I'll remind everybody of the film called Witness
Statement. I'll put the link in again that Gerry Brady has been part of putting together, which is
designed to be spread all around the world. Some of you have already done so. And it is a two and
a half hour documentary on evidence for police and investigative authorities for the decades to come
about the evidence of what happened during the COVID attacks. Now, I wanted to share something
with you before we go to Sebastian again. And I'm going to share my screen. Some of you remember
what life was like in January 2020. And I've been a fan for some 12 years of John Rappapour.
And this is what he shared for those is a wonderful, his substack is fantastic. But
this is on the 10th. So this is this email that I got was on the 22nd of January 2020, everybody,
is the new deadly China virus, a covert operation, new virus in China, watch out,
new virus in China, watch out, spreading animals to humans, pandemic coming up, obey medical
authorities, all hands on deck, centered in Wuhan, the city of 11 million. Will they quarantine and
shut down Hong Kong? Travellers with the virus getting through to Europe and America? What's the
name of the virus? 2019 in COVID-2 or in COVID-2? What? Thank God the Chinese are under a tight
dictatorship. They can crack down and quarantine anybody on a whim. If your body temperature is
elevated on the chest, they stop you? Wow, we may need that in the USA as long as they don't stop me.
Impeachment? Forget that. It's the virus. There you are. In the 19 years of this website, the one
story I've researched and covered more than any other is the deadly virus hustle, SARS,
swine flu, Ebola. Now we have a new one. And on it goes. So it was interesting. I've collected all
my emails from Rappapour. He's a wonderful investigative journalist. I recommend him
for all of you to get his sub stack. But I'll just bring into your attention what was happening
then. Do we know which state Robert O. Young was convicted in?
No. Someone will put it in the chat. Stephen, the full article is in the chat somewhere. San Diego.
San Diego. California. No, it's California. Yeah, that's California state. That is California.
Yep. Jesus. No. Yeah, OK. Sebastian, the question was asked a while ago about the black earth or
topsoil, which is in Ukraine. Why this is so important? I think Alexander can also
expound on this topic from a historic point of view. But I'd like to mention that there were
rumors that in 2014, 2015, Bill Gates was buying up a tremendous amount of farmland globally,
even in Russia. And he tried to get farmland in Ukraine. I think it was after the arms revolution.
And it is because the topsoil is the most fertile soil. It is one of the most fertile soils
in the world. And this happens to be, as Alexander said, it is in the south of Ukraine,
where the four states have been incorporated into Russia, as well as Crimea. And on that point,
Crimea is an extremely important geopolitical and strategic point of the world, which has been
fought by the British since 1854, the Battle of Crimea, of which a movie was made,
The Charge of the Light Brigade. And I pass on to Alexander here because this is of significant
importance that he might like to speak about. What about Crimea, about the Crimean issue? I mean,
the British, one has to say this clearly. I mean, most British people have only folk memories of the
Crimean War. And of course, there's a famous poem by Tennyson about the Charge of the Light Brigade.
And there's been films about this and that kind of thing. But the British establishment, parts of it,
at least, seem to have never given up on this issue. And the idea about Crimea, if you look at
Crimea in terms of the Black Sea, it sort of dominates naval movements on the Black Sea. And
it also means that because of the Black Sea, because of the various big rivers open in the
Black Sea, the Dnieper, the Dniester, the Danube, this is all part of some great geopolitical play.
And there's been talk that the British want bases of the Black Sea and specifically in Crimea.
And it's a fact that in 2014, the Americans, after the change of power in Kiev, after the Maidan coup,
actually did send people to Crimea to sort of think about opening a base there. Of course,
the Russians, Crimea is not just a naval base and a place that's important in those respects.
But of course, it's very much a part of their history as well. So it's understandable perhaps
that they would resist this. I have to say, I still find this fixation that some people in London
have with Crimea very, very strange that people should cling on to ideas and geopolitical ideas
of the 1850s in the modern world. It is part, in my opinion, of the unhealthy obsession that we have
in Britain about Russia, which has never fully gone away and reasserts itself every so often,
and which we now have in acute form. Quickly, on the subject of Crimea, just to also add,
by the way, that all these names, these Greek names that you see, Sevastopol, Simferopol,
Odessa, all of that, they have no actual Greek origin. They were chosen by Catherine the Great
and Potemkin, her chief minister. So Sevastopol means the city of the empress,
and the empress in question is, of course, Catherine the Great. And there was never any
ancient Greek city by that name, and there was never any ancient Greek city by the name of Odessa
either. That is a name that was also picked by them, and it clearly refers to Odysseus, the
Greek hero, the ancient Greek hero. Brilliant. Thank you, Alexander. And Sebastian, Tom the Rodman man.
Hi there. So I listen to both Alex's a couple times a week usually, and really appreciate it,
and I appreciate Alex from CRETE. He apparently has a lot of IT ability, and he does a lot of work
with all the channels and so forth. But I was talking to a friend last night who's actually
on this call who's very good on history, and he went over the vilification of Putin starting in the
right after he got installed. I guess initially he was greeted by Bush, and it was a positive thing.
It was a positive thing. But I think what I'm concerned about is, or what I wanted to get across
is that I first sort of became aware of, I certainly was impacted by Vietnam, but in the 90s I was not
awake. And then over the 90s I think I woke up, and I think TWA flight 800 was something that
woke me up, and then certainly 9-11 and so forth. But I wanted to just mention a few points. One
thing Eric sees in Russia, he's brought up that there are drones going upwards of 1200 miles into
Russia, and that somewhere between 8 and 10 percent of the oil refineries have been disabled
periodically, and then they get rebuilt. And that this story is just not, this is another theme I
have, what do we, what are we to focus on? We're focusing on Gaza. I was at a demonstration last
night out in the cold about that issue. It's very important to me. But the number of dead per day
in the Ukraine far exceeds the deaths in Gaza. So the American people have been just as duped as,
well, I know this is a contentious issue, but there's a vilification of the Palestinians,
and I contend that, you know, the Israelis have been fooled. There's some people,
another comment you might address is the stratification of wealth within Israel.
Is it true that there's a class struggle there, and that, you know, so I'm hitting all these points.
Yeah, if you could, I'll try to wrap it up here. What do you think, is Trump going to, is the body
count under Trump going to be less than Biden in the long run? And then your comments on the political
capital that was spent by Trump in this press conference with Netanyahu, and do you have any
additional analysis on that? Well, I've discussed all of these things. Can I simply say, first of
all, that you're absolutely correct about one thing. There is a huge amount of vilification and
media manipulation and distortion and propaganda. That is true of all wars, but the extent to which
it has been happening in recent years has been astonishing. And it often is directed in conditions
where there hasn't been a war. I mean, in theory, at least, I mean, we are not at war with Russia,
and yet we behave all the time as if we are. We talk about Russian leaders and Russian political
objectives as if we were actually at war with them. Now, I think people are starting to rebel
against this in the United States, definitely, in Germany, to some extent, less so in Britain.
I think if we're talking about the Middle East, about the conflict in Gaza, about the situation on
the Palestinian territories, then I think here, the degree of pushback that there is from people
about what is going on is much greater. People have learnt to be critical about the official
views from a very, very much earlier point than they have been about Ukraine. Ukraine is still
an early story. It's only been something that people have been watching and listening and
following about for about 10 years. Russia, it's perhaps longer, it goes back further. But
the issue of the war in Ukraine, as I said, people are only just now beginning to learn about it.
The war in Gaza, because it's been ongoing for, what, 80 years now, 70 years now,
a lot more people have become critical and an awful lot more people have become
much better informed about what is going on. Now, very quickly, just to touch on a few quick points,
the drone strikes that the Ukrainians do, I myself think that they are mostly performative. Yes,
they do do some damage. I think that they don't do any significant damage. If you look at the
overall economic numbers that are coming out of Russia, they are not affected by these drone
strikes. I think these are little pinprick things that Mr. Zelensky and his people do,
because they want to show that Ukraine is hitting back Russia in some way. So that's what I wanted
to say about those. Now, about the issue of these comments of Trump, there are two views here.
My own view is that Trump has no intention of deporting millions of people from Gaza. I think
he did understand that there is a potential political crisis in Israel, because this ceasefire
had been established in Gaza and that the Israeli government and Netanyahu himself
had not achieved the objective of destroying Hamas, which they told the Israeli people that
they would. I think Trump does not want to see Netanyahu go for all sorts of reasons. He prefers
the devil. He knows who is Netanyahu. So I think very unwisely and very foolishly he made these
extraordinary comments about Gaza, which he's now doubled down on, as he tends to do, in order
mostly to help Netanyahu. And I think that is probably all there was to it from Trump's
perspective. I think that in terms of the effect in Israel, in Gaza, in the wider Middle East,
and across the world, I think they were very, very bad comments. I think that they've been very badly
received. I think many people, myself being one of them, feel that they normalize deportations,
mass deportations of people, and appear to legitimize them. And I think Trump should not
have said what he did. Those are my views. Okay, one follow-up. Thank you. There's one
demonstration in the U.S. that I'm aware of against the Ukraine war, and Jill Stein was there. There was
the woman from Code Pink, Medea, was there, but they were not allowed to come to the front stage
because their respective organizations would not allow them to endorse that event. And it was the
People's Party. We also have somebody on this call who knows about the People's Party and the
corruption, how it's a paper party here. But I attended a local rally on that, and I was punished
by the party that I was in. I was expelled from that party.
Again, the body count in that is higher than Gaza, but there's no activity. Is there any
activity that you know of on the street against that war in Europe?
Because we're not seeing much here in the United States. It's just...
Well, there is very little, and in Britain there is none. I mean, there's been no anti-Ukraine war
protests in London, for example, that I'm aware of. I mean, just to say, there were a few at the
beginning, but of course they weren't anti-war protests. They were pro-Ukraine protests, which
ultimately meant pro-war protests. But those were right at the beginning. All that's melted away,
but it has not become a topic that people are mobilized around. And partly it is because
people are very, very intimidated. People are still very frightened. If you come out and talk
and speak out against the war, you're immediately classified as a Putin enabler or a Putin spokesman
or a Putin propagandist, and people are frightened of that. So we haven't yet reached that point
where protests have become possible. And can I just say the fact that you were expelled from your
party, the fact that Jill Stein was unable to speak, all of this is terrible. One should not
overlook how shocking it is that people are being prevented, in effect, from speaking out at public
meetings or attending public meetings. Again, once upon a time in Britain and the United States
and Canada and Australia and all sorts of places, it was absolutely possible to do this. We had a
place in London called Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park where people used to come and they used to
tip speaker. If you go to Speaker's Corner today, by the way, you will find it empty.
There is no one there anymore. I've been there many times. It's not far from where I live,
but it is now deserted. That whole free speech thing has died and it is terrible.
Now, there is not, however, the active persecution yet of people who speak out
against the war in Ukraine, as I do, that there is a people who speak out against what's been
going on in Gaza. Here there has been. I'm in touch with some people in Britain who have been
called in by the police, who have been detained for many hours, who have been questioned under
the Terrorism Act, which is an appalling act, by the way, absolutely awful act, the Terrorism Act,
you know, on the basis that they're giving support to a terrorist organization, in other words,
to Hamas, which I can say definitely that they are not. And they've been kept in custody for
periods of up to 96 hours without access to their lawyers and without ability to contact their
families. Now, I should say that I have been giving advice to one or two of these people,
not legal advice, but I've been arranging for lawyers to see them. One of them is a man called
Richard Medhurst. There have been others. I don't want to name who they are because obviously there
are confidentiality issues, but nothing like that yet about the conflict in Ukraine. And hopefully
there never will be. Thank you, Tom. Thank you, Alexander. Excellent. Alexander, 96 hours detention
in the UK without charges is illegal, isn't it? Absolutely. Absolutely. And I know that it's
happened. Denying a person access to a lawyer in that time is illegal. Preventing them from
talking to their families is illegal. Isolating them. And yet it is being done. I know that for
a fact. When did things change? When did Speaker's Corner die? I don't know. It's one of those
unnerving things that you go there and you suddenly notice that there isn't anyone there.
And then you go there again and again. And you realize that at some points recently,
but you can't exactly put your finger as to when it happened. This place, which used to be so
important, has ceased to function as it once did. I don't know. You won't find anybody to talk about
it. Nobody will discuss it. None of those things. So many things like that have disappeared from the
UK. Come on. Come on. We've got hands up, Stephen. Come on. We're running. We're going to run. You're
going to last. Stephen is the last. Every time I try to speak, Charles, I didn't get my 15 minutes.
And you close down every time. I'm trying to save you the last 15 minutes, Stephen.
Right. Well, that doesn't happen. With lovingly. At quarter past 10, your time, Stephen, it's all
yours for 15 minutes to grill Alexander. Well, we'll see. Yeah. Yeah. You'll have no problem.
Yeah, but then I can't think of the question. So I'm just.
Yeah, that's fair. Yevgeny, here we go. Yeah, thank you very much. First of all, I want to say
that as a psychiatrist from time to time, I attend Alexander's blog on YouTube as a psychotherapeutic,
you know, room. Thank you. So, um, Yevgeny, can I just explain who you are? So, uh, Yevgeny is a British,
uh, trained, trained in the UK as a doctor. So he's a British trained doctor and psychiatrist.
He was born in the Soviet Union. He knows the classics. He can talk about books forever.
And he was so he knows about totalitarianism as well because of where he was born. And, um,
and also very bravely and courageously, he's kind of accepted that he had to give up his
career in medicine, as did I, because of what was happening in 2020 and just said what he needed to
say and took the consequences. I actually deregistered myself and the license myself
in 2021 because I needed to speak out. Um, but Yevgeny didn't do that. He didn't play ball with
them. He paid the price and they recently took him out. Is that right? No, no, no,
it's completely wrong. I am winning. The thing is that it's a long, it's a long story. Just in one
sentence in 2019, I whistle-blowed about mistreatment of the patients in psychiatric
hospital in Scotland. So I was dismissed. Uh, there was fabricated case against me against
GMC, which was ongoing like for three years. So the results of these things, so I won employment
with, you know, I won the case in the GMC, in the GMC without lawyer, by the way. So, and, uh, several
times the Scottish DNA tries to like, to destroy my further advancement in the program. So eventually
I won, uh, the, in the dinner that I continue my training. So the, the stuff is going on, by the way,
I'm working in the hospital just beside the children's hospitals called Sky House,
which yesterday was in the BBC investigation about abuse of the young patients in the, in the ward
by the nursing staff. Okay. So just, I want to say that I'm attending your YouTube as a sort of
psychotherapeutic couch to relax toxic, you know, lying propaganda, which just goes from every corner.
You see how the propaganda is working. Somebody mentioned Skripals today. So they were poisoned,
I think, uh, was it like 2018, fourth of March on Sunday. On this day, I arrived in the, at the
ski resort in Highlands, like for skiing from mountains. So the next day, somebody is asking
me in the lounge area, Yevgeny, why did you poison Skripals? Do you know? It's crazy. Then another
thing about, I previously mentioned about the totalitarian thing. We should be very careful with
adjectives and looks look into the essence of the things. And they say every state is totalitarian.
It's just the, um, the, the sometimes the totalitarian regime, which controls actually
every citizen by laws, educations, their culture, and allows them some autonomy. It can camouflage,
we can say in the in democratic procedures, like elections or freedom of speech, like this
corner in the, in the, in the, uh, in the Hyde Park. It doesn't matter. You can make a speech in your
toilet. Nobody will hear you. It's in, if you're influential and if your voice is heard by millions,
you'll be destroyed. So every state is totalitarian. But now we can see that in the West,
this totally, we can say also the state just shows it real face. It's an apparatus of coercion.
And all this COVID story just shows that it was a disaster of population, almost in all countries
apart, maybe from Belarus, you know, and it shows that people will listen to the government
and they will listen to the advice. They will explain stay at home. And if the government tells
them Russia is your enemy, go and attack Russian embassy, they will do it in London, like with this
protests. So most of the population there, we can see it's like the research. So I want just quick
comment about fertility. There are a lot of factors about fertility, but this is like, I'll tell you
one factor. Consumption of antidepressants of new generations, so-called SSRIs, serotonin selective
inhibitors of like, of this stuff, known to cause loss of libido, permanent sexual dysfunction.
And there is even some rich search, I don't recall either in Canada or in the States, where
they found out that the loss of fertility of the fish in the river, in the rivers, corresponds
to the level of byproducts of antidepressants, which go like through the system of the people
into the sewage system. So it's one of the factors that definitely there is yetrogenic
artificial effect on fertility potentially. And my questions will be, and also I want to say that
many people need to learn from Alexander, analytical skills. It's not enough analytical skills.
He got like systemic knowledge in certain areas where he can see the patterns and he can draw
parallels. But these days people just make very simple conclusions and they talk about like the
leaders. The main thing is the groups, who are the groups of powers. My question will be one of them,
so I want to ask two questions. One of them about sort of world government. And the second one,
what does he think is the Soviet, we can say, Soviet socialist regime of economics? Is it
an alternative to capitalistic regime? So the first one will be about government. In our circle,
for example, the group for the patients in the UK, some people believe that, oh, there is a world
government which controls like everything. So it coordinates these campaigns. And they're saying,
it's impossible. There are a lot of groups of power even within one country. But there are certain
institutions of like world institutions of coordination of the actions where from different
countries, different groups, they gather somewhere through open structures, through closed structures,
and they sort of agree about plan of action. What do you think, Alexander? Do we have world
government or not? Well, I don't think we have exactly a world government in the sense of a
structured group of people who sit together and have a meeting and say, you know, this is what we
got to do in, you know, Peru or whatever it is. I mean, I don't think that is that is exactly what
we have. What we have is a community of people from, you know, decision makers, policy makers,
power makers, people of that kind, relatively small, which comes together, forms a kind of
consensus and which tries to shape events. And I think this is what happens. And I think it is very
powerful. And it absolutely does exist. And I think anybody who thinks that it doesn't just simply
So, of course, they do have their various institutions, places where they meet. You know,
we've heard about the WEF and all of that. And, you know, I'm not saying that that isn't important,
but it isn't just in these places that these people meet. They meet all the time. They meet in every
sort of place that you can find. And they come together. In order to be a part of this community,
you have to have certain views that are shared by the community as a whole. Obviously, you have
power and you have access to power and you apply it. So I think that it's not exactly a world
government, but it is a world ruling class, if I can put it like that. Now, you asked another
question, which is about Soviet Union economics. But could you say that again, actually, because it
sounded interesting. Yeah, I just want to clarify the second question. So to simplify things,
then we can say capitalistic West and to parallel to this system, social political system in the
West, capitalistic system was running, we can say the project, the Soviet project of the Soviet Union,
socialist state, although some people say, use the term like communist, but let's say that's like
the Soviet regime or regime of Eastern Europe was a block like countries. And there were a lot of
similarities in the way they were still sort of market, they were still money, they still sort of
some sort of exploitation. And it was industrial mode of production, with only difference that,
as I see it from what I like witnessed, we have the system where in the Soviets, there is no
private property of production in and you don't have land, you don't have factories to produce
significant wealth in the society. And the system is not working for profit, it just
to satisfy the needs. In the West, it's we can say, mixed system, but most of the stuff is
is a private interest. The huge major corporations, they're looking for profit, they want you to buy
the car like every year or to change your mobile like every, every model. So and the thing is that
the capitalistic regime or system try to reinvent itself, it goes into crises and goes
in new. So we sort of new crisis where they're trying sort of to maybe to moderate consumption
with the stories about global warming, that we should like leave minimalistic style of life.
And capitalism will try to survive. In this case, we see the new waves of near colonial,
we can say wars. What I see in Ukraine, it's actually near colonial war. So what do you think
what we look in the future as a model of like social political regime? Is it some sort of new
vegetarian type of capitalism or it should be some sort of more humanitarian faced Soviet regime?
So what's this is a very, very, very good question. And again, it's if it was easy to answer this
question like this, it would be I there's all sorts of people who are trying to look for
an economic system or at least a social economic system that will be juster and better structured
than the one we have today. I think the thing to say about this is that I am not able to set out
the model for a different system. I do believe that the socialist system that existed in the
Soviet Union was different in fundamental ways from the one that functioned in the West. And
it's important to say also, because this is something that some people have difficulty
accepting that that socialist system did actually function, it worked. I mean, it may not have
provided an abundance of consumer goods and that kind of thing. But if you're talking it is purely
in economic terms, it actually was a functional system. Now, what we are going to head to
in the future, I don't know, I am somebody who strongly wants to believe in democracy,
in human freedom, in human choice, those kinds of things. I would like to believe that the system
that will eventually evolve will satisfy those things which I do believe I do want to believe
are intrinsic to humankind and what I want to say. I want to wrap this straight away.
How the democracy is possible if the people who are in power keeps the power. We know
there were democracies since ancient Athens, where they were choosing their generals. And in
Rome, there was a system of elections as well. They were bribing with food. So the thing is that
the people who are still in power, they will hold this power. If you win the elections,
like as a communist or socialist and try to do some reforms, they will remove you from power.
An example of Chile, so he started moderate reforms, he won elections and the result,
he is butchered and a significant chunk of the population is butchered as well. So in this case,
yeah, there were democracies. That's for again to sustain this camouflage of the apparatus of
coercion. Right. Well, what I was going to say was that is what I would like to see happen.
I am not sure that it will happen. I mean, there is a very strong trend towards a more technocratic,
more controlled system. And I you know, it's entirely possible that we will see that we were
talking about the fact that there is a world ruling class, it could be that it could be organized
around them, or it could be something different with different structures that you know, I can't
imagine. But I am I don't know how it will be. I would like it to be a more democratic system.
I am not saying necessarily that it will be. Now I'm going to suggest that I don't know whether
you're familiar with this, but there was a writer, an American writer in the early 20th century called
Michels. And by the way, he eventually became a fascist and ended up in Italy in the 1920s.
But he was a very profound and incisive writer and a political thinker. And he said that behind
every political system, there is an oligarchy. And he coined the expression the iron law of oligarchy,
that every system ultimately devolves into that. Now I would like to believe that Michels is wrong.
But always, I ask myself, whether perhaps he might have been right.
We're going to move on. Jordan Peterson would agree with that, Evgeny. And Alexander, what you
just said, all right, that that there are certain people that always gravitate, make everybody equal
tomorrow. And within three years, the people who were at the top before will be at the top again.
So we've got two more questions and then Stephen for the last 15 minutes. So thank you, Evgeny.
Good to see you, Mark, then Sebastian and then Stephen. Thanks for that. Alexander, you live in
London. I suggest, have you heard of a weapon system called neural strike? No, tell me about it.
Well, I haven't heard about it. It was a CCP. There was a whistleblower in the PLA who brought
this to the attention of the world. I was looking for the electronic assault weapon and I found it
situated in what the Transport for London call a camera. You've actually got an
electronic assault weapons program being deployed right across London, part of the low emission zone
and deployment. Right. So if you're in London, just have a look on top of the traffic lights,
you'll get a bit of a surprise. There's a lot of very heavy duty hardware on there. A lot of it's
rad hardened, which tells me this is very disturbing. OK. Can you just say, just set the name again?
Neural strike, neural strike. What happened? I've invested, you know, the Blade Runners have been
chopping quite a few of these things down. I was concerned that it didn't look anything like an
NPR camera, supposedly for license plate recognition. It looks very, very militaristic, obviously on
in detailed inspection. I found that's exactly what it was. It's got a piece of hardware in it,
which was built by Thales. However, this was partnered with the Huawei
technology company. Basically, most telecommunications are militarized anyway,
but this is a military piece of hardware. It's a laser guidance weapon system,
abandoned international law for blinding people. And that's what they've deployed right across
London. So unbelievable. Why has this not been talked about more? I mean, I mean, I'm asking a
rhetorical question, but I would nonetheless ask you to because I haven't heard of it. So tell me
why I haven't heard about it. I mean, is it who is doing this? Who is installing these things?
I mean, I'm sorry, I'm asking the question. I'm asking questions that.
The company is called Siemens. But if you look inside, you'll see it's these international defense,
large defense contractors, Thales. It has a operating platform called Azure. Azure was a
5G weapons operating platform built with Microsoft Lockheed Martin, Thales. And it's what drives the
whole thing. But it's been driven with a with a piece of hardware. It's a product called Jamalto.
It's built in China. It's a high speed modem. So it basically controls the whole
electronic assault weapon system. So if you're in and around central London, just have a look on
top of your traffic lights, get a bit of a shock. Yeah, the biometric sensors. Yeah, the biometric
sensors to track people who unfortunately took the, you know, the COVID-19 injection.
Well, Mark, can I just say, I mean, it is absolutely terrible that this thing has been installed in the
way that you say, and that it's not been talked about. As far as I'm aware, there's been no public
debate about it. No information. The media doesn't write about it. There's been no discussion
in parliament. I mean, it's absolutely terrible. You know, once upon a time, and again, I'm sorry
if I'm being a little bit, you know, nostalgic and historicist here. Way back in the 19th century,
there was a debate about imposing licensing on pubs. It's a fact, you know, restrictions on when
people can drink. And there was opposition to this in parliament. And a parliamentarian,
who was actually a bishop, actually said, I would rather see England free than England sober.
So that was the English tradition. I mean, there was always this, obviously, people, you know,
did do regulations, but there was always this pushback against things. Now, there's nothing.
It's able to install these things right across London, apparently, and there's no public debate.
The newspapers don't write about it. The Guardian, which used to write about things like this from a
sort of leftist point of view, because that's what they did. And the Daily Telegraph, which used to
write about these things from a right-wing libertarian point of view, because that's what
they did. They haven't said anything about this. Nobody, you're the first person who's told me
about this. I will certainly look out for these things. Do you actually have a question to me?
Because I've been asking all the questions. Well, it's a question to be fair was to ask if
you knew anything about it. No, I don't. I don't. And I'm absolutely appalled that I don't, actually.
But I will certainly find out about it. And I will contact, I will speak to a few people I know who
would know more about this than, well, obviously, I would certainly know more about me about it than
I do. Because I've been doing nothing about it. Well, TfL, I don't mean it's just a camera, but I've
actually investigated, I have looked inside it, and I do have some of the bits from it. So I can
definitely tell you what it actually is. I should say that to people who don't know, I think London
has more cameras all over the place than pretty much any city in the world. I mean, they've
proliferated to an unbelievable degree. And it's all supposed to be to control traffic.
But that's what it's masquerading for. It's called fusion technology. And you can actually
look down to the nanoscale. So it can actually interrogate the bio metrics of the person.
Right. Right. Well, thank you, Mike. Alexander, they're controlling human beings.
Well, there you go. Yeah. A lot of plant.
The Emperor has no clothes. No.
Just like the eye in America. Yeah.
Yeah. Thanks. Thanks for Alexander. Thank you. Thank you, Mark.
Sebastian. Steven, thanks. I just wanted to mention, I don't know if anyone has
heard about this, but Richard Medhurst was recently arrested in Austria.
I know I have heard about him. He's in touch with me, by the way.
Exactly. I actually contacted him and asked him if he would join us also.
Who has been arrested in Austria? He's a journalist. He's a British journalist.
Based in Vienna. What's his name?
Richard Medhurst. Oh, I know him. Yes, of course. Yeah.
So I didn't know if you were all aware of that. And Alexander, I actually have asked Mark to join
us also on the Durant to speak about this topic because I do think it's very, very important.
That's all I really had to say. So thanks.
You were super short, Sebastian. Well done. All right, Steven, your time,
as I say in the classics, your time has come. Put your video on so we can see your smiley face.
But now I can't remember the questions, but I'll have a go. I can think of more.
So I think one thing that's very surprising to me, Alexander, I think you're very curious as well.
It doesn't take much to arouse your curiosity. I'm pretty curious. I am even at the expense of my
own propaganda, if you like, or my own ideas. I want to explore things to find out what the truth
is. So we had a guest recently who said that the most important things in his opinion were
searching for the truth and courage. So you could put it the way Charles did with 12 different,
you know, battlefronts. But I think the easier way to describe it to people is,
you know, we need to seek the truth and we need to be courageous at this time. And,
and if you if you're not courageous, then you're letting down your own family and your children.
And your grandchildren, if you've got grandchildren. So I think people need to understand
that they have a responsibility to the society in which they live, and not to just constantly
thinking constantly thinking about themselves, and maybe their family, if they're lucky.
It seems that many parents are quite happy to delegate the education system to the children.
Happy to delegate the education so called of their children to the state, and not contribute,
not help the teachers not show any interest. Oh, sorry, I've switched it off instead of
so just trying to get my video. So I just wonder, so I do think I made a few points,
I don't know if you remember them, but it doesn't matter.
No, no, I can't. I can't remember. Carry on. I should say I can I can see a picture,
but I can't see you. That's all we can see your interrogation lights, David, but not your face.
So, yeah, there we are. So I, and so I do think that if we get everything else right,
and we don't address how our children are educated or miseducated, then we will lose the war.
We have to get the education of our children right. Now, you could argue, as I said earlier,
you know, that there's a kind of human beings that find their way eventually, but, you know,
maybe so the Soviet Union, for example, arguably found its way in 1989, but many would disagree.
And it took them from 1917 to 1989 to correct that. So, you know, yes, you know, maybe things
will balance out in the long run, and human beings will find a way. But most human beings want to
kind of enjoy their lives. And so it'd be very good to avoid things before they actually happen,
which are very difficult once they've happened to correct. So I just wonder whether you can
speak generally on some of the things I've just mentioned. I think I think what you have discussed
is the fact that, you know, going back to our first discussion about the fact that we are social
beings, that we are part of the community of Politea, we need to be active and to play an
active role in that, and to work constantly on this, and obviously to have that responsibility
to our children. And I think this is absolutely true. Now, I have just become a parent over the
last three years, my children, my two oldest children are now starting what's called preschool
in England. And one of the things I've discovered, and which we all parents are discovering,
is that we are not left alone as parents. We are constantly under pressure now from the school
system to basically control our children in the way that they want us to control. So if any parents
will confirm this, by the way, I mean, they might not see it in exactly my perspective. But
in terms of upbringing of children, it's very much the school now,
which is of course, an institution of, you know, the wider state, which is pushing constantly upon
you to do various things to make sure that they, you know, take particular lessons, that they are
brought up in a certain way, that they exercise certain forms of speech and behaviour,
and you know, all this business of, you know, comfort zones and all of that.
I had never imagined the extent to which it happens. And bear in mind, I'm talking about
two little girls who are three. Yeah. So, I'm just changing the subject a little bit, but not much.
Do you think Sweden is a pilot study for totalitarianism?
I don't know enough about Sweden to be able to say, perhaps. I've never been there, by the way.
I've never been to Sweden. My parents used to love Sweden. They used to go there in the 60s
in its social democratic heyday. Targa Erlander was the Prime Minister at that time, and they loved
it. And for them, this was the ideal. But then they were very much old guard leftists. It would
appeal to them. I don't know what Sweden is really like, but maybe it is. So, in 1969, a book was
written by a British guy, I think, called Roland Hunford. It was called The New Totalitarians.
When I went to Sweden in the 80s, my wife is Swedish, I became aware of this book, and I
was fascinated by it. And there was another book called, the book's title was called, it was called
A Clean, Well-Lighted Place. And after five years of living in Sweden, that resonated with me. I knew
what it meant. But I couldn't articulate what it meant, if you understand me. But I recognised the
title, and I've remembered it to this day. Very interesting, isn't it, how human beings operate.
So, a clean, well-lighted place. The thing about Sweden, which is very unusual, is that the
population of Sweden believes its government. That's why it didn't need a lockdown.
And I think that there are suspicions in my mind that Sweden was a pilot study in totalitarianism.
I mean, that is very interesting. And again, as I said, I've never been there, so I don't
know very much about it. But a population that believes its government is a deluded population,
by definition. Completely lost. Completely lost. I couldn't put my finger on it when I was there.
I really couldn't. But I felt as though I was on a mission there. I couldn't understand the place.
I was trying to understand it. Because without understanding the country in which you live,
or the society in which you live, you're very vulnerable. So I need, I think, this is why
foreigners grow and they go to a different country. So I think the best education is
actually moving to a different country and surviving in that country, especially when
it's totally new to you. It's a really steep learning curve. And essentially, you know,
you might go back to your own country because you failed in that new country, because you don't
understand it. And so, I think, so, I think, I just try to think of what's the most important
thing to talk about. In my mind, I think the most important thing to talk about
is what's happened in the last, since 2020 in particular. It seems to me that governments
all around the world thought it was okay to psychologically damage, to psychologically attack
their own populations. They forgot that they were the servants of the people.
Your children and all children need to learn at school the relationship between the individual
and the state. You know, what is the aim? We are not servants of the state. In Sweden,
there's something called knäckebröd, which is a special hard bread. It has big holes on one side.
This is simplifying maybe, you know, there may be other differences. But to me, as a bloke,
it's had big holes on one side and small holes on the other side. And I was told by one of my
friends, my Swedish friends, who came from the Swedish-Finnish border and was very influenced by
Finland. And of course, Finland had been in the Winter War with Russia. So, they knew about
suffering. He told me that Swedish children learned at school, sorry, at Dargis, it was called. It
was a kind of place for the children to be deposited while the mothers went out to work.
You know, in the feminism wave, should we say. And so, they learned at Dargis how to butter
the knäckebröd. So, when I was saying to my wife and to my Swedish friends, you know,
this knäckebröd, what do I do with this? Oh, all the Swedes knew. And they all had the same story
because they'd learned about it in Dargis, not from their parents, but from Dargis. So,
the parents left everything to Dargis when I was there in the 80s. So, I'm mentioning all this.
I wonder whether you can see a pattern which we need to get into the curriculum of every...
Well, I think that I am seeing this already in the school that my children are attending,
which is that they are expected to behave in a certain way. I don't mean that, you know,
I'm not talking about them not being disruptive or, you know, anything of that kind. But
their speech is now being monitored in the school which they go to. And ultimately, of course,
through the speech, their thought in a way that would have been completely inconceivable
when I was at school. I do think there's going to be a pushback against this as well, by the way,
in England. I think that we are a different society.
You do or you don't, Alexander?
I think we do. I think we will. I think we are a different society in Sweden. I think that there
is a more, well, if you like, a more anarchic spirit still.
Well, you say that, Alexander, but I'm...
You know what I was going to say. Yeah.
No, you say that, but I'm despairing because I see the similarities increasing rather than decreasing.
Well, as I mentioned at the start of the program, that with every single year that has passed,
since I first came to England in 1968, I've seen liberty, if you like, gradually erode away.
When I say that I think that there will be a backlash against it and all that, you know,
I'm not going to pretend or I don't pretend to myself. That is what I want to see. And of course,
what I want to see is what I hope I will see. But, you know, I might be disappointed.
But, Alexander, so, you know, you mentioned your children. You've got children and you need to
educate them. So how are you going to educate them in a state education system? Because I think you're
going to have a big shock. Well, probably. I mean, I should say that, I mean, I play a very active role
in the life of my children. I mean, I read books to them. I tell them stories. I have my own ideas.
My wife is the same. So I think that we do have that influence over our children.
And obviously, that is something which I think we will fight to preserve and retain. But I can
already foresee that we're going to have problems going forward. I don't want to discuss this in too
much detail because I can't speak for her. But my wife has already had many issues at university,
for example. I mean, she's found it very difficult to express certain opinions, not just about Russia,
but just general opinions about things without encountering not just criticism, but pressure.
Well, almost, absolutely. For some members of the academic and managerial body.
So, I understand you. So not the students so far. Interestingly. Yeah, I don't want to pry,
Alexander. Is she British or is she foreign? She's absolutely British. I mean, her mother was German,
but she was brought up in Britain. She is absolutely British in every other respect.
Yes, her mother was German. That's the German connection I have, if you like, but she's very British.
Interesting. But both you and she have a foot in two countries, essentially.
And the same with the Afghani. It really is a magnificent education, I think. Just actually
having knowledge of two countries is enough. But anyway, I just want to ask you, Alexander,
after the last four years and what we're seeing now in America, what are the big lessons in your
view? You know, you might, you know, in a perfect world, you might like more time to think about.
But off the top of your head, what can you see now, the two or three most important things that we
need to understand about what has happened since 2020? And I think it was treason, by the way,
worldwide treason. Yeah, I think the first and most important thing to take away is the government's
lie. All governments lie. I mean, either way, I've said this many times, I said this on my
programs, all governments lie. And one should not assume that what you're being told by any government
is true. That is the first thing. That is the first thing that anybody who wants to be an active and
effective citizen should remember. And the second is that there is always an impulse
within government, society, the state to try to control and to try to extend control.
As somebody who worked inside state bureaucracies and have seen them from the inside,
I can absolutely say that. And the other things, the other side, the positive sides, is to remember
the importance of human autonomy, human dignity, human independence, the right of free speech,
those sort of things, because that is what enables us to hold back and to resist these pressures that
are always going to be there. Absolutely. Thank you so much, Alexander, for coming to speak to us.
Thank you very much. Thank you. Beautifully said. Thank you, Alexander. Thank you, Sebastian,
for your role. Stephen, well done for organizing. Thank you, everybody, for your contributions.
Don't forget to save the chat. And we'll be back again. And on we go in our fight for truth,
justice, freedom, ethics and health. And Alexander, as John Cleese would say,
I think it was John Cleese, you're a very naughty boy, because you've sat here for two and a half
hours and you have not even had to go to the toilet once, which clearly means you're not drinking
enough water. So get more water into you. All right, everybody. Thank you very much. Thank you,
everyone. Thank you, Alexander. And Alexander, I think one thing that I would say to people is
they need to be learned to be awkward. Yeah, absolutely. When you need to stand up and defend
yourself and your family. Absolutely. So few people are prepared to do that these days.
What do you say, Jocheny? Just a quick question. The books on the top shelf beside the medallion
of Alexander, Alexanderos Megalos. Yeah, is it Alexander the Great? Alexander the Great. That
was a present, by the way. So on the top shelf, all these books, like the similar, on the top shelf,
the small books, what is this? The small books, they're some of the Greek classics.
Ah, I was trying to guess all the time and just. They're from the American Loeb edition of the
Greek. Loeb library. Loeb library. Yes, thank you. And further to what Charles just said, Alexander,
I would say that you're a naughty boy because you don't put forward the views that the state
would like you to put forward. Oh, yeah. Yes. Very naughty boy. So, Sebastian, so you, Stephen,
so all of us here. All right, everybody, stay naughty, stay awkward. Bye, everybody. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Very good. Thank you so much. Thank you.