The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 344: ANSWERING THE CALL

Episode Date: November 3, 2023

Acapulco Reeling After Category 5 Hurricane Devastates The Famous Mexican Resort Town; Jefferey Jaxen Reports on WHO’s Pandemic Treaty Push, Aussie Legislators Hold Hearing on COVID Vaccine DNA Contamination, and is there a depopulation agenda?; Founder of GiveSendGo On Why He Refuses to Bend The Knee; Fitness Guru Combines Community, Education, with Music Festival Fun at Arkadia FestivalGuests: Mike Saavedra, Harvey Gonzalez, Jacob Wells, Aubrey MarcusBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

Did you notice that this show doesn't have any commercials? I'm not selling you diapers or vitamins or smoothies or gasoline. That's because I don't want corporate sponsors telling us what to investigate and what to say. Instead, you're our sponsors. This is a production by our nonprofit, the Informed Consent Action Network. If you want more investigations, more hard-hitting news. If you want the truth, go to I Can Decide.org and donate now. Good morning.

Good afternoon, good evening. Wherever you are out there in the world, it's time to step out onto the high wire. Well, there are so many things happening in the world today, and one of them that we tend to forget sometimes is Mother Nature's can be more drastic than any of them. And that is what we discovered in Acapulco this week as a Category 5 hurricane slammed into that beach area. really the biggest one in history. This is what that looked like in the news. Hurricane Otis slamming into Mexico's Pacific Coast overnight. Hurricane Otis, the strongest on record to hit Mexico's Pacific Coast. One of the worst storms ever to make landfall in our world's history in a metropolitan area.

At 10 a.m. Tuesday, Otis is a tropical storm. Winds 70 miles per hour. By 10 p.m., winds are 160 miles per hour. So Otis went from a tropical storm to a cat five in just 12 hours. It is that 12-hour window where it rewrote the history books. There were probably a lot of people caught off guard, maybe even in a dangerous place that they wouldn't want to be during such an intense storm. Neighborhoods submerged in water, including the base of this stadium. Mudslides and fallen trees spilling into major roads, cutting off vital access for vehicles.

People don't have water, they don't have food, a lot of people are trapped. Acapulco is a total disaster. It's not what it was before. The park was totally destroyed, the buildings, all the streets. No, I would describe by Akbulko now as a total disaster. The people are telling us they're not getting help. They're not getting water. They're not getting food.

We saw looting in some streets, in some stores. Now, frustration with the government's response growing, as residents say they're left to fend for themselves. Many flocking to makeshift shelters, lining up for hours for a chance to get food and food. water. We don't have anything anymore. They looted everything. Not all of us looted. We really need help. There's nobody here. A long rebuilding process with the cost of the destruction potentially reaching $15 billion. I'm not going to mix my words. There is a humanitarian crisis going on right now.

Well, we reached out to our friends at Strategic Response Partners. They are a team that rush in wherever there's danger when most people are running away from tragedies like this they charge in to help and if you remember during the Maui fires that we got incredible footage there from them and I'm joined right now by Mike Savedra and Harvey Gonzalez from strategic response partners that my understanding is Harvey you're still on the ground in Acapulco and Mike you just left but you know this is this there's the report that this is a very rare event. I mean, I've been to Acapulco. I don't ever remember seeing this level of devastation.

It's somewhat unprecedented. Is it not? It sure is. I mean, being from Miami, Florida, we know what the resort feel. We know what a big city looks like. And Harvey's from Miami, Florida, as well. And when we first got to Acapulco,

I mean, we were blown away by just the manner of destruction, like how high grade this was. every type of building, every type of neighborhood, every type of civilian, and it was in urgent and emergent need. And I was surprised the amount of help that wasn't visible. When I look at these images, I mean, it looks like just windows blown out in high rises. I mean, it's really shocking. You would think that these buildings are designed for high winds and rain. What is it? You know, I'm always sort of shocked by this. If you're on the beach, it's not like there's rocks flying through the air. Is it just air pressure that's able to do that?

Well, it's a high wind. If it started out as a tropical storm, I was actually at my firehouse the night before. And I went to bed and everything was normal. And I woke up and I had Steve giving me a call, Steve Selleck. And he was like, listen, get your stuff and get your passport and get Harvey and you guys get to the airport right away. You guys are needed. And I was like, what's going on? And he's like, there's a cap five hurricane that just hit Acapocco. And I was like, where? Because usually a cap five hurricane would come announced, you know, from days prior, four or five days before. There'll be announced that there's a big storm. There's a large mass heading into your direction. And these people just got clocked with absolutely no warning. There was, it was a tropical storm at night.

And when they woke up, some of them in the middle of the night, it was a nightmare. And that's what I mean, news was saying. That's historic to see a storm grow in that magnitude that quickly. Now, I think about, you know, Maui, I mean, that's the United States of America. You know, we tend to have resources. We're all shocked at how poorly that was handled. Harvey, how would you describe, you know, Mexico and how they're, I mean, are they built to handle anything like this? No, they are not. Unfortunately, they've never dealt with a storm of this magnitude. They were not prepared.

There was no game plan put in place. And what we saw when we first came in, as you're seeing in some of these pictures, is total turmoil, chaos, very disorganized. You see a lot of military that are coming in, but they're not really doing anything. They're standing around guarding places and stuff like that, but there's no plan put in place to what is the next step. And I guess right here we're watching people just, is this, is there looting going on? People just taking stuff out of stores.

And I mean, it's like every man for himself right now. Correct. That is correct. Every man is for himself. Figure it out how you can. We had a situation where we saw people trying to reach the hospital and they were being turned away. They were, you know, depending on what the situation was, they weren't being allowed to be seen at the hospital. Wow.

So it's pretty bad. It's pretty bad. Amazing. You know, some of the images, I mean, what type of death toll is this mounting right now? I mean, were people able to get out of the way? Well, right now it's very unknown. And for the simple reason that, number one, there was really no planning. So because there is really no planning, the situation is that they're saying that there's, you know, anywhere from 100 to 150 death toll. And that number can be a lot higher. A lot of the buildings have not. unfortunately have not been cleared. So in reality, we don't know what's inside the buildings.

We went to one particular building and we asked the owners at the building, hey, have you guys had the military come through and check out the building? And their answer to us was no. They have not had the military come through. And they were going up and down the building, just gathering things and doing what they needed to do to try to be safe. But we told them, it's like, listen, you know, don't let the children go into the building. You know, if anything, stay out of the building until someone can come out or let us clear the building for you to make sure that there is no harm in the building. And just I think in clearing you guys do videotape that you sent us some of the video footage. If you want to just talk with what are we looking at here?

Even even in a in that you got to understand from the firefighting of perspective, there's a step approach to all these things and what you're seeing here is just an initial view of a building that was completely destroyed. They were going through different store that you see the cities that are completely desolate. There's a lack of leadership. It's not a lack of personnel. We sure did see a lot of soldiers coming and going, but I feel bad for the firefighters and the USAR guys that are in this area because they're supposed to be backed by their government and a lot of them are volunteered. So a lot of guys were worried about their own families and they reported to the firehouse to get some work done and they were caught with a complete surprise.

There was no weather notifications. There was no information that was being given to them to prepare for this emergency. And then they just responded. And when we went up to them and even myself telling him, look, I'm a firefighter paramedic, I'm a number of search and rescuing. Is there anything I can do to help you? And the guy's like, I can't even get some, I can't even call my chief. I can't call people.

Our radios don't work. So it was a nightmare. It really was. When I, you know, one of the things I think adds pressure to this specific situation, Maui, obviously things like that, devastating other hurricanes. But in this area, one of my concerns would be the drug cartels. I mean, Alcapulco is what they consider a hot spot when it comes to human trafficking and drug trafficking and all that.

Does that play in a situation like this at all? It does play a big factor because it's not so much Acapulco being the issue. They do have a problem there, especially as you go into the mountain. But if you're traveling back and forth from city to city trying to get there because there's nowhere to stay in Acapulco, that's where you can really run into problems. As it is, when we were leaving the city, you see a lot of people are pretty much desperate asking us for a ride, you know, to try to get us out of the city and take them with us, which we, you know, we've been highly instructed not to do so because unfortunately, we don't know who we're dealing with. You know, we don't know at what capacity of this person we're dealing with. And one instance of my saw somebody on the side of the road and he told me he was, Harvey, what do you think? And next thing you know, we see like eight men hiding in the back of a tree. So we did not know what to expect. So our strict instruction was you go through, you don't stop, you don't stop for anything or anybody.

The only people that can really pull you over there is the transit police. And even with that, you're supposed to engage with them a little bit differently than you would typically do so in the, US. So we would just show them our paperwork. We don't hand over anything to them. We just show them exactly who we are, what we're doing there. And I had an instance where we were pulled over at one point. And they were very courteous to us. They gave us passage and told us to keep moving forward doing what we're doing. They were thankful for it. But unfortunately, I asked them, I says, what plans do you guys have in place? And they were like, right now we don't know what we're doing. We're just trying to be a solid. Is there any red cross or any of the?

those you know, you know, NGOs that we know can step in here. Does Mexico have any sort of FEMA that that works through these situations? We're very blessed for having the FEMA program in the United States of America. I don't think a lot of Americans understand how blessed we are to have that, to have a dedicated group of personnel that are going to respond to no matter what the incident is. It was very humbling for us to get into the city. And just like Harvey said, even from the beginning, we were warned if there's a police officer that gets behind you or someone puts on red and blue lights, don't pull over. And for me, being from the United States, I was like, what do you mean? We don't pull over. Man, I said, you do not pull over. You continue forward because you just never know. So we knew immediately that the rules were different. Mexico does not have a FEMA style or FEMA-grade network with bandwidth that can handle disaster like this. And working with SRP, and one of the things that we specialize in is being privatized and be able to go into these cities.

And the first thing we wanted to do was just establish communications. And we were looking for something that was basic, like what we call a boo, a base of operation for the Mexican government, and we couldn't find it. And we tried talking to different personnel and trying to, we found a group of urban search and rescuement from Mexico.

These are the volunteer guys that I told you about, that those guys are absolutely amazing. And they were like, look, man, we're on our own. Let me ask you this. I mean, I think this is the, what really, really is haunting for those of us is this is a tourist destination. And I think about Pouquet, that tidal wave that hit.

Like if you happen to be, do you have advice? I mean, the question would be if some sort of, you know, this disaster happens while you're in a vacation area like this, especially in another country, what is the recommendation? Do you just stay in place? Do you get the hell out of there as fast as you can? Do you go to an airport? Do you rent a car and just start driving? Is there anything that's like the best way to handle being really out of your element in the worst of circumstances?

So one of the things you want to immediately do is always keep yourself communicating with your family or anyone back home. But always keep those lines of communication open. You're always looking at the news. We saw video Harvey and I of there was people that were vacationing. Canadians vacationing in Acapulco and they're recording how beautiful the sunset was the night before. And then the next day is just destruction. Yeah. So when it comes for a safety aspect,

that's why it's important for families to have their own disaster plans. Having your IDs, everyone's passports, having an understanding of where you're going, having an understanding of this is how we're going to communicate while we're in this country. And having that home base to check into to let them know that it's important

that I check in with you guys every day. Usually whenever RBI or anybody in SRP we travel or anywhere, one of the first things that we're always monitoring is the local news. We're monitoring the weather. And also, I just want to, rely on the news and where I'm at,

but I'll be looking at the National Weather Service to see if there's any kinds, like if we would have gone to bed if we were being in Alcapulco, and to be very honest, and we would have seen there was a tropical storm, it humbles me to be able to say, I would have been like, eh, we can handle that.

But to wake up in a morning to this just nightmare, it's incredibly humming. It's a really good point to let family know where you are, I would imagine, so that you're set up, if there's an emergency, here is where I was going to be. I would imagine checking in if you're moving out of that space. So should you lose contact, your family knows where the last place you were

was. Because as we're saying, I mean, we've got cartels. You have situations there. Well, look, it's great to know you guys are out there. We love that you check in with us from these spots. It really give us the sense of what's on the ground in these situations. It's so devastating. Our hearts, our prayers go out to all those people in Alcapulco. What is the situation where I do Do they have running water and electricity and all that in most of the parts, or is it just? No, as of last night, there were some areas that TV power, it's not controlled. So in other words, in my situation, last night I got stranded in Acapulco. The SUV that I was driving broke down, and I had no choice but to leave.

And thank God to the USAR guys that we met, they were able to come through and pull me out of the area. And I was in a really when I actually broke down because I was already on my car. way out of Aco Poco. And to get out of Acapulco, you've got to come up the hill and start heading towards the tunnel on that way up to Acapulco, that area is all, it's all cartel control. So I was in a really bad situation. Thankfully, we were able to move quick and get people out there. And they were able to take me back to one of the spots that they were hunkered down.

This is a, there's a hotel that pretty much is completely damaged. And you have very few spots where you have electricity. So they have the power running, but you don't know if there's a live wire somewhere. No one's assessed that. And then not only that, they don't have water. So it's a situation where you have to be blessed that if you made it out of there, that you're good, you know. One of the things that we learned, one of the things that we learned, especially responding with Steve to all these different disasters, whether it's a wildfire or hurricane, a tornado, snow that we've done blizzards in Dallas.

We like to consider ourselves being from Miami Hurricanes. We got a Brazilian jiu-jitsu black belt in hurricanes. And, I mean, we showed up and it was definitely a gut punch. There was every manner, even as a paramedic myself, being in the vehicle with Harvey and seeing someone carrying a child that needed medical attention. And as we were going to get out, we realized that it was a huge group of people. And it took a second to realize that we would have been mobbed. We had to wait for her to cross the street and we were like flagging.

to come towards us so that we can we can assess the child but it's it's humbling to see that the infrastructure which is we wanted to reach out to the mexican government like let us help you we have these generators we have this equipment we have everything on a boat you know an hour away from from you guys and we can move it in with a with a helicopter it's a cargo helicopter so we can get everything in there and we can get you guys back out and we remember with so much red tape that it's it's not it's not aggravating it's depressing because we we have all the answers that they're looking for, and we just can't even get anybody in front of us. Wow.

My understanding is you've given us a couple of good organizations that people want to help out or the organizations we can help out with. WcK.org, worldcentralcchin.org is a recommendation that they're making, responding in Mexico after Hurricane Otis. You can certainly get involved there. Guys, I'm going to let you get back to work. I really appreciate you taking the time. and thank you for your courage,

jumping into places where most people just would not go when others run away. You guys are running in. Just really, it's a pleasure knowing you and getting to have this moment. One more thing. Tina Blanco at Sat123.com, she saved our lives.

Because if it wasn't for that sat phone, I don't know what we would have done. Wow, okay. Great. Thank you. All right, you guys, take care. We'll see you next time. God bless.

Yep. All right, well, you know, there's all sorts of, you know, things that go on in the world. And coming up later on the show, like, what if you want to donate? You know, we've seen, you know, donations getting frozen for different reasons. I'm going to be speaking to one of the co-founders of Give Send Go that has given an opportunity where others have shirked their duty or found things too controversial. I'm going to be talking to Jacob Welles. He's going to be in studio.

But first, it's time for the Jackson Report. You know, for what it's worth, you know, we complain a lot about being here in the United States of America and the issues that confront us and problems with the government. But when you see another nation, you know, going through something like that and just no infrastructure whatsoever, though as I'm saying that, I'm thinking, I don't know that Maui did any better, if not worse. And I think that that's what was so shocking there is when we do fail. But, you know, we do, one thing we do not have here in the United States of America, we have to worry about, you know, drug cartels.

running rampant through cities when we're going through moments like that certainly is an added, you know, issue. Yeah. And I really hope everyone follows that story and donates the appropriate people that can get the funds directly into the people's hands. And you're right, we don't have traditional drug cartels, but we do have pharmaceutical drug cartels. And that brings us to another story here we're talking about one of the ones we've been tracking. And that's the DNA contamination within these COVID-19 vaccines. So this really kicked off. off because of two people. One of them was Kevin McKernan. He's a genomics researcher and also Philip Buckholtz. He's also a genomics researcher and he, we covered his Senate hearing at South

Carolina talking about this, really raising the alarm. It's been on the radar of a lot of people over the last month or two since this happened. It's really one of the big stories amongst all of them with this. And so what really was the situation was they used two processes, Pfizer, Modern, and a Pfizer especially, they used two processes. The first process was the vaccines that they did the mockups for the clinical trials. They used a PCR to amplify and create the DNA. But when they kind of got the green light from regulators,

they said, well, we need to make billions of copies of this. So they use this circular bacterial DNA plasmid to replicate this. And in order to do that, they fed it in there and it just replicated all of these, all of these mRNA DNA sample copies. Problem was that it looked. left a lot of kind of junk DNA in there,

contaminated the vaccine. So we have a study now from Kevin McCurnan and co-authors that was out in October, DNA fragments detected in monovalent and bivalent, bisoner of vaccines from Ontario, Canada. So the ones, you know, process two, those are the ones out being injected into people. So those are out there for researchers

to grab these vials and start testing them. And so that's what these authors and these researchers did. They took 27 M RNA in Ontario, Canada, and it was taken from 12 different lots. So what they looked at, they used methods to check out how much DNA was in here. And this was their conclusion. Let's just jump right to that. It says, in conclusion, these data demonstrate the presence of billions to hundreds of billions

of billions of DNA molecules per dose in these vaccines. Using fluorometry, all vaccines exceed the guidelines for residual DNA set by the FDA and WHO of 10 nanograms per dose by 1808. by 188 to 509 fold. So, wow. I mean, that's not like, that's not 500% that's 500 times the amount that's acceptable. I just wanna take a moment, Jeffrey,

because I think people watching this show say, wait a minute, you already covered this last week, right? We've already covered this DNA contamination. But for those that are watching this show, you know, we investigate issues like this, like there is a serial killer on the loose. Folks, there is a serial killer killer on the loose. This story keeps growing. This isn't last week's study. These investigators,

detectives, if you will, are getting deeper and deeper into what is going on here. What is the footprint? What is the fingerprint? Who's on it? And what we're talking about is, why is it the CDC talking about this? Why is in the FDA? Imagine a manhunt where the FBI is caught covering up where they were just last seen. Or you start seeing, wait a minute, are our government agencies involved? why aren't they doing anything? Why are they recommending it? This is a huge, huge story. We're talking about we were told that there's no way this vaccine alters your DNA in any way. And what these guys, genomic specialists, when it comes to your genome, this is their area. They are the best in the world and they are calling bull crap on that statement that was made, which means we've been lied to.

And now this product is creating all sorts of problems in human beings, all, around the world. So if you're thinking, well, it's going to check, I mean, I get it. We geek out here, but this is a very serious investigation, and it's happening all around the world. And I just want to make it clear for those who are like, you know, used to just seeing science and you just pass over it. Well, listen to the details, what we're talking about every week. This story is getting deeper and deeper and more and more horrifying. Okay, go ahead, Jeffrey. And both those researchers, they're focusing on the regulatory aspects of this, because there was a lot that was missed. They're saying, look, this is a regulatory.

This is first and foremost a regulatory problem. It obviously is individual people have to take responsibility as well. But the researchers found that the plasma DNA, this contamination, if you will, was likely in the lipid nanoparticles. So remember, the lipid nanoparticles is a new technology right before COVID happened. There's these circular kind of lipid globules that house the MRI and the DNA contamination, and they usher that into the cell. So why is that important? Let me just point out too, Jeffrey, something we've covered before, that the lipid nanoparticle was originally designed to deliver drugs like potentially chemotherapy cancer drugs into the brain.

The whole idea was something that could cross the blood brain barrier and get to places where other products might not. So this technology, though they told us, oh, it's going to shoot you an arm and stay there, it's insane because what you use is a delivery system was designed to not stay there. the entire point was so that it could get to your brain and other organs in your body. So this story, this is what we're talking about. There is a cover-up. There's a set of lies that are really, really scary here.

And so now what you're saying is this DNA that, you know, is now being found inside of this delivery system that can go anywhere in your body. Yeah. And one of the issues here was when we talked about, I mean, this story has a lot of offshoots as well to investigate. So in the conclusion there, they said that it exceeded. the FDA and WHO's guidelines for DNA contamination, those guidelines were put in place by the FDA and WHO in the mid 80s into the 90s. That was way before the lipid nanoparticle technology existed. So that was put to cover essentially a whole different conversation. And it also doesn't cover what's called cumulative dosing. So booster one, booster two, booster three. So we're continually

injecting with this lipid nanoparticle that has potential DNA contamination. So those, So those guidelines, I mean, from my view, at that point, are worthless. They need to be rewritten for this new age and this new, this new analogy. So let me get this straight. Is what you're saying then is that we have this 10 nanograms, just the limited amount of DNA particulars could be in a product based in the 1980s. But that was this idea that, well, I mean, if you're injected with something like that, your immune system's going to just kill it off or do something.

It'll probably won't get very far. It's okay. But now we're saying that they never have. had this, you know, this technology to deliver. So even if you took that 10 nanograms and then protected it and put it in a spaceship, if you will, they can get to your brain or get to your heart, that would seem like 10 nanograms might be too much. And so what we're not, but we're not, we're not at 10 nanograms. We're at like potentially 500 times the amount, billions of these fragments being housed in delivery weapon systems that's going to your brain, to your heart,

to your, to in women's ovaries in all of these things. So it's, it's almost exponentially worse than we can imagine. And that's the concern. And that's why these researchers are saying, wake up regulatory agencies, we really need to do something here. Do we need to pull these products? Do we need to investigate them further? We need to do tests and we need to do them now. And a lot of people have to repeat these results because we have to confirm these. This is just a small study. But what these researchers did, they went a step further. They actually looked, because they had the lot numbers. So they cross-reference the lot numbers with the VERS reporting, the vaccine adverse event reporting system. And they said this.

In an exploratory analysis, we found preliminary evidence of a dose response relationship of the amount of DNA per dose and the frequency of serious adverse events. We have a chart here from the actual study. And again, it's Pfizer that seems to have the most contamination, at least in this study when they're talking about this. And it was Pfizer that had the dose response relationship. You can see here, you have the serious adverse events on the side and then the DNA contamination in that nanogram per dose. And it goes up almost right together. So that's, you know, that's an exploratory analysis, but it's something obviously has to be looked at a lot further. So how are they doing this?

So they're tracking the lot numbers and they know how much contaminants they found in that lot. And based on that lot, they find more VERS reports for that lot than, say, the one that had low. Is it sort of based on the lot numbers that they know? Is that how they're figuring this out? Yeah, from my understanding, absolutely. Okay, all right. And so there's another conversation here, another offshoot on this, on this. So some of that DNA contamination is what's called the SV40 promoter.

So when I say SV40, our audience will think of polio vaccine and the monkey kidney cells and then the cancer causing. The SV40 promoter is something that's- Meaning Simeon retrovirus. Simeon virus, this was a virus that was carried over by accident, is our understanding that contaminated the polio vaccine caused cancer for millions and millions of people. So that is what we're talking about, is SV40. Yes. And in gene therapy, this is actually something that's used quite a bit in gene

therapy. It's called the SV40 promoter. And what it does is it's called a nuclear targeting sequence. It's what it has within it. So what that does is it takes the DNA and it drives it into the nucleus of cells. So it's really great for gene therapies. It does not have the tumor-causing gene in there. That's obviously removed, but it does have, it still has a function. So they found that the researchers found that this SV40 enhancer promoter was also among this DNA contamination. So some people actually put that forward to the regulatory agencies and said, hey, by the way, this is a pretty important one. On top of all that DNA contamination, did Pfizer disclose that to you when they put forward all of their information to

regulatory agencies. And this is from Canada. This is Health Canada confirms undisclosed presence of DNA sequence in Pfizer shot. And Health Canada said Pfizer did not specifically identify the SV40 sequence. So they're saying we understood that they used plasmids to kind of replicate this DNA, but we didn't understand that that contained the SV40 sequence. So why did they not show that? Well, it turns out the European Medicines Agency, same thing. European regulator confirms Pfizer did not highlight DNA sequence in COVID-19 vaccine. And the whole conversation to this is important because COVID vaccines did not do genotoxicity studies for regulatory approval, which means genomic contamination. So does it affect your genome? Does it insert itself in those DNA strands we all know about?

Does it put a little row in there that's not supposed to be there? Does it insert itself in, right? is one of the things that we're really questioning. And by the way, what we're talking about, folks, is why on the high wire we were saying, warp speed of science is the stupidest concept the world is ever known. Let's just be clear. Warp speed in science, rushing science is why all of this is turning in this dramatic story

that's going to affect lives all around the world. And there's a whole area, obviously, of science, genomics, gene therapy, that looks specifically at this, expertise, in this specific. very nuanced piece. And it sure would be great if, you know, there were some people from that that were overseeing the vaccine approval when this operation Warpsey was being introduced. Well, in Australia, we have Senator Jero Renick. And he recently had a conversation with one of those people. Take a listen to how it went. Right. Gene therapies are a delicate intentional process encapsulating the desired gene. Manufacturing gene therapies is challenging. And it requires certain

steps including transfection. That is on Pfizer's own website from the table at. I show it to be my question. And then also from the website of the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy, because the vaccine, it's referring to the COVID-MRNA vaccine, introduces new genetic material into cells for a short period of time to induce antibodies. It is a gene therapy as defined by the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy. And then the TGA's own Pfizer-Nine clinical report, page 19, says, the proposed commercial scale manufacturing process includes used of linearised plasma DNA template for MRNA reduction. So we've now got Pfizer themselves who admit that the MRNA vaccines

with gene therapy. The American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy admits the MRNA vaccines are gene therapy. And we've got the TGA themselves admit the DNA was used in the manufacturing process. Why wasn't the actual MRNA vaccine tested for genotoxicity and why didn't the Office of Genetic OTGR therapeutics. Look at it in terms of a gene technology. Okay. Dr Raj Bula, gene technology regulator. Thank you for your question, Senator. I think the first part about the genotoxicity, that question has been asked before because the therapeutic goods administration was the approving authority for the vaccine products. That is a question for TGA or genotoxicity. In relation to your question around manufacturing, I think it's useful to put a bit

of context around that and that the committee is aware the MRNA COVID-19 vaccines were fully formulated and imported into Australia, which meant that there was actually no manufacture of the MRNA or the vaccine product itself here in Australia. If indeed the MRNA, was being manufactured here and it's correct that gene technology was used and the modification of the MRI then under the gene technology act an approval would have been required for that manufacturing step oh well that contradicts what you've said previously you've said previously gene therapy gene technology wasn't used now you're saying because it was produced in another contrary that you're not responsible for checking the gene therapy so the gene technology

act doesn't reach into manufacturing in other countries But it still involves transfection here. It does in, it transfects cells of Australian citizens. No, I disagree with that. Well, that's what Pfizer said. Even though I admit transfection is a part of gene therapy. No, Senator. So you're disagreeing with Pfizer, the people who actually made the vaccine,

that transfection isn't a part of gene therapy. I think she's disagreeing with you at the moment. Well, it's not my word. I've just read out what Pfizer said. Welcome to my world. I think it comes down to a definition of what is a gene therapy. Yep, that's right. I'm relying on the manufacturer.

Just depends on if there's a damage of a gene therapy. That's right. That's why I'm relying on the manufacturer that says that it is. I mean, that is incredible. And this is, and what we're watching, and this is, we've watched this for years, Jeffrey. In all the lawsuits we've brought, it's this compartmentalizing that gets,

that's how they get away with it, right? The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Therefore, no, but like, how do you arrest anybody? How do you figure out what's going on? In this case, she's saying, well, we didn't manufacture. Even though I'm like the head of gene technologies in Australia, and I'm here to make sure, in the regulatory agency that makes sure that you're not getting a dangerous gene therapy product made by us, but if it's not made by us, we don't look at it at all.

I mean, this is literally like, sorry that that food products killing you in America is made in China and that has nothing to do with us. I mean, it's really a crazy argument that they're making and then trying to say, well, and, well, I don't believe it transfects, even though I didn't do the job my regulatory agency was supposed to do to prove that. Right. And if you really pin them, there's no, just plain no. I'm not just no.

I'm not going to answer that question. Right. So they're looking at the entire, I mean, how do we get here? Looking at this entire pandemic response, there seems to be two camps. There's a camp of saying, well, we want some amnesty because, you know, this was an We did the best. We gave it the darned a shot we could. And we did really good under circumstances. There's a whole other camp that said, look, you had the data, you had the information while you were making these decisions. You knew these decisions would be harmful. The lockdowns would be harmful. You didn't test the vaccine to stop transmission.

You knew all this and you went ahead anyway. And it really hurts society. And obviously here we are still unraveling some of these issues with this vaccine. Well, one of the people I gave it a very blunt analysis is another senator from Australia, Malcolm Roberts. He has held a 10-hour COVID inquiry last year, and at the end of it, he grabbed the microphone and said this. It's become clear that people in this country and globally have been steamrolled. It is also clear that it has been coordinated, it is also clear that it has been integrated not just over six months, not just over two and a half years, but it has been planned over decades. The changes to legislation in this country were done so that they could control doctors and people. But the people are waking, and it's thanks to people like Dr. Altman and all the

presenters here today, thanks to people like Senator Babette and Craig Kelly, we know and we knew that this is all b*** and that we've been had. But we are going to hound you down the people that are guilty. We are going to hound you down and hold you accountable. And we will expose your global agenda so that the people of Australia can be free in the future because I love my kids and I'm looking forward to my grandkids and we are going to save this country. It's amazing when I think, you know, all this going on in the world, some very, very touchy subjects that you just can't say one thing about without getting attacked by somebody. But meanwhile, probably the biggest story there is in the world, something that's killing more than probably

any war right now is this vaccine that was forced on citizens all around this world. And we're all tuned to watching bombs dropping in Ukraine and Israel and Gaza and all this. And my heart goes out to all of the pain that is going on there. But we are distracted when our own government agencies are continuing to push a product that very well may be destroying millions of people's lives over the next couple of years. You know, we are really distracted. It's why, you know, we're focused here. I know a lot of you, you know, we're not weighing into things that have nothing to do with help. because I think this is the biggest story. This is a war on humanity right here,

and we're really being distracted by other things around the world. So it's really, this is an outrageous story, and it's great to see more and more politicians starting to make statements like that. We are going to hound you down. Well, welcome to the high-wire team. We plan on hounding, I love that term, hounding Anthony Fauci down,

and putting him behind bars as he should be. And it sure seems as time goes on. more people kind of on a sliding scale of the reaction Malcolm Roberts just had when it comes to looking at this pandemic. But if you're the World Health Organization, you look at the pandemic as an opportunity. And this was just recently brought to light in a conversation, Tadros, the head of the WHO took to Twitter and, or X, and said, take a listen. Last month, the UN General Assembly adopted a political declaration on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. underscoring their commitment to meet shared threats with a shared response.

The COVID-19 pandemic appended lives and livelihoods disrupting societies and economies and exposed and exacerbated political fault lines within and between nations. It eroded trust between people, governments and institutions fueled by a torrent of mis and disinformation. And it laid bare the searing inequalities of our world, with the poorest and most vulnerable communities the hardest hit. The next pandemic is not a question of if, but of when. And we cannot afford to repeat the same mistake of the past. That's why WHO's member states are negotiating a new pandemic accord and amendments to the international health regulations.

to strengthen the legal framework for the global response to pandemics. And we can't stop there. We must follow through with national ratification and accountable implementation. For the sake of future generations, we must not go back to the old cycle of panic and neglect that left our world vulnerable. We are stronger together. This is exactly. what I'm talking about. I mean, look what's happened. That's just this week. So look over here, look at over here, you know, look at the shiny thing. Watch what we were talking about in the news. While, meanwhile, get their dog, take their kids, grab their locks, you know, lock them down.

Let's make sure that they have no government. The WHO can move in at any moment. All that's going on, folks, while we're thinking, you know, about other things. It's all I've got to say. I mean, it's really scary what this guy's talking about. I'm going to have, I got to take a moment. I promise my team I'd wait on this. But this is what has bothered me, from the very beginning about this entire issue. From the moment COVID started, and they started destroying our economy, taking away our right to go to work,

to be able to walk out in public. They made it illegal to breathe the freaking air, forcing us to wear masks, and if we didn't, you know, we were ridiculed and shamed, weren't allowed into buildings, destroyed our children's lives, destroyed their education, all for a virus that in the end has a death rate less than one,

Here's the numbers, this is worldwide. This is looking at numbers from all around the world. If you're below the age of 70, the total death rate is about 0.03%. Not even a tenth of 1%. You had one tiny group of people above the age of 70 that are 2.4% and then plus that even higher at 5.5. This is the point. Whatever that number is, is it not shocking to you?

It should be shocking to everybody. The WHO is saying we made mistakes. The mistake wasn't, we destroyed your world for no reason for a nothing burger. They're not apologizing because this thing wasn't the 3% killer they said it was going to be or the 7% killers we've seen where we didn't lock down before on this planet. No, they're not saying our bad, our misinformation, our disinformation. It's you. That you didn't comply.

You didn't make it easier for us to destroy your lives and take away your livelihoods and destroy your ability to, you know, feed your families and to educate your children. And where? Where in our government right now, Jeffrey? Where is the senator? Where are the congressman? Why is the one question never asked Tony Foucher or anybody? I've been screaming this for years since the beginning of COVID, which is what is that bar? What is that threshold by which we warrant this level of authoritarianism to take over our lives? Is it going to be 0.3%? Is that it? A third of 1% death rate means we suddenly are allowed to come in. WHO is going to come in and say, we're taking over your government, we're taking over your lives, we're running your hospitals, we're running your police departments,

we're kicking in your doors. Is that how low it is? Or are we going to get someone to step and say, you know what, we did overplay our hand. There was a little bit heavy for the 0.3%. Maybe it should be at least, I don't know, what, 2%, a 3% death rate in this virus, 1%, but the fact that no one is giving us threshold is just saying any pandemic at any time allowed us to do whatever we want to you. So a pandemic, by the way, is not severity. It just determines that it crossed over some country lines. It actually made it to several different nations. So if the sniffles ends up getting from Switzerland over to America, does the WHO get to come in and say, hey, you have no constitution any longer? I mean, this is what is happening while we're all looking at

the shiny bombs blowing up in places all around the world. And the narrative they want you to believe is we didn't see this coming. It caught us off guard, but we'll get it next time. You definitely saw it coming. You were testing. Governments around the world were testing these viruses. They were trying to weaponize these SARS viruses. In fact, a new article just came out. Anthony Fauci-run lab in Montana experimented with coronavirus strains shipped in from Wuhan a year before COVID pandemic began. This in 2018, they're working with a SARS-like virus that Wuhan Institute of Raleigh shipped over to Montana, the NIH's Rocky Mountain Laboratory. So it's they definitely saw it coming so they're working on it. In fact, most consensus now says that they caused it because of the lab leak. So I don't,

I don't understand this, this anyway. So if we have WHO's Tadros, he's saying in that kind of plea to push forward this this pandemic treaty, a lot of people are reporting on, it says, he says, we must follow through with national ratification. He says it right there, because one of the conspiracy theories that people will tell you is, oh, the U.S. isn't signing over its sovereignty. It's not going to be a big deal. And the U.S. does have, it does have some protection to just being engulfed into an international treaty or a treaty from a foreign country. Right. But he's saying there, this is my goal. As long as your president of the United States does not put a bunch of tools in power like Tony Fauci that goes and goes ahead with everything the WHO asked for and recommends to all of our

governors to shut down everything that we have and know to be our lives, You know, so, you know, as long as your president doesn't put people in power to just hand it over anyway, then maybe you could stand up against something, but we couldn't. We were powerless in many ways in this situation, and they want more power. And with this pandemic treaty, we are definitely seeing it coming. So they just released, the WHO just released an updated version of this in mid-O October. And this is an advanced edited version. And first of all, they're calling it a WHO pandemic agreement. Sometimes it's treaty, then it's a chord.

So we have to watch the word games, but let's look. Some of the wording is a little different, and we have to continually look at these updates. So first, they're using what's called a one health approach. We're seeing this term, one health approach. And it says in here, one health approach means an integrated, unifying approach that aims to sustainably balance and optimize the health of people, animals, and ecosystems. Remember, this was about a pandemic. Now we're talking ecosystems.

The approach mobilizes multiple sectors, disciplines, and communities at varying levels of society to work together to foster well-being and tackle threats to health and ecosystems while addressing the collective need for clean water, energy, and air, safe and nutritious food, taking action on climate change and contributing to sustainable development. There's your Agenda 2030 W-E-F plug-in right there. Just blown right past the whole idea of a pandemic, and let's just go talk about energy and WEF agenda 2030s. Then moving on, they're talking about communication and public awareness.

This is a big one because remember in California, they passed a law. Doctors couldn't speak on their expertise. They can have their licenses pulled. That law was overturned. Now they're talking about doing this top down. It says the parties shall strengthen science, public health and pandemic literacy in the population as well as access to information on pandemics.

And you go in there, it says, and their effects and drivers, combat false misleading misinformation or disinformation, including through effective international collaboration and cooperation. So no longer is the government going to be reaching out to X or meta-tun- I'm looking at what anyone watching this show, we know we got it right, they got it wrong.

We got it right, they got it wrong. They want to figure out how to have more power to stop what we were doing, which was telling you the truth, so that their bogus science that is now contaminating your DNA as we speak and everyone's refusing to look at it, even though the best genome scientists in the world is saying, hello, people, look out. We have a major, major problem going on here. We may not be the same human beings we were built to be in two or three years from now. I mean, unreal. It's unreal what's happening. Let's talk about the products, the vaccines, the PCR testing. So there's an article in there, Article 13 in this treaty, in this updated treaty, global supply chain and logistics. It says the terms of WHOSLC network shall include facilitating the negotiation agreement of advanced purchase commitments and procurement contracts for pandemic-related products. So that means you have no choice.

If you're the WHO's member state that signs on to this, you have to. to have if they decide advanced purchase commitments are required you have to do that you have to buy these if you're a country that says you know what we're going to wait i think we're good like india they said we're good we're going to manufacture our own vaccine in-house we have distribution we have manufacturing facilities in india we don't need fizer's vaccine they'll say too bad you not only need to take these products that we recommend you have to purchase them all up front even though we don't know how this thing's going to roll out because we need your funding to get the science done and rush this manufacturing product out very quickly. They don't have the money. They just

want the profits. They're spent all the profits they got from the last vaccine we pushed on you, but you as, you know, your taxpayers are going to pay to fund the next crazy rushed warp speed disaster bomb. And we were told the warp speed process was, you know, this is an emergency. We have to do this. We're just going to rush things really fast. This is not normally. It takes three to five years, 10 years sometimes for medications, proper safety testing. Well, the WHO said, hey, that's pretty cool. I think we'll stick with that. So this is in the regulatory strengthening, they call it, Article 14.

It says the party shall strengthen their national and regional regulatory authorities, including through technical assistance with the aim of expediting regulatory approvals and authorizations and ensuring the quality, safety, and efficacy of pandemic-clerated products. So they want to expedite approval. That's directly written in there. So it's Operation Warf Speed from a year on hour. Forever. Yep.

And so the final thing, so this is a growing living document, according to the WHO. There's going to be amendments that are going to come along. You know, obviously they start out with pandemic. Now we have, you know, agendas, climate agendas in there. Who knows what they'll add to that. If you are signed on to this, if the U.S. is signed on to this, let's look at this where it talks about agreeing on amendments. It says the party shall make every effort to adopt any proposed amendment to the WHO pandemic agreement by consensus. And if all effort at consensus have been exhausted and no agreement has been reached, the amendment

shall as a last resort be adopted by three quarters majority vote of the parties presented present and voting at the session. So there you go. You don't want to do it. Three quarters majority. Sorry. So that's how it works with the WHO. Well, as soon as this draft was released, you had a very interesting pushback on this besides

from the public. You had the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations. So they represent ARMA. and they put out this document, innovative pharmaceutical industry statement on draft WHO pandemic treaty. They say in it, it warns that the current proposed text does not preserve what went well for this pandemic and will slow down efforts to improve equity by having a chilling effect on innovation pipeline for medical countermeasures.

As it stands, the world would be better served with no agreement on the current damaging treaty text. In short, no treaty is better than a bad treaty. Why are they saying that? What are they pissed off about? I don't understand. In this treaty, they have an article that talks about transferring technology, intellectual property, and data to all manufacturers throughout the world.

So if you're a company and you have all those things like Pfizer and you want to sell this product, WHO is coming along and saying, nope, you actually have to make a great, you have to agree upon transferring this technology and all your intellectual property to manufacturers, especially in vulnerable countries, low-income countries, so they can manufacture their vaccines on their own. So it pretty much puts, and that's what they say in here, it's going to just have a chilling effect on the innovation pipeline because if this goes through, why innovate if you just have to give that away immediately?

And so that's what they're saying there. Now, from the people standpoint, there's actually, and again, in the U.S., people are saying, don't worry, it's not a big deal. But look, I say this, look how the WHO ran this recent. pandemic, the COVID pandemic. They named it. They called it a pandemic. They called that for the world. So I can't see this actually hurting them. This is actually going to give them more power, it seems, especially a lot of other countries around to this. So in the United States, you have 15 congressmen and women saying this. This is S-44-no-No W-H-O pandemic preparedness

treaty without Senate approval act. So they're making real sure that this thing is not going to go through. And that's going through the House as we speak. In the UK, we have Andrew Bridgen. He just gave an incredible speech last week in Parliament about the excess deaths from these vaccines, possibly. He put forward a referendum for parliamentary sovereignty. So the UK is saying we want to recognize our sovereignty in this whole WHO conversation. And then in Canada, there's a- Well, certainly one man in the UK is trying to say that, right? And in this case, we have like a bill that's going through, whether or not we'll get enough politicians to sign on to protect America's own decision-making or whether we're going to make international treaties and allow outside agencies run by Tadros from Ethiopia,

who I understand used to be directly connected with some of the warlords there. If that's who you want to be the leader of America's decision-making, then you may want to reach out to your representatives right now and say stop the WHO treaty immediately. Yeah, elected versus unelected. And so Canada has a petition. You can sign that if you're Canadian citizen. This was petition E4623. It was put out in mid-October.

It closes February 2024. It has over 45,000 signatures, partly brought forward by Leslyn Lewis. She was doing some great work over there. Remember the House of Commons in Canada. So these are kind of some of the pushback that's happening already. There's a lot of mobilization in the media, the alternative media, on social media. A lot of people are talking about. this. So this is going to run really interesting how this is going to turn out. May

2024 is the final reading, the final adoption of all of these. So that's the date. That's kind of the end date, the finish line. So we have till then to really sound the alarm about this. Freight train from hell on its way. If you're watching right now and you're thinking, wait a minute, I didn't have time to write down, you know, where do I write? Where do I sign in? All of this information that appears on our show is in a newsletter every single week. You'll get it on Monday. All you have to do is give us your email right now. If you're watching the show on the highwire.com, just scroll down. It's as simple as this. Boop, boop, type your email in there. We're the only ones that will have it. We will make sure you're always informed about these things and all the documents, the links that make it easy

to try and protect yourself and your family are in your hands just in a couple of days. It's really, I think, one of the greatest tools that all of you that are sponsoring make possible. This is how we communicate. This is how we do the right thing. This is how we protect ourselves. how we get to be a part of pushing back, which is what this show is all about. I'm not, look, I'm just trying to warn you all that if we don't do what we know we are here on this earth to do, which is to push back, protect ourselves, protect our children, protect our future, you know, that's when you're going to have issues. But right now, we are in the captain's seat. The world is pushing back. These people are crazy, and a lot of people are recognizing that.

And we've done some deep dive reports on this show, you and I together, about some hot button topics. the origins of eugenics in the U.S. in England, even the origins of what we're being told is this current climate crisis, tracking it back to the club of Rome and how they decided that they would choose human beings as kind of the cause of the climate crisis. That was decided upon. It was written about in a book. Well, when we see headlines like this in Bloomberg, I think it's time for us to go a little deeper into this conversation. Earth needs fewer people to beat the climate crisis, scientists say. Now, most people seeing that, it probably sparks a lot of questions or maybe some shock.

Where is this coming from? How do we still have these headlines going on? And really, where did this start? So one of the people you can really point to is a person named Thomas Malthus. He was an English economist, and he's probably best known for his book. He wrote an essay on the Principle of Population that was in 1789. So let's just take a little bit of an excerpt from here. And then we can talk about it.

So he writes, The power of population is so superior to the power in the earth to produce subsidence for man that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race. The vices of mankind are active and able ministers of depopulation. They are the precursors in the great army of destruction and often finish the dreadful work themselves. But should they fail in this war of extermination, sickly seasons, epidemics, pestilence,

and plague advance in terrific array and sweet. Weep off their thousands and tens of thousands should success be still incomplete, gigantic, inevitable famine, stalks in the rear, and with one mighty blow levels of population with the food of the world. This guy sounds like a fun guy to party with. So what, so obviously his idea, I mean from that concept there, but also from his body of work is the population has a carrying capacity, the earth has a carrying capacity and this population must be maintained, or if it comes out of balance, then you're going to be.

going to see epidemics and war and starvation. Well, it was so popular that a group of people started the Malthusian League in 1877. And it said this about that. The Malthusian League advocated for limiting family size voluntarily through contraception to avoid the overpopulation and poverty cautioned in Malthus's work. Malthusian League's activism during the late 19th and early 20th centuries led to more tolerant views of contraception and family planning in Great Britain in the 20th century. So Malthus was kind of the first mover in this space. And he influences Charles Darwin. Charles Darwin is kind of like the competition between species, evolutionary biology, survival of the fittest. Darwin's cousin is Francis Galton. This is where we pick up one of our deeper dyes.

Francis Galton is the father of eugenics. That movement took off in America and in England in the in the early 1900s, late 1800s, early 1900s, and really went through until publicly after World War II, and it became, after what happened, what Germany did, it became kind of not too palpable. Hitler gave eugenics a bad name. I mean, he really, just bad advertising for eugenics, they had to sort of regroup. Right. And so this whole eugenics conversation was, well, we want a better stock of people. We want people with better blood. We don't want people with any type of issues with them. They can just, so that really didn't talk about the planet too much. Malthus is where the planet came in. We're talking about the planet in relation to population.

So that brings the Club of Rome. So organization started in the late 1960s. They fund MIT shortly after that to do a computer simulation about the carrying capacity of the planet. And this was when the book Limits to Growth comes out. Limits to Growth is kind of a compilation of this doomsday computer scenario that they did to talk about all the possible ways this could turn out. That was in 1972. And if you can see on this book, it says a report from the Club of Rome's project on the predicament of mankind. So now we're getting somewhere talking about a predicament of mankind. Well, one of the co-authors was Dennis Meadows. And you would think, you know, obviously these thoughts are kind of foregone conclusions. They're not really popular in especially eugenics.

It's really a disgusting dark time in our past. But in 2017, the co-author Dennis Meadows did an interview. Listen to what he had to say. It's politically inconvenient. Politicians wouldn't want to tell you that if you to deal with climate change, you have to lower your standard of living. So we still have this fantasy, collective fantasy, that we will somehow solve climate change but without giving up our material standard of living and for sure not doing that politically incorrect thing to try to talk about birth rates. The planet can support something like a billion people, maybe two billion, depending on how much liberty and how much material consumption you want to have. If you want more liberty and more consumption, you have to have fewer people. And conversely, you can have more people.

I mean, we could even have eight or nine billion, probably, if we have a very strong dictatorship, which is smart. Unfortunately, you never have smart dictatorships. They're always stupid. But if you had a smart dictatorship and a low standard of living, you can have a... But we want to have freedom, and we want to have a high sentence. So we're going to have a billion people.

And we're now at seven, so we have to get back down. I hope that this can be slow, relatively slow, and that it can be done in a way which is relatively equal, so that people share the experience and you don't have a few rich, you know, trying to force everybody else to deal with it. So those are my hopes. I mean, these are pretty pessimistic hopes, you know. But that's what lies ahead. So let me get my choices straight.

I get smart dictatorship or slow annihilation. Is that what he just laid out for us? his pessimistic hopes for the world. Great. I hope we can do this equally, so we can equally the population. You should all equally, even though, like, I just want to see equal distribution. Well, he's got some China plates sitting in the background there. They're probably ridiculously worth some ridiculous amount of money.

No one will ever eat off of them are totally purposeless. But I'm sure he's going to make sure that it's equal distribution. All right. Amazing. So why are we doing these deep dives with some guy from the 1700s? well because headlines like this we're seeing these coming back around the mouth theusians are back climate activists who worry that the world has too many people are joining ugly tradition so one of the people that's really caught up in this conversation of climate change

of population and vaccines is bill gates he's kind of a power player in this space and in 2011 he sat down with Forbes to do kind of a tell-all article and it's really tell-all in this light so let's look at this the headline with vaccines bill gates changes the world again So this was right around the time a little before that that he decided to take the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and focus it on vaccination. And, you know, the front facing view is he really cares about kids. He really cares about kids' health and developing countries. He wants to pull them up. Well, listen to this article. It says here, Bill Gates's plan to eradicate disease stems from a bold concept. The demographic theories of Thomas Malthus generally accepted for the past two centuries are wrong, specifically that subsidence eventually translate into population. and population growth eventually translates into misery. The logic was crisp and Bill Gates friendly. Health equals resources divided by people. And since the resources, as Gates noted, are relatively fixed,

the answer lie in population control. So there it is right there, population control. Thus, vaccines made no sense to him. Why save kids only to consign them to a life of overcrowded countries where they risk starving to death or being killed in a civil war? Bill's dad, remember on the board of Planned Parenthood, Bill's dad had set up a dinner at Seattle's Posh Columbia Tower Club with the program for appropriate technology and health path. While the meeting started with birth control, among other efforts, Gates began consuming data that startled him.

In society after society, he saw when the mortality rate falls specifically below 10 deaths per 1,000 people. The birth rate follows and population growth stabilizes. It goes against common sense, Gates says. In terms of giving, Gates did 180-degree turn. on to say rather than prevent births, he would aim his billions at saving the kids already born. We move pretty heavily into vaccines once we understood that, says Gates. So there's kind of a short little synopsis of the Bill Melinda Gates vaccination program and the genesis of it, but don't take it for me.

It's not like we're just trying to pick out a couple pieces of the article. Take it from Bill Gates himself being interviewed by Klaus Schwab in 2008. Take a listen. All right. What would you like to see as your legacy in 10, 15 years? Of the new work? Of the new work. Yeah.

If your new function. Well, I've set very ambitious goals because I'm quite optimistic. If you look at, say, the 20 diseases that our Global Health program goes after, I hope that within 15 years, over half of those, we could have had a very dramatic impact. Some of them will prove to be harder than others. For example, AIDS, we will have made an improvement, but not the dramatic improvement, probably in that time frame. Malaria, perhaps.

And a number of the other ones, we have things in the pipeline. So, you know, huge change in the mortality rates in developing countries, which then has this effect of reducing population growth. That's this big benefit that then makes everything like education and nutrition. a lot easier. If you slowly annihilate people, you have less people to feed and educate, basically. I want to make it clear here because people get hoodwings. He's like, no, but do you see, Del?

He's saying he's trying to make kids healthy. Let's be clear. He had, and I think there's a better set of words we should use. He wants less souls on this planet. He wants less children on this planet. When giving vaccines, I think, well, why make kids healthy only to live like, I want them to die. I want fewer of them on this planet. Oh, wait a minute, if I vaccinate and the families are healthier,

then there's fewer kids, let's do that. And the reason I bring this up, I mean, it's it's wordsmithing at its best, but let me just ask this question to everyone in the audience. So let's just say he actually does believe that vaccines make you healthier, and by being healthier, you end up having less kids, especially in third world countries like that. So he's vaccinated to make kids healthy, only to reduce the population, which he has admitted time and time again. is his goal. Here's my question. If that vaccine that's designed to make you healthier

somehow has a side effect like sterilizing you or sterilizing a percentage of those that receive it, do you think he would say, whoa, stop, stop, stop. That's not what I wanted this product to do. I mean, would he really interfere? If this, for some reason, this vaccine, for some people that have certain genetic susceptibilities actually shortens your lifespan,

do you think he would say, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. That's, that is not what vaccines, here to do, I'm trying to help people live longer, healthier lives. Or would he say, you know, let's get back to my original issue here, which is too many damn people. So if this product, where I'm trying to make people healthier, you know, ends up sterilizing you, which vaccines that he has delivered and been a part of have been caught having sterilizing agents in them, we use vaccines to sterilize deer, so it's not outside of the realm of possibility that we could

do that with human beings. And what if it shortens lifespans on some people? Do you think that Bill Gates would stop that product? Is there anything that has come out of his mouth that makes you think he would think that is an unfavorable side effect? I think that's the question we should be asking ourselves. And frankly, why I will never touch a single product to let anything go into my kids that ever received a single red scent from this man who I know is telling me honestly, right to my face, Dell, I want less soul.

on this planet. And so when we look at the headlines, we have to ask ourselves what is going on because we're seeing headlines like this. We just heard from people. We just heard the ideology that goes way back to the 1700s and it's peppered throughout to present day of less people on the planet. And then we see headlines for the first time really ever recently like this. America's fertility crash laid bare. Interactive map shows how birth rate has plummeted since 2007, falling up to a third in some states. And you go, to this article and it has a map there and you can see largest decline in utah 36.2 average decline over negative 22 percent and you go to another graph the number of children born to each woman

in the 1800s there at the first line it's up to about seven and then you track it to 2020 you have less than two got a little bump up there in the 1960s for the summer of love but other than that we're going downhill and this isn't just an american phenomenon in fact japan is one of the the worst performers in this space. Last year, Japan considers offering even more money to new parents as birth rate crashes. This year, Japan on the verge of societal collapse due to birth rate, Prime Minister says,

says the replacement rate. Poland, same thing. Poland birth rate found to be the lowest in 30 years. And then if you go to the economist, it just says global fertility has collapsed with profound economic consequences. So this is a, I mean, this is a whole different conversation about perhaps why this is happening.

There's a lot of moving parts, But these are the headlines that we have to pay attention to. This is a really serious, serious problem. Well, our generation, as we get older, and certainly the very next generation behind us, will just be a giant burden on our social systems and our government that will have to take care of us because we will have less kids.

We have fewer kids that we have people dying or getting old, so they're not going to be able to take care of their parents. You know, my kids in that generation will just not have enough manpower to fund their elderly. when they get older, what happens to that social structure system? It comes crashing down. This is just, you know, one bad decision on top of another. Really interesting reports today, Jeffrey. And they kind of all go together, right? It's just really limited thinking that didn't just start 10 years ago. I think what you really see is this is an agenda that go back to the Fabian Society.

You know, all of these really scary eugenics programs are now really taking hold and they're being funded. And this is what I think is so interesting, Jeffrey. You know, people said to me everywhere I travel, and I get to go to these great conferences where, you know, we'll talk about Central Reserve banking systems and AI and, you know, bio weapons and all of it. And they'll say, and, you know, and Bitcoin or whatever it is. And they'll say, you know, they'll say to me, well, vaccines is one of the issues

or hell. I was like, no, no, you don't understand. And Jeffrey, the truth is, is we've been on this beat for, you know, just about six or seven years now. And this issue of health, everybody may think, oh, it's just about health. It's not literally the takeover of the world is being masked in this guise of health. The W.H.O. The W.E.F. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Gavi. All of these, the World Monetary Fund. It's all about health. They're all investing in a social structure system that uses your fear of death or this idea that we need to protect people, even though we want less on them on this.

planet, trust us, we need to make all your decisions for you. There's nothing else that touches what this is going to do. There's nothing else that's going to rob us of more security. There's nothing else that's going to rob us of more rights. This is the number one issue of our time. And Jeffrey, I am just happy to be on this ride with you because you're one of the best there is on the most important topic I think is proving out. We were right. This is where our focus should have been. Keep up the great work. We're going to keep people informed to make sure that we stop this beast before it devours everything we know and love. Absolutely. All right, Del. Thank you.

All right, Jeffrey. I'll see you next week. Well, you know, obviously I'm passionate about this, and I guess sometimes we get into the weeds, but you really got to see what's going on here. It's not going away. The problems are worse. Now, if you had a government that was admitting to you, we overreacted. You know, the virus wasn't as bad as we thought, but it taught us some lessons. you know, they're actually asking us to forgive them now. There's like all of these, forgive us for, you know, forgive me for what? You haven't admitted you've done anything wrong, like totally overreact.

In fact, you're saying you think that it was a mistake that we push back at all. This is the world that we're in and we're lucky that we have, especially the United States of America, a court system, a legal system, that we have multiple branches of government. And right now, hopefully those three branches of government will push back against this world takeover. But you're going to need good lawyers to do that. The lawyers that aren't bought, they've got to find judges that haven't been sold out to these insane ideas. Well, we have one of those lawyers that does the work for us at ICANN. I think Aaron Siri will go down in history is maybe one of the most important constitutional scholars and attorneys of our lifetime, maybe of all times. The work that we're doing has been spectacular.

But we report on it a lot. But if you want the jump on what's happening, he's starting to record videos and then putting out legal reports on what we just accomplished and what his law firm accomplished this week. This is this week's video and you'll be getting all of the information that he's talking about, all the actual evidence that is breaking tomorrow if you're on our email list. But first, let's see what Aaron has to say. When Congress eliminated the liability pharmaceutical companies for the injuries caused by their vaccines in 1986, it recognized it creates a create. created a vacuum in which the industry was no longer going to be responsible for vaccine safety. In fact, they had now an inverse interest in assuring vaccine safety. So it made the Department of Public and Human Services responsible for vaccine safety

in literally a section of law called the Mandate for Safer Child of Vaccines that has three simple parts. Part one, make them safer in every possible way. Part two, create a task force that includes a head of the NIH, FDA, and CDC to make recommendations to the Secretary of HHS about how to make them safer. And three, every two years, the Secretary of HHS was to provide reports to Congress on how the vaccines have been made safer.

We know from prior FOIA requests, the task force was formed, made one report and disbanded back in the 90s. And in terms of the actual buying report to Congress, they've never done that. We actually had to go to federal court, and which they finally admitted, no, we've never given that report to Congress.

Well, you would think, After we did that lawsuit many years ago, they would have finally submitted a report to Congress. So we forwarded them again to see if they've done it. And we again got the confirmation. Nope, never submitted a single, by annual report to Congress and how we've made vaccines safe.

How does the head of the health agency in which the CDC FDA and NIH is located, how do they get away with not doing the most minimal, required activities in assuring vaccines are made safer of just making recommendations and submitting a report to get away with because the only one who can really punish them for it is Congress. And Congress could either withhold funds from them

or could eliminate certain powers and authorities. But unfortunately, Congress rarely invoke the power of the purse to hold the executive branch of government accountable. And it is highly concerned. Because if the Secretary of HHS isn't doing the simple parts of the mandate for the child vaccine recommendation reports, are they really doing

the hard parts of actually making vaccines safe, eliminating vaccines that aren't safe, we all know the answer to that question. ICANN is currently a part of funding over 20 legal professionals now through Aaron Siri and his team to fight for your rights, to make sure that the government is held accountable. And we are, as we're not just, what you're watching here is an experiment that's never been done before. Look at what we do. We take our scientists that are international. We're having a meeting. Every week, we meet with international specialists looking at what's happening in the science all around the world. That's why we're bringing you breaking stories out of Australia. No one in America is doing that.

No one's tracking Australia and Japan and Canada and what they're learning there. The same problems that they're sharing in plasmids and things like that, contaminations and vaccines. Not only taking that information, we now take that information and we give it to our legal team. Our legal team then starts using that to bring FOIA requests against the FDA, asking questions they can't answer. When they can't, we bring lawsuits against the them. Then we're going and grabbing groups of people and saying, we need to take the lawsuit into a civil basis so that we can take a ride to the Supreme Court. This is how we were able to bring back the religious exemption to Mississippi after since 1979, I believe it was. They had not

been able to opt out of the vaccine program until this year because of the work that we are doing. Yes, over 20 legal professionals are working for you and you are making that happen. And we're When you look at the WHO, who do you want in the court cases against that? Who do you want talking to the politicians? And we're meeting with everybody. We're getting more and more senators and congresspeople to listen to us. Because what they do, and a lot of them are lawyers, by the way, when we say we've won lawsuits on this, we've loaned lawsuits on this, they go, wait a minute, there's lawsuits you're winning. So you're not some crackpots.

Believe me, we are shifting the conversation of this in the United States of America and around the world. but obviously we are starting to fight on a lot of fronts. We are in many, many different pots now. We're looking at chem trails and are we being poisoned from the sky? Are they going to try and drop vaccines on us? Are they trying to put vaccines in your food supply? All of these things. What's happening with this?

We are on the cutting edge, but it is expensive to be there. I'm just a journalist. All I ever want to do is try to report and make the world a better place. We never tried to build some empire, but you have done that. We've got this massive attack going against all the wrongs in the world, and we want to keep it up because we've got our groove on. We are the most successful at this. We've got the best legal team. Unlike other nonprofits, by the way, that will just grab on and they'll fund different lawsuits and different lawyers around the country, which is great, and they do a great job, and that's really awesome.

We never do that. We always have our law firm on it so that every day. we win, we learn. Every time we lose, we learn. Our law firm gets smarter and better and better at everything they do. That is why we are so capable. And I want to keep this role on because we are going into the most dangerous times this world has ever seen. And we are running out of time. That's why I need your help. We need the big wins. We need now. We need to get in the NIH. We need to shut down the CDC. We need to start changing these regulatory agencies and affecting the politics and the system around it. If you are down,

to be a part of that team. You can do it from your home and you can just celebrate when you win. All you have to do is become a recurring donor. We're just asking you, go to the top of the page right now. It's going to be one of the most important things you've ever done on your computer. Click on the donate now.

We would love for you to become a recurring donor. It's going to take you a couple minutes. I don't care if it's $1, if that's all you can afford right now. But ask yourself this. Are you going to have a dinner this weekend and how much you're going to spend and then all of a sudden it's all over the next morning. You're in the bathroom and there it was and how much will that be remembered?

Or do you take a moment and say, what does it mean to save the future for my children to fund the greatest legal team that's going to be seeing the biggest pressures ever seen? The biggest attack on the United States of America and governments around the world are taking place. We're there for you. We need your help. You really do make a difference. We're going to make it easy for you. Just type 72022 in your phone right now.

put in the word donate, and we're going to hand you the link. It'll be right there on your phone. And now you can become a contributing partner in part of our network, the informed consent action network. We are fighting in every state that still is not, things that can force vaccines on you in California and, you know, Maine. These states, there they are, the five holdouts that still remain trying to rob you of your right to opt out of these untested, dangerous products that don't. WHO wants to come in here and force them on you. Good luck forcing them on us. We actually have exemptions here. We want that for every state in America so that we are ratified in our safety.

Help us do that, become a recurring donor today. All right. Well, as we've said, when tragedies like Acapulco strike and, you know, people are stranded, maybe people we love, or, you know, I've been at an Acapulca, I've been at events down there. There's great people that are down there. How do we get money to them? How do we know that when we give money that, you know, to these organizations that we can trust them?

And we've seen governments that step in and freeze those assets. What happens there? What's going on there? Well, in the middle of all the work that we've done and all the times that we've run campaigns here on the show, and you've been spectacular at helping people out, through all this, there's been a growing, you know, massive attack on these donation sites. and one has stood up, one has stood up and is starting to really test the time to become one of the most powerful gift-giving assets we have in this world. I'm talking about give-send-go. Take a look at this. Give-send-go. An alternative crowdfunding website called Give-Send-Go.

Give-Send go, which is a freedom platform. Give-Send go. It's a Christian-owned crowdfunding platform. Give-Send go. It's a Christian crowdfunding site highlighting a lot of fundraising opportunities. The site was launched as an alternative to GoFundMe, which many say was too quick to shut down campaigns that don't fit its agenda. A young man named Kyle Rittenhouse came to our platform because he had been banned from every other social media platform. And all of a sudden we woke up to the site exploding tons of hate mail and death wrecks. And we were like, what's going on? And we realized we had arrived on a battlefield for freedom.

And he was able to raise legal fees on GIFS and Go. And through that, he was found not guilty. The Freedom Convoy turning to crowdfunding platform gives and go after GoFundMe sees millions of dollars in donations. Campaign actually passed $9 million, $9.2, almost 9.3. The nonviolent Freedom Convoy, the truckers have now become Canada's public enemy number one. When a Canadian court froze $9.5 million in Freedom Convoy assets raised through Give Send Go. The funds primarily at this point are here in the United States, and there are a wide variety of methods for us to get them to them. But yes, the convoy is appealing it and going through that legal process up there.

Daniel Penny's lawyers launched that defense fund on Tuesday, and in less than a week, thousands of donors raced to his aid. At one point, there was such a surge in web traffic. The site froze. Take a look at this. Daniel Penny's legal defense fund topping 2.76. million dollars. That makes it the second highest grossing fundraiser in give Sen Go's history. Even people in difficult situations need to be afforded these fundamental rights so that justice can really be served because the best place for that to be done is in a courtroom not in the court of public opinion. All right. Well, I am honored to be joined right now with the co-founder of GiveSengo

Jacob. It's really good to meet you. It's good to be here, Del. Thanks so much. Actually, not meet you, have you on my set. We've met many times before. We keep showing up at these events. You're, you know, everywhere that I think freedom and health is being discussed. And I've been wanting to have you on the show for a long time because I just think it's so important to work that you're doing. Well, we have seen each other several times and we're in the fight together. We're standing with you guys. Gives and Go has been used for so many things throughout the world. 80 countries now. It's amazing the growth we've seen. But, We're happy to be. I'm so grateful to be here. Yeah, it's really good to have you. And, you know, one of the things about the work that you're doing is, you know, you haven't been shy. You've been going to really scary places. Like, let's just start, Kyle Rittenhouse, you know, a controversial story here in America. For those that maybe don't remember, trying to just protect stores during a time that, you know, there was unrest hitting the city.

He, you know, was protecting with a gun. I'm not going to relitigate it, but he did get his... his day in court, but really only because he was able to get lawyers, you know, that could really give him a decent shot. Right. And you were a big part of that. Tell me how that happened. Yeah, it's really incredible.

We don't go out and solicit campaigns. They come to our, we're a platform. People come to our platform. What had happened was his campaign went to those other sites that are out there and they all shut him down. So he was, he was left without any option. And someone came along and said, well, I know. of this other site, maybe they'll allow it.

So they brought it to our platform in August of 2021, believe it was. And all of a sudden we got massive amounts of hate mail flooding through. You need to take this thing down. And we looked at it and we said, well, why do we need to take it down? I mean, this seems pretty controversial. People on both sides of the aisle. There's been no judgment rendered.

You're supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. in a court of law, not public opinion in America. And for us, it was, well, do people deserve that due process or do the voices we have on social media dictate what people should have and shouldn't have? And we said, no, we're going to stand for the right of this individual to raise funds for his legal defense, just like anyone should be allowed to in a similar situation. And not really an indictment on whether he was innocent or guilty.

It was, well, we don't know. The evidence will come out in court, and what came out in court eventually was that, yeah, they did find him innocent or not guilty in that situation. Acting self-defense, I think, was ultimately the situation. So, and then, you know, this case ongoing right now on a subway, this unfortunate incident, where, you know, you have a homeless person screaming at people, threatening their lives, and then someone, you know, tries to apparently be a good Samaritan. and it goes too far and the homeless person ends up dying. I'm sure he was on drugs and all sorts of things. Again, very controversial story, but in your opinion, it's just about, I mean, I guess this is the question. How do you just, I mean, is there some sort of board or panel that decides what stories you will do

or the stories you wouldn't sort of cover? No, really. I mean, campaigns come on. Like I said, we're just a platform. So anyone can come on and just start a campaign. Now, prior to releasing any funds from a campaign, we do have a verification process. We're required by law to know your customers, especially in the financial transaction industry. You've got to make sure you're not funding a terrorist and money isn't going to some bad actor that way.

So we go through all of those checks to make sure that whoever's receiving the money isn't somebody that's on one of those watch lists somewhere, that they're approved by the financial system to raise money online. And once those things are done, we do scan the campaign. to ensure that it's actually fundraising for a legal endeavor. You can't be fundraising for something illegal, to do something illegal. And so those checks are done, and then if it passes that, then the funds are released

to the recipient. So that's the process. Now you're calling, I know you sort of celebrate that you're Christian-based organization. Are there ever things that sort of common conflict with those values? All the time. Yeah, we're Christian in who we are as our foundational,

moral value and ethic that we have as a company. But as far as who we want on the platform, we want everybody on the platform. Our whole idea behind the platform was the other platforms that were out there, they were fundraising vehicles that people could use, but they were missing a component. People oftentimes in these difficult moments when fundraising is needed are left hopeless because something disastrous has happened.

You might have just lost a child in a tragic accident. No amount of money is bringing that child back, but you can raise money to help pay for those funeral expenses. We said, well, with what we believe as Christians, we have a hope that actually can help those hopeless situations, more than just money. So why don't we build a platform around that idea, that it's not just money that people need. People need a hope in something bigger than the situation they're going through. And how we accomplish that is a ton of ways on the site. And one of them, the most notable, I'd say, is our prayer. team. We actually call each campaign that gets set up on our website. We have a prayer team that

just calls and prays with people and says, hey, I know what you're going through or I've read what you're going through. Can I pray with you? And many of them happen to be atheist or Buddhist, like I said, people that aren't necessarily aligned with how we believe. And they're so amazed that we would spend our money and our time to actually invest in their lives, invest in their campaign that way and they're blown away by it. But yeah, we've had lots of controversial things that we don't even necessarily agree with, maybe from an extreme transgender situation or even I think that the largest Satanist group in the world tried, you know, had set up a campaign once before. Did you let that go through or do you say that doesn't fit our values?

So where we've drawn the line is on campaigns that are fundraising for, abortion, the killing of innocent life, and the transgender mutilation of minors. If you're an adult and you want to set up a campaign to fundraise for your transition surgery or whatever, that's more power to you. We'll call and we'll pray with you and we'll share our hope with you in that moment. But if you're doing it for kids, we're going to protect kids. It's basically that line that we've drawn. So with the Satanist campaign, it actually was for abortion.

ritual rights so that they could ritually kill children. And so we said no, but we'd be happy to let you have a campaign for your statue of whatever, that there were other things they were trying to do. It is amazing when you get into these spaces. At one point I was talking to a social media company about potentially working together.

And it is wild because you want to have freedom, right? You want to just create a space of freedom, but there are rules of freedom, right? freedom, right? And there's a limit to what we all think should be free. And, you know, for each of us that may be different and it's subjective. It's not really an objective place. And I just find it really interesting because you do have to have some parameters and when you're trying to be as open as you can be. Well, that's it. We're trying to be as open as we can be. And we do recognize there's a lot of tension around various issues. We've had situations, you know,

some of the contentious ones, like a proud boy having used our platform for our fundraising. And we've really to wrestle through some of those things. And we don't say that we're at the end of the journey in how we think about it. Because we're people. We realize we don't know everything and that we want to learn in the process. It's like, was that the best move? What we've said is we're going to cover the journey in grace to not always get it right, but to have grace for the campaigns that come on that we disagree with. When you're saying we, you started this with your sisters, is that right? Yeah, I'm one of 12 kids. Wow. Massive family, yes, six boys and six girls from New Hampshire.

You need crowdfunding just to feed that family. Right, I know. Seriously, I'm sure my parents would have taken advantage if it had been available back then. But yeah, myself and two siblings came together in 2014 at a family get together and saw so many people using GoFundMe as a platform. And we're like, oh, that's super cool, communities coming together, but it's missing that hope piece that we have. So let's create a platform that actually can deliver some of that hope when people are fundraising in those moments. So let's talk about the Canadian truck goes because I think that that's where you, I mean, in some ways, I suppose it's some negative advertising, but it really puts you on the map. I mean, there's a lot of focus there.

Funding people we were, you know, trying to give to these truckers that were standing for their rights, their freedom. Right. Didn't want to be forcibly vaccinated and all the things that were going on. their business was being crushed. But then the Canadian government stepped in and, you know, locked the funds up. Now, am I correct that you were sort of in that, that gives and go got sort of locked up, funds locked up?

What happened there? Yeah, so it's an interesting story. How the process works is funds come here to the U.S. So from any campaign in the world, they come here to the U.S. are domiciled here in our accounts. And then when the recipient from any of the 80 plus countries that we're in, request those funds, they go through that background check, and then we disperse them. So after GoFundMe shut down their primary campaign and it was switched to us,

we quickly saw millions of dollars shoot through. Like GoFundMe did what the government said they just walked away from those people. They just said, we're walking away from the funds. Yeah, well, they had, I think, dispersed, they dispersed an initial million. The bank, it was TD Bank Canada, just jumped in, Prior to any government action, just said, well, we're not comfortable, so we're freezing these funds, which was interesting, pretty crazy in itself. Yeah.

And then GoFund, we kind of got cold feet on the whole thing for whatever reason. I don't know if they were in talks with the government or not. I know that the government never reached out to us. They never called us, they never talked to us, they never shot us an email. That's a good question, right. Like this idea, like, why would they have reached out to them and not you? Right. And so they switched over to give send go, raised all of that money.

We were then in a situation because it was rapidly evolving where the government actually petitions the courts and the courts came down and said, we're going to freeze anything that happens in Canada. We're not going to allow any of our Canadian citizens to have any access to any of these funds. So we had already sent three and a half million Canadian dollars to the trucker convoy organization. Okay. We'd sent it to them, and that order comes down from the courts, and the courts came in and grabbed it. They seized that money right away. Because that order was passed.

And so then we were left with the remaining balance of this almost 13 million Canadian dollars. Wow. And we started looking at, are there legitimate ways for us to actually get this money to the trucker organization? What are we going to do with it? We're holding on to it. We understood that the givers gave with the intention of it getting to the truckers, But now that the Canadian courts had said, if anybody receives money from this campaign,

they're going to be receivers of illicit donations from illicit activity, and we will throw the book at you, we'll charge you. We were left in a very difficult position because it was like, well, what do we do with this? If we even sneak this money across the border, because we were looking at every option, if it's found out that that person received it, they're going to go to jail.

So we tossed around a whole lot of, different ideas, options, trying to figure our way through it. We were thrust into the situation ourselves. It's kind of novel for us. It's just an interesting vantage point because you're right there. We all heard it happen. But you're holding on to a bundle of money. Like, what do we do with this? Exactly. We're kind of like literally just sitting around thinking of ideas of ways that we could do it. And after several weeks and it's just going on long enough and not really having a viable thing, We didn't want to be like, you know, you can get criticized for doing anything, but it was like the longer and longer you're holding it,

and money's not. We're like, you know what, the best thing, let's just return the remaining balance to the people that gave. So, because we can't accomplish what it was intended for without the Canadian government. Because even if we sent it to whomever, if they saw a wire transfer, they were monitoring it all. They're just going to grab it. Right. They couldn't grab it from us because we're here in the U.S. and outside of their jurisdiction, which they didn't like because we tweeted about that.

We're like they have no jurisdiction over what we do. And then since then, got called and asked to testify before Parliament several times. Really? You have. In Canada. In Canada, yes. Fascinating discussions with some of the MPs up there about the whole thing. Yeah. Have you gotten any lawsuits against you?

Is there any actions being taken against you? Yeah, so you know how when big piles of money start to to come together, lawyers start licking their lips. And so that's what happened up in Canada. Right at the beginning, an attorney saw an opportunity with this money and said, oh, well, we can find an aggrieved party, I'm sure. And so they found an aggrieved party that said, oh, you know, our business was affected because of these truckers.

And so we're going to now tie these funds up ourselves in court. We're going to file a lawsuit. So they filed a civil lawsuit against the trucker organization and members that were involved in the trucker organization, individuals, they named a few individuals. And then six, eight, nine months later, we get something coming into us saying, hey, we're going to add you guys to the lawsuit.

I'm like, well, what did we do? The money didn't even get there. I mean, it went there and you seized it. Right. And then we refunded the rest. So I wasn't up there honking a horn. Like, I didn't have my truck in the street. Like, what is this?

And so we've walked this journey out. So then the judge okayed the petition to add us to the lawsuit. So now we're involved in a $300 million lawsuit. Wow. Some attorneys up in Canada that are, you know, they wanted to make this their own type of January 6th, something or other. I don't know. Right. You know, try to twist it in the media.

A bunch of people out there, you know, cooking hot dogs in the street and singing. Bouncy castles and the kids jumping around. It's really horrifying. It's really horrifying. And the crazy part of some of it's now coming out in some of the trials that have unfolded around some of the individuals involved is that the police were working in conjunction with the protester groups as they came into the city and orchestrating where they should park and all that. Because big cities that deal with protests often, they have liaisons. to deal with protester groups to kind of coordinate.

And there's text message threads between the police and some of the trucker groups. Here's where you're supposed to party. So this was not anything what the mainstream media wants to tell you. Oh, well, they were blocking the traffic. Well, they went where the police told them to go.

Like, none of that stuff. Since you've been up close and personal with this whole Canada thing, and it really, from my perspective, and we've done a lot of reporting on this, it's really kind of scary the measures that are happening now in banking systems, even in their social media, up close and personal, like really looking at banking. I mean, you're watching how funds are moving internationally now. You're in 80 countries.

Right. Are we wrong to be concerned about digital banking systems that are controlled by government agencies? I mean, do you feel like that's... I think, I personally think that we are. I do think that there are some decentralized digital currencies that aren't run by individual countries that could possibly be a solution. Cryptocurrency is interesting in Bitcoin in that it's decentralized in some respects. What we are doing ourselves as a company and organization is creating multiple layers of

payments from all different, whether it's submitting checks, allowing people to scan and submit checks to campaigns to adding cryptocurrency in there as an alternative payment option. So we're looking at the whole gamut of things and even developing ourselves as a deeper layer of the payment space like creating our own bank and where that would happen and how you can do it so that it maintains some level of sovereignty and what it's able to do. But I do think that there's a lot to be concerned about. What about here in America? Are you concerned with our banking systems here in America? Completely. I mean, if you, if you, well, if you look, again, this is the global picture,

but 25 years ago there was 10,000 plus banks and now, as of like last year, there was down to 2,000. I mean, it's shrinking and shrinking and shrinking. Regulation continues to increase. It is restricting the market. When you restrict those market opportunities, you create a more centralized banking system, it just becomes easier to control. And you can now, I think it was Bank of America around January 6th that submitted all of their users, Bank of America customers who had used their debit card within Washington, D.C. area in that timeframe. Wow.

Yeah. And just turned it over to the government. It's absolutely crazy that there's submitting, but it shows you how much they're able to see what you're doing, even with the current system, cryptocurrency, you know, from a government perspective, is just going to be horrific. Wow. I mean, it's such an important work. I'm just really glad you're out there. Actually, I've just heard from the booth that our good friend Jeff Berwick, who is one of the founders of Anarchapoko, which is an event I've spoken at, has a give-Singo for people that want to give

to someone that we actually know down there in Acapulco. Here it is Hurricane Otis Acapulco, Rescue and Recovery, givsendgo.com slash Acapulco Recovery. Our friend, Jeff, is down there. Jeff, you know, so sorry to hear what's going on. Man, he's been there for several years. He's a big part of that community. So if people want to give, once again, there's give, send, go. How should people think about your platform?

Like, when do I need it? When do I use it? You know, we really say it's all the time, anytime. I mean, if you see a need, we actually want people to be proactive in engaging with their community. It could be your neighbor just went through a house fire and you just want to rally the community to help them. The vast majority, there are these hot political button campaigns that shoot us into the media, but 99% of the campaigns on Give Send Go are just everyday life. Communities coming together to help each other, from people

raising money for things like pet bills to adoptions to going on a missionary trip with your church. I mean, literally, the options are endless for what you can fundraise for, but we say, get out there and actually see the needs that are in your community and step in. I mean, one of the features of creating a campaign on GIFS and Go is you don't have to be the recipient. You could just be the creator. So you can go on, you can create a campaign and have nothing to do with the funds. You could just be like, hey, I saw the need. I'm creating the campaign.

And then we identify the recipient either with you or who it's supposed to go to. we do all the verification for it at a later time. So you can just create the campaign just trying to engage your community to do something good. Oh, I love it, man. It's really important work. I want to thank you for finally making it in here. We've been wanting to do this for some time. It's so great because I've watched those others shut you down.

I don't think anybody should be using anything other than give us and go. You've stood your ground. You're taking the heat. You're involved in several lawsuits. It doesn't seem to be backing you down, which is our kind of spirit here at the high wire. Yeah, right. All right. So thank you for joining us and I look forward to seeing out there and all the beautiful campaigns that you're doing. Definitely. Thank you.

All right. Well, I am going to be in Las Vegas actually speaking this weekend. I'm on Sunday. I'm speaking. And the big question if you want, or the thing of going there is like, what is Arcadia? You are about to enter a parallel reality. A representation of the return to innocence beyond the tragedy of our separation from each other and the earth. This is the more beautiful world our hearts know is possible. This is Arcadia. This story matters. And this story is a story of a more beautiful world.

The invitation to step inside this story of Arcadia. A story that will hopefully be the start of a bigger story, a story that repeats time and again. But this is the Genesis story. This is where it starts. And we are all holding a piece of the pen. How do we want to write Arcadia? It's up to us.

This new story, like make it real because each one of you adds your pen stroke, making it thicker and darker and truer. With every dance move you make, every compliment you give, every hug, everything you do, you can make this a new story. We are in a moment of reconnection as humanity. We have a new opportunity to express a new self. And to do that, we need to see the mirror of another human being. And then Arcadia here, we are finding the opportunity to, with fresh eyes, see one another.

Allow this to be the epicenter of something that ripples and ripples and ripples and ripples. Media is a perception. It's the ability. to see the beauty in everything, to see the sparks in the shadows, to collect them from the broken vessels and say, ah, yes, that's beautiful too. That's the essence of the kingdom. That's the essence of Arcadia. Well, I'll be there in Arcadia in Las Vegas with my brother, Aubrey Marcus, who joins me now. I know you're live there, Aubrey. Thank you for taking a moment. I know you're trying to put magic together so I don't want to take too much time. But for those of you that haven't seen it,

one of my favorite interviews this year was on the Aubrey Marcus podcast. Definitely go and check that out. And clearly, by watching that little video there, Aubrey, I think I'm going to have to lose the vested tie. I don't think I'm going to fit in very well. You go, you go as you, Delp. You bring your unique style, your unique self, your unique passion.

You know, that's why we're having you out there, is to bring your heart and bring energy and that comes through a suit and tie and it comes through a tank top and glitter on your face. Whatever you want to do, you bring it. Yeah, man. What is it, you know, when we look at an event like this, I mean, it's really outside when I'm like health freedom, but you've been such, you've been so brilliant at talking about empowerment, health freedom, and just venturing into that space. And as people, what is it about the work that you're doing that, you know, and Arcadia, what is

your mission here? Because I feel like we're all on this earth for a plan, for a reason. At least I feel like I am. It's a lot of what I'm going to talk about when I'm there on Sunday. But, you know, what is your goal here? I think that, you know, the world has become increasingly complicated and increasingly difficult. And there's a need for a lot of compassion. There's a need for a lot of feeling what other people feel. And that's what also heals the divide. You know, someone we both deeply support is Bobby Kennedy and his message is about healing the divide.

And to do that, first we got to feel people's pain. We got to feel the pain of the people who can't afford a house. We got to feel the pain of everybody around the world and see through their eyes. So compassion is one part. But the other part is we have to feel compersion. And that's the joy in other people's joy. Because meanwhile, while all of this ugly stuff is going on, you know, lovers are embracing each other. People are having bites of amazing food and laughing with their friends. And even

when I went to the Soweto slums in Kenya, when they had an old beat-up soccer ball, the kids were laughing and playing and kicking on goals that were made with trash cans. You know, their joy and beauty and love. And we're here to anchor that. And it's not to bypass all of the challenging things, but it's to say that also we need to remember the world we're fighting for. And we need to allow that conversion, which is the shared expression of somebody else's joy and their ecstasy to also fuel us. So, you know, that's a big part of what this Arcadia is about, is to get us back to remembering that a more beautiful world really can and does exist and exists in microcosms. And what we're fighting for is for it to exist in the largest macrocosm

possible, a circle where nobody is on the outside. Really beautiful. You know, I'm glad you brought that up. I remember I had the same experience. I went to Haiti when I was working the doctor's television show after the earthquake, that devastating earthquake and just all sorts of horror. But I remember seeing some of those shanty towns where just kids didn't even have clothes. They were so poor and, you know, there's sewage running down the side of the hill,

but you would still see, you know, groups laughing and giggling and standing around singing with each other. And I just remember thinking, man, if they can. have joy in this, I should have be allowed a single bad day in the world that I come from, you know? And there is. There's always beauty. And it really is important because, you know, if we don't understand the beauty, then we don't know what we're fighting for. And then all we end up doing is fighting. Exactly. You know, exactly. So that's, you know, that's the, that's the, that's the stand of it's a different way to look at being a warrior. You know, like sometimes we'll need to fight and that fight will involve tears and blood and it will be a difficult way that we

stand and I say that metaphorically as much as actually physically but another way to fight is to fight by a living expression of embodiment of the type of human the type of humanity that we're all fighting for and so you know I think this festival comes at in some ways at a perfect time to help a lot of people step away from all of the challenges that are in the world and anchor back to what it means to be in a in a sacred community, in a place where you can let go and be in our bliss. Well, it certainly looks like an escape. Can people still get in there if they just watch this and said, man, I want to escape,

I want to get down there, I'm going to come in. I'm sure people are flowing in and out of there. Yeah. I'll be there on Sunday. There's the website on the bottom. FitforService.com slash Arcadia. I'm going to let you get back to making magic. Aubrey, I look forward to seeing you and just.

I look forward to seeing you too, my brother. Yeah, and it's Arcadia with a K for anybody who's looking for it. And yeah, say hello if you come up from this show because I really appreciate everything you've been doing, my brother. Thanks for serving the world in the way that you do. Great. Love you. See you soon. Take care. Love you, too. See you too.

All right. You know, it is such an important message. These are very, very trying times. I was in Iowa just last week. And I said there, I think this is the litmus test right now is if the things that you're watching on a television make you so angry that you cannot see a way forward, then turn that television off. And I even said to that audience, if this show watching it so undisturbs you and upsets you that it makes you feel that you have to be afraid

of anything in this world, then turn it off. Our goal here, and the work that we do is to try and empower you, to empower you to know that you are a gift to this planet as every child and every person is. And there are things that are wrong in this world, but I am here to tell you we can fix them. We are capable of fixing those things. You know, we've got to have the serenity to, you know, accept the things we cannot change with the courage to change the things that we can. and we need the wisdom to know the difference. Let that be our prayer always. Let us ask ourselves,

am I being as loving as I can? And do I have fear? We cannot live in fear. We have to live in belief, in faith, in love. Love for our fellow man. It's what the high water is doing here. We are trying to make the world a better place, and we're trying to stop those that are getting in our way.

I hope that you experience that the way we experience that and my prayers and blessings for all of my team. God, everyone around the world, these are hard, scary, scary times. We see that we have issues. Let's find a way to love. I'll see you next week.