The Highwire with Del Bigtree - MONKEY BUSINESS

Episode Date: May 28, 2022

Del & Geert Lock Horns Over Childhood Vaccines; MonkeyPox? Really?!; Dr. McCullough & The Courage To Face Covid; The WEF & The WHO want YOU; Del Addresses The Tragedy In Uvalde.Guests: Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, John LeakeBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you are out there in the world. How about we all step out onto the high wire? Well, I've been actually in a really great mood today because I just spent an entire weekend, you know, focused on hope, hope for the future. I was at the Better Way conference in the United Kingdom, in Bath, England. It was a spectacular event. And on so many fronts, what was great about it, number one, you know, throughout this pandemic, I've been interviewing a lot of international world-renowned experts,

but because they're international and none of us could travel, I haven't actually met them. So to be face-to-face and person-to-person to meet here at Bannon Bosch, of course Dr. Robert Malone was there, Tess, Lorry, just an amazing lineup of brilliant minds. And what was also special about it was the fact that in most cases, and I do a lot of speaking engagements, I'm speaking at least two to three weekends a month,

but we're usually just talking about the issues and the problems and trying to wake everybody up to what's going on. To have everybody at this conference was tasked with the point of, you know, a better way forward, bring solutions. And so we were all focused on solutions, a three-day event, absolutely spectacular. So spectacular, in fact, that I really am not feeling jet lag, even though I could not sleep in the nine-hour flight over there or the 10-hour flight back. I think I'm missing about a day of sleep last week, but I feel great. I'm ready to rock this out. So let's just, just to get a sense of, you know, what this great event was like. I just thought I'd bring back sort of a montage of some of the great moments that happened

there. Take a look at this. This conference is put together and sponsored by the World Council for Health. The people that will be speaking here and in this debate with each other have been tasked with discovering and figuring out a better way forward. If there is conflict or if there is passion as we work through this, I want to remind that that is the scientific method. During this three-day conference,

we get to ask the questions we haven't been allowed to ask. We have a panel of speakers who have risen like phoenixes out of the ashes of lies and deception. Anything you build on lies will ultimately always fall because it doesn't have roots. Science is a very strange business, and there aren't enough people left in it who remember how it's done. What is being asserted as truth, as strategy, as current technology, as current technology, current technology capabilities is a fantasy. They don't even understand, for example, what the herd immunity is.

They don't even understand what natural immunity is. Our thinking has been hijacked by industry to think that a lipid nanoparticle plus an M RNA equals a vaccine. It does... It equals a nuclear bomb. I'm about to become a terrorist, okay? And I'm going to become a terrorist by telling you that a government that would gaslight a person injured by a vaccine that they had insisted the person get cannot be trusted.

And what we're seeing now is the utilization of vaccines as an en route to global human compliance. From the pain of awakening, we come to realize that we have all been complicit one way or another to our downfall as a species. And that the time for great change is here, evolutionary change. Every adversity is a blessing in disguise and the COVID-19 chapter has really helped expose the modest operandi of farmer mafia and all those who are forward hungry and seeking control and for whom profits come first. If the entire world tomorrow rejected these vaccines, uniformly rejected this vaccine, the entire dark plot would fall. Why do people want three, four, five vaccines? Because they're never meeting a need. We need to return to a place that we actually. meet human needs. We don't have a COVID crisis. We have a nature disconnection syndrome crisis. We are forced to grow. We are forced to step into sovereignty. We are forced to step into our true

human divine potential. The power of the people is greater than people in power. We live in a world where media, old and new, combine and they decide what is the truth. the media, raise your hands. Wow, absolutely zero. Okay, that's worse than I thought. We don't have enough scientists in journalism. We really need a change there. I want to say you are the new journalist.

Pierre Corey, Peter McCulloch, Tess Laurie, Bill Bigtree, you know, Phil Harper. This is remarkable stuff that you're doing. I think there's something profoundly reassuring that the truth is there. It can't be. done away with. You can hide it, you can smoke screen it, you can gaslight it, but it doesn't go away. I don't think any of us ever imagined ourselves caused as revolutionaries for simply speaking

the truth. The science is never settled, the story is never over and we must continue to ask the hardest questions of each other and of ourselves. It's important for us to remember that we are not soulless pieces of biological organisms that can be hacked, but rather we are full of mystery and wonders and from the source we came and to the source we shall return. And that journey is the true magic of life. And that's what we should appreciate. And it was amazing. The exact same time that we were there in Bath, England, you know, as the World Council for Health, looking at a better way forward in Davos, Switzerland, you know. home of the Great Reset of Cored, the World Economic Forum, has begun meeting.

And we also had the World Health Organization having their meeting to discuss many of the types we've talked about how we're going to control the world and the regulations that are being put into sort of that world dynamic of health. So, you know, in some ways, if you try to, you know, wonder, and I said in a speech there, you know, being attacked by the media gives us a sense of how important this is. And I think the headline that was reported out while we were there says it all. The Davos of COVID conspiracy theorists is happening in a UK town right now. I'll take that.

The Davos, meaning I guess they see that we are on par. In fact, we are. And I think we intend to be the majority in the very near future. And that was the heart of a lot of the conversations. What's it going to take to get there? Remember, our movement, this movement of health freedom of real science using the scientific method, That movement is growing every single day. On the other side, people that want drugs and vaccines that never get safety tested,

fighting to be able to skip safety testing, fighting to be able to force things into everybody in the world, not seeing any of the dangers of what they're doing. That's what they're trying to sell right now in Davers and Geneva. And so, you know, it's on, right? This is really a war, a war over the hearts and minds of humanity. And as I said at the very top of this event, I said to them, look, we are all coming from.

from different places. You're about to see some of the greatest scientists in the world here at Vannebos, Dr. Robert Malone, who invented the MRNA technology, Dr. Ryan Cole, Peter McCullough. I mean, we know it, we could go on and on. But I said, if you're expecting to show up here, it's a beautiful audience, I think over 400 people in attendance, the room was packed. And I said to them, if you're expecting to come and see some agenda-driven,

homogenized game plan that we've already structured, I think, I think you're in the wrong place. I think you're going to see argument. I think you're going to see disagreement. And I said to them, I want you to recognize what that is. Do not get depressed. Don't get upset. Recognize that is the scientific method. We've gotten too use to science being this agreed upon consensus, which is why we're in the trouble we're in. That is anything but science. That's how when you know science is not happening. And short to form and just as I had expected, there were some, you know, strong debates. And one of the ones, of them actually involved me. I was watching the panel of doctors, the opening night, the first panel that had Dr. Robert Malone here, Bandon Bosch and many of the other luminaries that have been on this show. And here at Bandon Bosch said something that did not certainly line up with my ideology or the work that we've done and the investigations that we've done. So let me play for you what he said to this audience at the Better Way Forward Conference. Let's just listen to this. Mass vaccination campaigns are just driving the propagation of more infectious variants.

On the other hand, life-attinuated vaccines are critical to maintain herd immunity. So once you have herd immunity established, it is indeed beneficial because the elderly people or people with weak immunity, they will, of course, no longer contribute to herd immunity. So you have to replenish that reservoir. You can do this indeed by vaccinating young children. as we do with the live-attainuated vaccines, this is going to train their innate immunities, contribute to hurt immunity,

and we'll keep this balance where the virus is under control thanks to the herd immunity. Well, obviously I was sitting there. I was the MC of the event, which meant I was coming up after every one of these large panels. There was usually about 10 people in the panel. They were about three hours long apiece,

dealing with all these issues. And I had an iPad where I was receiving all the questions from people that were in the audience and those that were online. And definitely, you know, geared lit it up when he said that there's obviously, almost anyone that watches my show would say that Dell clearly disagrees with that. And I think most of you probably do, this idea that we need all of these vaccines in the childhood vaccine program to achieve herd immunity. And so I was sort of, you know, I wanted to get off to the right start.

I didn't want to scare, you know, Tess Laurie that was gracious. I felt so honored to be invited to be the MC. And all I'm supposed to do is read the questions that are sort of all over the map about everything else. And I said, there's only one question that needs to be answered tonight. And that has to do with do vaccines have a place as we move forward in this better way? You know, I was thinking about it, you know, did a little praying about it. I decided I got to let it rip. And so I went up onto the stage and I tried, realize I was going to blindside Heert and some of the other scientists and doctors who maybe have been dancing around this.

Like, let's be honest, I've had Heert Van der Baner, on the show, we have delved into, and he got into it there too, on his theories about, you know, driving viral immune escape and all that's possible in the future. Go watch the other shows if you don't know what I'm talking about. But I've never really asked him what he thought about the childhood vaccine program. I'm well aware he's one of the great leading biologists and vaccinologists in the world, so it wasn't totally shocking to me. I also know that Dr. Robert Malone is, you know, a lifelong vaccinologist. So I started out the question. and answers by asking the question, who here believes that vaccines are a part of a better way forward?

This is just a little taste of the one-hour debate that broke out. And believe me, it got interesting. I think there's a conversation that needs to happen right here and now, if we're truly going to discuss a better way forward, that has been set off, and some of it's a bit of a firestorm that Geard Vanden Bosch has created online. And for those of you that have been asking those questions, it really comes down to vaccinations. I think that many in this audience and out there in the viewing world right now would think that after this COVID pandemic and the problems that we've seen with this vaccine, that an event like this would come to the conclusion that there isn't a place for vaccines moving forward. So I want to ask a few questions of this panel. I'm going to put you on the spot.

We are truly, truly going to have a scientific conversation. We can't be afraid to have this one. How many of you, by raising your hands, believe that vaccination has a place in a better way moving forward? Okay? I appreciate that. All right. So roughly half of those that are up there. How many of you are aware that since the increase of vaccinations, when we were giving 10 vaccines,

I'll use the United States of America's stats. We were giving 10 vaccines in the United States of America by the time you were 18, up until about 1986 when we took all liability way. That vaccine program increased to 54 vaccines. How many of you are aware that in that time we went from a chronic illness rate in the United States of America of 12%

to a chronic illness rate of now over 54% And that data has been stopped being given to us since 2012. How many are aware of that increase in chronic illness? Okay. Here, is that not something you're aware of? Well, you know, I don't like this blunt statements, right? I mean, it's all more complex. You have to be careful with correlations.

I agree. I'm strictly stating correlation, and I will admit that. But I think it's at the heart of the conversation. It feels like you set up a very simple binary system, but you asked a very broad question, is there any role for vaccines going forward in a better way? In my raising my hand, I was not endorsing in any way our current vaccine schedule. For me, as a vaccinologist, who has often assumed, has integrated. a belief system that I was brought up in about the efficacy and utility of childhood vaccines.

I had a moment of epiphany when I sat down with Candace Owens. And we talked about what the temporal relationship has been with many of these classic pediatric diseases. And they're quenching in the population, which was more concurrent with implementation of modern public health and water sanitation practices than it was with implementation of vaccines. And yet the industry has taught me and has taught many of us that there was a causal relationship when in fact it was correlation, which is one of the big flaws that we've seen again and again is conflating correlation with causation. Is it true that a great many vaccinations is bad for you over a lifetime and that we should treat

this technology very sparingly, right, that we should be choosing very carefully which few things it makes sense to use it for and what to hold it in reserve for rather than just imagining that if vaccines are good, then more vaccines are better. My opinion is that our children are not suffering from infections. They're suffering from chronic diseases, autoimmune diseases, autism and depression. So it seems we need to re-evaluate health, and we need to look at those things that potentially could be affecting our children's health.

A vaccinated versus completely unvaccinated, retrospective study, you know, where is the place in which any of this system works? Well, I'm having a tremendous problem here. Please. Please tell me why. Because, guys, this is way more complex than your decision. discussing. If you are discussing about the safety issues, for example, I mean, you are not considering

the impact of losing herd immunity. If you have diseases where you have no asymptomatic transmission, you can do a lot because you can isolate people, you can have a major impact by infection prevention measures on the spread of the disease. If you have diseases like flu, like rona, like even measles that can spread asymptomatically, how do you think that without vaccination you are going to maintain your herd immunity? Please tell me. Okay. It's by having the next epidemic, of course.

Do you want to have this? Can you calculate what the damage will be of that? You cannot, for example. I would say this. With other things. I'm having a huge problem with taking this shortcuts, right? and we say no injections. Okay, guys, then we are not going to vaccinate these diseases that we have kept under control for many years.

I have two points. Lose that herd immunity and have your epidemics to reestablish it every single time. I have one last question. There have been small studies, Paul Thomas being one of them, a study out of the University of Mississippi. They are very similar. I've seen private studies done by large institutions that are now afraid to put them out. but they are all very, very similar. They're showing that amongst the vaccinated,

somewhere between a four to five point six times rate of neurological disorders amongst the vaccinated children compared to the unvaccinated. They show nearly in some 40 times to 60 times rate of asthma amongst the vaccinated to the unvaccinated. I could go, you know, list all the allergic rhinitis through the roof amongst the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated.

If we were, were able to get these vaccinated versus unvaccinated studies done in satellites all around the world by our major institutions, our health departments. And they showed that autism is definitely connected to the vaccine. Neurological disorders are definitely connected at a rate maybe six times that of those are not receiving these. If the Harvard Medical School study of the VERS system that we talk so much about said that VERS is only capturing one percent. of the total amount of actual injuries that are taking place. Every year, our normal vaccine program has about 400 to 500 reported deaths from vaccinations.

If it was true that upon study and deeper analysis, that that is 1% and nearly 40,000 people are being killed by, or children specifically killed by the vaccine program. If that was proved out and we removed it from correlation and moved towards causation, would you reconsider your perspective that vaccination is still our best way forward? You mean all the vaccines together? Yes, because we would only be looking at large studies of vaccinated. I can only say, you know, we have been dealing with these stakeholders that have organized a major, a major experiment with COVID, right? We all agree. Are you willing to do a similar, not a similar, but also an experiment

no longer vaccinating against diseases, infections where we know that herd immunity is protecting the population? Are you willing to do that experiment? Do you have any scientific irrational? Yes, the one I just stated. Wait a minute. It's not what you. You are talking about all the time what I'm hearing here, of course, of concern is the children and health issues in the children. But if we talk about herd immunity, for God's sake, it's about the vulnerable people, the elderly, people with underlying diseases, etc.

Are you willing to sacrifice those? I mean... But I just ask you the question. And this is not for all the vaccines, of course. I'm just talking, I'm just talking about vaccines. I understand, but you're not answering my question. Would you at least sign on to a document amongst all the scientists here and the 17,000 that are aligned behind Dr. Robert Malone to demand that proper vaxed versus unvaxed versus partially vaccinated studies be done of all the major databases collecting health data around the world? Would you stand behind that without stopping any vaccine program?

We can have answers to these questions and truly evaluate. risk benefit, which has never happened. And I think this entire system is built on way too many assumptions. You can't answer the question. Neither can I, from either perspective. We should be able to, because that's what science is. Would you sign on to the demand for vaccinated versus unvaccinated studies? I mean...

I were done. I know. I know, you know me well enough that I'm... You know, I would never ever be opposed, you know, to gathering more data. What I'm saying, and what I'm really getting sick of, is if you want to calculate the benefit, right, the benefit of herd immunity, what are people going to do? They're going to come with their bloody modeling, right, which I don't trust. And so I think it's incredibly difficult. It's incredibly difficult to do this risk-benefit analysis.

You know that there is a threat like for measles in some places which is highly infectious. Yes, but Gier did had a death rate of one in 500,000 in the United States of America, before the vaccine ever came along. I think we can reevaluate the risk benefit. We'll continue on. I want to thank everybody for the time here. Obviously, I think rigorous debate here is very important. I want to thank our panelists for their honesty.

I told you this would not be an easy moment. So I want to thank all of you. That was, as I said, a one-hour debate. It got, you know, I would say almost heated in a couple of places. But when the dust settled, we all got together later on at different times. And I said everybody, sorry if you felt blindsided, but it's a conversation that needs to happen. It is continuing to happen since that debate happened.

But if you want to see what was said in that debate and where these scientists stand, by cutting it down, you might have some misconceptions of where maybe Merlone is or Brett Weinstein. Right now, you can still see this entire conference. You can buy a ticket and watch it. is so spectacular. Just go to the betterweight conference.org. I recommend this so highly. It is truly, I think, probably the greatest event I have been at to date because it was about being inspirational, because it was about looking in the future. And frankly, I really want to support the World Council for Health. Tess Lori is such a great leader for us. When you think

of, you know, something that mounts up, we don't want to just fight the WHO. We want to present a new international organization, the future for the world, the World Council for Health. health really can be that. And so simply by, you know, buying that conference and getting in and watching it, you're really helping to support. And you've got something that's got some amazing moments and excerpts you can share with friends. And I assure you, you are going to be left with a real sense of possibilities. So just an amazing time. I want to thank all the people that made that happen, all the new friends I have all around the world, all the people in media that were there, getting to recognize how high wire is affecting people all around the world.

I mean, I hear that, but it's another thing to meet people around the country and just see how much effect we're having. So absolutely spectacular. We have a huge show today. We're going to get it like, look, I don't shy away. And I said when I was there, if they wanted me to come in as an emcee, which is not something I usually do, this is how I do it. I'm not going to let things slide. We never let things slide on this show. So yes, you're damn right.

We are going to be talking about monkey pie. It's coming up. We're going to get deep in that conversation. Everything that you wanted to know or didn't want to know But first it's time for the Jackson Report All right Jeffrey, you know you take a little bit of time off you run to another country and Get yourself involved in a conference where you're basically just thinking one thought all day and I swear I came out and got back to the news I'm like oh my god What's happened to the world so laid on me? What are we looking at today? Well, you mentioned that I know you've been asked about monkey pox I've been asked about monkey pox I've been asked about monkey

And I know you're going to cover that later in the show. But one of the things I've been asked about specifically is, are they going to lock us down again for monkey pox? Are they going to force a monkey pox vaccination on us? Right. And everywhere we look, the COVID-19 restrictions, the pandemic restrictions that were put in place are getting holes poked in their integrity and in their basic goodness for to do anything positive for society over the last few years. And a big thing has happened now with the vaccination standpoint. And this is from the legal front. So this is from the American Bar Association.

Now, just to bring viewers up to speed, this association is over 140 years old. They're part of the law school accreditation process. They're committed to advancing the rule of the law in the United States. I mean, this is the premier association when it comes to legal, I guess, wherewithal in the United States. And this is an article they just put out. It's very, very interesting. It's titled, Evaluating Compulsory COVID-19 Vaccination Mandates. And it says here, before we go into the quotes, Judge Harlan was the judge in Jacobson versus Massachusetts.

This was a compulsory vaccination in 1905 because of a smallpox vaccination. Jacobson didn't want the vaccination because he had a childhood injury to vaccination previously. So this is what this association wrote. Judge Harlan noted at the time that although the court supported the ruling of Massachusetts, it says, quote, the court would not be inclined to hold that the statute established is the absolute right that an adult must be vaccinated if it be apparent or can be shown with reasonable certainty that he is not at the time a fit subject for vaccination. So what this Bar Association is doing is going through three points in Jacobson v. Massachusetts that a lot

of lawyers have not really decided to argue. And Jacobson v. Massachusetts, why is it important? Just for people that are brand new to this conversation, Jacobson v. Massachusetts, It's a 1905 decision that looms over every one of these choices that's made. So every time you want to push back and say, I have a religious right to not be vaccinated, or I have a personal right that I should be able to turn down a vaccine. This is my body, my choice, any of those, what you'll hear is, well, not based on the Supreme Court Jacobson versus Massachusetts.

I think for people that are new to really understanding how our laws work, yes, that's what we call precedent. So if the Supreme Court made a decision, And all the way back in 1905, when people were living in the sewage of horses running through the streets, you know, didn't have working toilets and things like that in, you know, all over America. And we're comparing that time and what was decided then affects us now in the modern age with cell phones. And, you know, what have you, 5G going on? It just seems so antiquated.

But that's how our system works. But to get back to it, I just want to bring people up to speed. 1905, we're talking about. since 1905, we've been, you know, dealing with this decision. So, you know, this bar association is really weighing in on a very old decision by the Supreme Court. But even the judge there, as you just pointed out, said, look, I'm not saying unequivocally across the board that we're saying you should vaccinate everybody. You know, they have to be fit to receive the vaccine. And there's many points to that that you're pointing out here. Okay. Yes. And just to say,

this is an antiquated decision, obviously, but over, it's just about 250. 54 cases during the pandemic, fighting executive orders, mandates through hospitals, federal worker mandates have relied on this decision, mostly to deny the plaintiffs the right to not have this vaccine, the mandatory vaccine. So, yeah, so the subject must be fit is the first argument that the American Bar Association article is saying, this is a caveat that no one's talking about. You know, what if you're, what if, I mean, we can go a lot of directions with this, but what if you're a college student, you've had two shots, you have myocarditis and you're looking down a barrel of a third booster in order to go finish your college?

that could be argued as something. Now, let's go on to the second point that American Bar Association makes in this article. It says the COVID-19 vaccine mandates are in no way similar to the fact pattern in Jacobson when evaluating either the rationale for the mandates based on vaccine efficacy or the severity and proportionality of the punishment for failure to comply

with Massachusetts mandate in 1905. So again, we know now that these vaccine efficacy is abysmal. We'll get into this later in the segment here with a JAMA article. But back then, they saw that the vaccine, the smallpox vaccine could eradicate. They have those words in there. It can eradicate smallpox. It's not what we're dealing with with COVID-19 here. This thing is not stopping disease transmission whatsoever. And the punishment, by the way, was a $5 fine, which is about $157 or so in today's money. So I know a lot of people that would probably pay that to not have to lose their job. Move narrowly on your way, exactly.

Right, right. And now the third point it makes here, and the third and final point, it says, A footnote in Jacobson, which the court relied upon in its historical analysis about the efficacy of vaccines included data that separated out those who had naturally been exposed to smallpox as its own category of the population. Wow. So here we have natural immunity in an analysis by a court so long ago. And that's another aspect, again, that we're not seeing really played out in the legal aspects and legal arguments. Look, it didn't work. All of these people that were employed, all of these doctors on the front line being forced to get the vaccination. because Joe Biden decided that it was his call to make

with an emergency use authorized vaccine that had not been properly safety tested. How many of those doctors? I mean, they were treating people from day one. Most of them had already caught it and gotten through it, had natural immunity, and it just didn't weigh in as being a part of the decision-making. But here we now find out through this Bar Association article

that the original ruling in 1905 said, hey, don't put the natural, immune to that list they get to that's a different deal on the side they don't need the vaccine and so i think it's brilliant to see you know um such a powerful legal organization uh stepping up here and think about what that means Jeffrey and people we read it we think ah blah blah associations whatever but remember every lawyer in the country that's going to find themselves on one side of these cases or another this is the journal that they read this is their bar association and so even the writers they know who they're writing to they're saying to every lawyer in america yes read this this is the

facts of the matter um so you know really powerful yeah you can almost see it it just ripples out into the legal consciousness of american law and we'll see what happens with that but you know there is a a lawyer a prominent american lawyer alan dershowitz yeah and during the early part of the pandemic actually two years ago to the month in may 2020 uh he came out with this article he was in an interview and he said some things. And this is the article that reported on it. Alan Dershowitz says the state has every right to plunge a needle into your arm and forcibly vaccinated citizens.

And while I remember at that point, you had to have him on and you had a conversation that looked like this for anybody that didn't see it, check it out. Can you name a case where forcibly injecting somebody was upheld in a court? Of course, yes, the Jacobson versus Massachusetts. It took place in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where I spent most of my life at Harvard, and Cambridge had an outbreak of smallpox in the first decade of the 20th century, and a group of dissenters led by a man named Jacobson took the case to the United States Supreme Court, and in a decision by Justice Harlan, the first Justice Harlan, joined by Justice Oliver O'Don Holmes and others,

said that the state did have the authority and the power. As far as I know, I know, I know, no other case in the federal courts or in leading state courts that's denied that power. So I think right now the judicial view is fairly unanimous, but you raise some interesting points that I think good lawyers could really bring to the attention of the authorities, and you might get a decision that is more nuanced and calibrated. My understanding of Jacobson is Jacobson actually just ruled he didn't want to pay the $5 fine, And the Supreme Court enforced that he had to pay the $5 fine. He was not forced to be vaccinated.

I asked you, is there precedent for forcibly vaccinated? Are you equating paying a fine with, as you said, taking some of the hospital and forcing a vaccine into them? Something that I think could be considered battery or wrongful imprisonment. Do those equate? Does paying a fine equate to actual physical retaining and puncturing your skin with a needle? Do you think that those things actually line up? Of course they don't, but the Jacobson case would have permitted compulsory vaccination. I mean, that was such a fascinating and brilliant.

By the way, this is the beauty of our website. If you have not seen that debate, I think it's about 30 minutes long. One of the high points in my life, obviously, you know, who am I to think that I'm going to debate one of the great constitutional lawyers of all times? But he made such dramatic statements, as you said in that headline, saying, I believe the state could plunge a needle into your arm forcibly. And he didn't just make that statement. He said, and I would love to be the lawyer that the government hires to defend that position.

And so I had reached out to him and said, look, you made a pretty strong statement, and you said you want to be a part of it. Will you come on my show and let me debate you on the merits of that? In the end, you heard a little bit of that. It was pretty stunning. After about 30 minutes, I laid a bunch of different thoughts on them. But the big one there being, you know, Jacobson only made them pay a $5 fine. I had asked, you know, Alan Dershowitz, so have you ever seen a case where they did defend

plunging a needle into someone's arm? He said, Jacobson, it just wasn't true. Jacobson had to pay a fine. That is not the same thing as dragging someone in a hospital and violating their body. And he conceded that amongst many other things. If you want to see how that debate went, you just have to go to our, you know, our amazing website. You just search them sure Dershowitz will get to you there or something. And this is one of the goals.

Let me just stop down for a second, Jeffrey, just as I interrupt. For those of you watching this show, this is one of the things that we do that no one else does in news. We have a legal team that fights for the rights of humanity, especially here in the United States of America. So we are looking for that perfect case.

We are constantly trying and getting involved in funding different cases across this country because we need to have a case. The way this system works, there has to be a new case that rises all the way up to the Supreme Court, and then ends up being decided by the Supreme Court that will overcome this antiquated, dying old case that has been looming over us for over a century. And so when you're funding the informed consent action network as one of our donors,

that allows me to say to our legal team, you know what? We're pretty well funded this month. And so what happens that the wrong lawyer takes one of these cases up to the Supreme Court? and they lose there. Then we have a loser, and then we're stuck with that precedence. So it's so important that when these great cases come along, that I get to send the greatest lawyer of our time, Aaron Siri, into the battle.

You make that possible when you become a recurring donor. Great, you know, large donations, you know, at one time are great. But when you become a recurring donor, we get to see, we know exactly how much funding we'll have over the next couple years during the course of this case. So just go to our website, decide to be a recurring donor. And, you know, we're asking for $22 for $22, but obviously not everybody. That might be a little bit too much, even though I know you're spending that on your

cable bill and a bunch of other things that are lying to you every day. But whatever you can spare, whether it's a cup of coffee, $5 a month, it really makes a difference if you are, have done very well in life. And you really want to be a part of letting your money fuel the blood of the, of the, the, the, the, the rebellion. of truth, the battle for truth, then this is the way you get to do that. Sorry to take us on such a side bar, but this shows how important right now the legal side of the work we do at the informed consent action network is. It's truly going to decide our fate in the years to come. It's super important. And the other beauty of that was the open debate that was allowed, minus any

type of government censor that you and Mr. Dershowitz had. And if I believe correctly, you both came to some common ground at the end of that. where before perhaps he would have, you know, he would have been at an extreme view kind of painted by the corporate media that these people are just anti-vaccers and no one can ever debate or question vaccines because their science is settled. So that's the beauty of this open debate. And moving on to some other parts of public health, there appears to be a dark chapter of public health and the COVID restrictions that has come to an end. And it is the, this is at NHS, that's the National Health Service in the UK. Here's the headline out of here. And then I can explain,

it a little more. NHS boss orders hospitals to ditch all remaining COVID visiting restrictions, as she says no patient should be, should have to be alone. Now, to me, I thought there still have restrictions on them. Oh my gosh. Well, what happened, you know, reading this the article on March 2021, NHS put some guidelines out and it allowed patients to have two visitors for about an hour. That's March 2021. This thing was still going on. And so what a survey by the mail online found that a lot of the hospitals were not, we're not abiding by that. They were just sticking to the strict no policy, no, no visitor policy, which is terrible. So I guess the NHS boss had to make it, make it very explicit and say remove all restrictions. And that's also what happened in Florida

with Governor Ron DeSantis doing some great work out there. He actually put it into law. I can't believe we actually have to put into law this, this basic tenant of humanity. But here's the law. It's no patient left alone. And this requires health care providers to allow, visitors even during an emergency for like end-of-life situations labor delivery and it's interesting too they also say for to feed drinking and eating from family or caregivers they have to be able to be let in to have this happen and I know we've covered that a lot of times in the past that's one of the end-of-life pathways that people go on without really their consent so a family member can intervene with this

with this act at least in Florida so let's that that's a good news thing but let's move on to some vaccine science here. This is out of the Journal of the American Medical Association. That's JAMA. And this is a study looking at Cornell University titled routine surveillance and vaccination on a university campus during the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Amacron variants. Remember, that is the highly contagious variant. And it says here, Cornell University opened for residential instruction in fall of 2021 using an extensive testing, contact tracing, and isolation program in partnership with the Tompkins County Health Department. Then this goes on and say what they did. vaccination was mandated for all students and encouraged for employees masks were required on campuses

and isolation orders and contact tracing occurred within hours of any positive result basically every lockdown measure allowed outside of Shanghai China was was put on this this closed container campus this is what the researchers found they write from november 28 to december 31st 2, 797 COVID-19 cases were identified they say 89% of them were students 11% were employees eclipsing previously measured incidences. Most cases, 82.2% reported mild symptoms, no reported hospitalizations, despite high vaccination rates. This is the college campus, you're 97.9% off campus, of campus, sorry, 98.6% of cases were breakthrough infections and proportionality, more named close contacts who became COVID positive in this period. 22.6 than previously,

they said 4.4% between August, 23rd, November 27th. So what they're saying there, again, 98.6 of the cases they found were breakthrough infections, vaccine failure. Remember, we were told that the vaccines were 95.6% effective at stopping this disease. So this is showing that although you put all these restrictions on, not only didn't stop the restrictions the cases for the kids, but they were talking about close contacts who became COVID positive. 22.6 of them were also getting this. I mean, it's amazing because it's such a great actual controlled study on a university like that because you don't have like people, well, I had to go to work and I'm interacting with all these other people and then there's my job. I mean, you really have a very controlled environment

there where for the most part these students live there, they eat there, they sleep there, they, you know, study there. And so there's not a whole lot of outside, you know, interactions, at least not the way there would be anywhere else you would try to do a study like this. And to see that level of failure, not only 98.6% breakthrough in the vaccinated, but then who they're spreading it to was mostly the vaccinated that were catching. it. And so just, yeah, it feels redundant in some ways, but I think to myself, we listen to their monstrum and their, you know, repetition of how great this thing is, which is a total lie. And then slowly they've sort of weaned themselves off of saying it's great. Now it's, well, it's, you know,

it's at least 60% of bad. Well, it's left than 50, but, you know, that's better than nothing. And, well, you know, you're probably going to catch it, you know, no matter what, but at least it reduces your symptoms. Oh, well, maybe the fourth shot, maybe destroys your immune system or, you know, makes your immune system shut down. I mean, it's just, it's incredible how they've just had to just slowly this slide into the sludge and sewage of their own lies while we've been able to just maintain the truth. But this campus proves it once again, here we are, the truth. That's right. And you know, at a time when, you know, the Bill Gates of the world are out there

going, we need more money to do these lockdowns bigger next time across the whole world. Let's hit one more piece of this, you know, inconvenient lockdown truth, we'll call it. And people during the lockdown, we're saying this question, why are liquor stores over? This was the headline just to remind people. This was in March 2020. Why are liquor stores considered essential during COVID-19 pandemic? Here are five reasons. Liquor stores continue to thrive despite the pandemic.

A lot of people have kind of scratched their heads at that. But now we have data, you know, it's not a surprise, but we have the data here to see this. And this is in JAMA once again. Here's the study. This was published just last week. Evaluation of trends in alcohol use disorder related mortality in the U.S. And during the COVID-19 pandemic. And it says here, in this cross-sectional study, we used data from 2012, so then went way back

to 2019 to project 2020 and 2021 mortality rates and found that alcohol use disorder-related mortality rates increased among all ages and sexes during the pandemic. Not a good trend, but here's even a further trend to look at here because we've been talking about that age group, a 25 to 44, what's been happening? Why are there's so many deaths in this age group? Well, this may answer some of the questions, not all of them, but some of them tragically. It says here the authors write, the youngest age group, 25 to 44 years, demonstrated the largest increase in alcohol use disorder mortality. 40.47% in 2020, first 33.95% in 2021 across all age groups. And we have this chart here from the actual study.

And you can see here, 2012, you have just over four mortality per 100,000. And then you're going all the way up to 2020. that little dash line is what it was supposed to be, what it was projected. The rest of that light blue is what it was. And at the top, a lot of people say, well, those are the COVID deaths. At the top, those dark, that dark shaded part are the COVID deaths. So something else is causing this. The government lockdown restrictions look like it may be the case. And this is why when people ask me about monkeypox lockdowns, right. People have a lot of answering to do before we can go back down into a monkey pox that, you know, is not this, this extremely contagious viral airborne.

foreign thing. So that's my point on that. But let's talk about, you know, really one of the biggest stories, two biggest shows in town recently happening still right now is the World Economic Forum, then the World Health Assembly. That's the WHO's yearly assembly that they gather is the 75th version of it, I think. And before last week, no one was really talking about this, but a lot of attention was given to these amendments that the Biden administration sent in to the World Health Organization for this assembly to amend the international health health. regulations according to the United States and although these international health regulations already give really big sweeping powers to the world health

organization to only to recommend they can only recommend they can't force anything they can't take away sovereignty but as we've seen over the last two years their recommendations hold a lot of weight and a lot of public health organizations and a lot of states and countries follow them verbatim so the the amendments by the Biden administration were kind of just giving them a little more a little more a little more more leeway there. They can, they can declare an emergency of international concern without this 48-hour waiting period from a member state. They can do it on a potential, or it doesn't even have to be actual. It can be a potential concern. They can do this. These are the amendments. But really,

one of the big things was the WHO's pandemic treaty. This is the big Kahuna. This thing is supposedly being pushed through in 2024. And these international health regulations that are being talked about right now are kind of part of this and it's getting out in the media here's the good news no one really heard about it no one really reported on it too much over the last two weeks and then all of a sudden it's pops in the news here's again governor florida ron desantis talking about this listening what he had to say all right there is no way we will ever support uh this w h o thing to send our stuff that's not going to happen no way every every day i love that guy just a little bit more I mean, you know, you just really wish you could clone a few of our representatives here in America,

Rand Paul, Ron DeSantis, among those. Just spectacular. Yeah. Well, it's interesting because once this is forced, the media, the corporate media has to cover it. Our politicians have to weigh in on it. So here's Washington Post. Here's what they decided to run with. There's the headline. Global health talks clouded by conspiracy theories about pandemic treaty. It goes on in there to say, well, it's conspiracy theory. It doesn't really give over sovereign. But they are going to work on this pandemic treaty, and it's going to be this sweeping, overarching one-world treaty that's going to deal with these pandemics. So it's almost like this double speak. They're trying to really, they're trying to really soften it a little bit.

But apparently CNN didn't get the memo. CNN went right for the sci-op fear headline. Opinion, we need a global pandemic treaty before it's too late. You know, you're not supposed to admit it. Right. Right. Are we supposed to be in denial or are we supposed to be demanding it? Wait, wait, wait, I forgot the memo.

Did you get the memo? I know it was a D. Oh, my God. One of them got it wrong. They got the memo, but they got it wrong. But obviously, we know this is the conversation that's happening. Anytime you read a headline that tells you, oh, it's a conspiracy theory that they're really trying to gain power and controls over government agency across the world. I mean, we just watch it happen before our eyes.

That's what just happened. I didn't vote for Tony Fauci. Who the hell is he to decide whether my kids can go to school or whether I can open the doors to my business? I mean, it's crazy. And a lot of the time the opinion pieces are really driving the conversation in the media because those are allowed to be put in there. This was from the telegraph. Here's the headline here. A WHO pandemic pact would leave the world at China's mercy.

And the byline says lessons have still not been learned. So why should we trust the WHO in a future pandemic? It goes on to say, which is interesting. I thought an interesting point about that article that nowhere in the treaty or the international health regulations does it say lab safety or transparency of research in this agenda, being able to look at the labs and make sure. everything's okay. In fact, the WHO formed a team to go look at this. They didn't really even give an update at this World Health Assembly. So it kind of feels like that fell by the wayside. I wonder why. But we do have great organizations on this now. The Health Freedom Defense Fund, they have put together a declaration. It has about 65,000 signatures at this point. It's called

the World Freedom Declaration. This is opposing the proposed amendments to the international health regulations that the Biden administration was giving. But as far as as the overall pandemic treaty this was the one you really got to watch out for there is a written and public testimony the w hos going to have an intergovernmental negotiating body this is on june 16th and 17th of this year 2022 okay and the words you got to look for is called the world together that's what they're calling this pandemic treaty they're not going to call it the pandemic treaty verbatim like that's the world together and that's what you got look for now moving over to i guess just the other side of the country because that was in geneva we go over to davos now

We have the World Economic Forum. And this was, this was Klaus Schwab's, you know, World Economic Forum. This is the guy who wrote COVID-19, The Great Reset. This is the guy who, remember, talks about you will own nothing and be happy. This guy talks about COVID-19 being a great opportunity. You would think he would maybe take a second to step back and think about that. Also, the guy who was a star in a couple of the James Bond movies back in the 1980s, if I remember correctly. Absolutely, absolutely, and played and parodied by Michael Myers in Austin Powers.

So this is what he had to say at the opening of the ceremony at the World Economic Forum, 2020. Take a look. Let's also be clear. The future is not just happening. The future is built by us, by a powerful community as you here in this room. We have the means to improve the states of the world. But two conditions are necessary. The first one is that we act all as stakeholders of larger communities, that we serve not our only self-interest, that we serve the community.

That's what we call stakeholder responsibility. And second, that we collaborate. And this is the reason why you find many opportunities. many opportunities here during the meeting to engage into very action and impact-oriented initiatives to make progress related to specific issues on the global agenda. You know, it's interesting because when you say us and he says, we are here and, you know, it's in our hands and we're the ones that, you know, are going to, you know, affect the world's, you know, when he's saying to us, I think we think he's talking to us.

as you know the people or when this idea of stakeholders it's really interesting that was sort of his that was sort of his brainchild as this idea of stakeholders prior to that you know our entire system or where we were going was more like the Milton Friedman economics point which was you know the shareholders everything make the shareholder happy and all the world will move smoothly it's all about making money well that led to gutting businesses and all these things to lower the bottom online, make it seem like you're making more money than the shareholders made more money. And so Klaus Schwab comes along and that's why I think he's a saint. I mean, I know some of this from, you know, growing up a progressive liberal.

I'm now for everyone that's, you know, new to the show. I'm politically marooned. I don't trust anybody on any side. But being a liberal, what sounded so good was, you know, Klaus Schwab was saying, it's about the stakeholders. It's about those human beings whose lives were affected. And remember when he's saying these things, he's saying them to his a room full of billionaires. They're all the richest people that flew in on private jets to really do business deals

and then talk about how they're going to save, you know, us minions in the world. But I just want to point out that since we've been having the world economic forum there and those have been taking place, the poor have gotten poorer and poorer and poorer. The rich are getting, the billioners are just getting richer and richer and richer. And nothing was a bigger boom than COVID for these billionaires. I mean, they are there all but just giggling themselves stupid. right in front of our face, many of them doubling their profits like Bezos and Amazon and, you know, Walmart, all of the big China-driven, you know, entities that kept us alive while

all the mom and pop stores were destroyed. That's the brainchild of these world-saving, ha-ha-ha, billionaires. It's really disgusting, and it's hard to watch it. That's my little summary of what's actually happening there. But he said it, right? I don't know whether that was his accent or if he was just so excited that he couldn't contain himself when he was talking. He sounded like he was kind of slurring. But, you know, there was three things that really three big pillars that came out of this was, you know, control information and misinformation, disinformation, then that net carbon zero emissions, signing everybody on to that and obviously, you know, preventing these pandemics in the future.

But as you mentioned, these billionaires talking about climate change, they all flew in on private jets for the most part. And it actually made some mainstream headlines, which is really refreshing to see the hypocrisy. At Davos, our leaders, private jets and limous actually hurting climate change efforts, you know, maybe. But now that we're talking about this carbon footprint that they've brought about and they're kind of forcing it upon us, you know, this, a lot of people are saying the Biden administration is doing this forced austerity with the gasoline prices. But we have a group president at Alibaba, you know, he was talking at the Davos form and understand when they get together with their buddies here in Davos, this is kind of like when people

get together and have some drinks, they let some stuff slip that you probably shouldn't let slip. and this is on camera. So this is a group president at Alibaba. Listen to what he had to say about a carbon tracker. Okay. We're developing through technology and ability for consumers to measure their own carbon footprint.

What does that mean? That's where are they traveling? How are they traveling? What are they eating? What are they consuming on the platform? So individual carbon footprint tracker. Stay tuned. We don't have it operational yet,

but this is something that we're working on. Oh my God, they must have been so thrilled to hear about that there. I mean, I can't wait, a carbon footprint tracker that, you know, decides like the meal I'm eating. How many carbon footprints am I leaving behind doing this? Imagine you're getting, you know, mid-stake and suddenly you're arrested. Like, I've got over my carbon crest, you know, you know, how much, you know, ozone you've eaten up, you know, with that cow that was out there in the world.

I mean, this is crazy. And we've talked about this. We've talked about this on the show. This is why the vaccine program was so. important. All of this stuff, all these technologies, these billionaires want to make billions more on really depended on the vaccine passport getting passed. So anyone that tries to argue with me that, oh, they got exactly what they needed. All this went displayed. I totally disagree. That vaccine passport was everything because that passport ultimately is going to be your carbon footprint

passport and your body monitor to know what your emotions are, what you're thinking, where you're doing, where you are, what you think of the president when he's talking. That one wouldn't go for me very well right now. I'm thinking I think he needs to be retired. I think he needs to be handed some pudding and rolled in a stroller off to the window to look out over the beautiful sunset. But, you know, that could give me a lot of trouble if I got a tracker sitting in my back pocket. And these Davos clips over the past years has even said that that's where their ultimate goal is. But we don't have to wait for him to someday possibly develop it for like a green lockdown.

This is the headline just this month in May, Google Back Startup, launches free carbon emissions tracker. This is for small and media-sized businesses. I can get one for free? For small and medium-sized businesses. As if they have not had enough government regulations over the last few years, they can now get their free carbon emissions tracker.

And it's interesting to note that Google has not signed up for this carbon emissions tracker, although it backed this startup. But another interesting thing that came out of it, from the Americans perspective, came out of this Davos meeting, another sound clip. Just it gives a quick background here. last year to the month the Biden administration signed the American rescues plan that gave up

$1.9 trillion to the COVID rescue effort. They've burned through mostly all of that. So you have Dr. Ashish Jha, he's the he's the White House COVID coordinator. He's out trying to be basically a salesman right now saying we need more money. We need to pass this $22.5 billion package to create new vaccines and therapeutics and all of this stuff. And here is the headline. This is what he's saying. He's saying coronavirus, U.S. faces dire risk of vaccine rationing without more funds. Vaccine rationing. Well, let's listen to the head of Moderna, Stefan Benzel, a newly minted billionaire, multibillioner, this is what he had to say at Davos about his vaccines.

As Seth knows, we're now throwing those into the garbage. It's sad to say. I'm in the process of throwing 30 million doses into the garbage because nobody wants them. We have a big demand problem. We right now have governments. We try to contact not only he's doing great work with his team trying to get demand into the countries, but also we contacted through the Washington,

the embassies in Washington, every country, and nobody wants to take them. And so the change we have now is a very different situation than we are two years ago. The problem we had two years ago is there has no amount of capacity in the world, zero. The situation is very different today. More than has three billion dose of annual capacity.

Pfizer has four billion doses at seven, billion and the Chinese don't want the vaccines of their money. So if you just take the just of the Chinese population out, you have more than a dose per person. And as we just discussed, the issue in many countries is people don't want vaccines. In the U.S. people don't want vaccines. Around the world, we have a lot of people who don't want the vaccine that's a problem safe and his team are working against.

So we don't have a capacity issue around the planet. It is not true. It was true two years ago. It's not true to them. Can I just say hashtag winning? Sorry about that. Sorry you got to trash the 30 million. vaccines nobody wants. I'd like to think we have a little bit to do with that. Are they vaccine

rationing because they have to trash the vaccines? It seems like kind of a circular problem here. And then we have this story out of Maryland. This was a plant that's being investigated. We've reported on it in 2021. It had problems. Now it says here, 400 million COVID-19 vaccine doses dumped by Baltimore plant congressional report fines. They had to do a congressional report to find this out. It was not public knowledge. This was a plant that produced AstraZeneca and now the Johnson and Johnson vaccine, which the FDA has limited. So not only have, do you have these blood color issues, but you have a plant that's producing subpar vaccines that throw 400 away, 400 million away.

So just point that out when we're talking about vaccine rationing, they're throwing away vaccines like hotcakes out there, apparently. Now, the final clip here really is something that's become, unfortunately, a recurring situation on this show is the policing of speech. And if we remember last week, the Department of Homeland Security's disinformation governance board was paused. Eno Jinkowitz stepped down as its leader, director, coordinator. Such bad press for that. But then the European Union, it didn't happen that way. The European Union did pass the Digital Services Act. This was the headline from just a couple weeks ago, a new EU power to find

big tech billions in crackdown on hate speech, disinformation, and harmful content. Now, at Davos, we have the leader of e-safety. This is Australia's online safety coordinator. Australia passed an online Safety Act in June of 2021, you know, as they were visiting people that were posting about going to a rally on Facebook, the cops were visiting them. They passed this act. And this is what the head of this new e-safety commission had to say at Davos. Take a listen. We are finding ourselves in a place where we have increasing polarization everywhere. And everything feels binary when it doesn't need to be. So I think we're going to have to think about a recalibration of a whole range of human rights that are playing out online, you know, from freedom of speech to the freedom to, you know, to be free from online violence or the right of data protection to the right to child dignity. I mean, it's just this is your life in the hands of billionaires.

And when I think about this, I think back to sort of that, you know, the definition of, you know, fascism. Originally, Mussolini talked about, you know, the corporate control of government and the corporate control of humanity. And I feel like that's what the, let's be honest, that's what's really happening here. It's the richest people in the world saying, I pretty much own my government, you own your government, while we all come together and own the world and make the decisions for the world. And by the way, these pesky little issues around, you know, that they've got these constitutions about free speech and all that. I think we've got to recalibrate that. I mean, it's really, these people are disgusting.

The fact that anyone represents this is some beneficial meeting for the world. The fact that our world leaders, Obama, the Clintons, hugely invested in this thing. Of course, Joe Biden's been there. And then they come out and tell us, hey, we've got a great new idea. You're all going to be renters. Give us your houses. You rent. We'll own everything.

And you'll be happy. And, you know, she mentions the online discourse feels binary. No, it doesn't. I don't know what you're watching, but that Alan Dershowitz conversation you had was not binary. Binary is just two sides. There were several sides being discussed, debated, open debate. The conversation you just had in the UK with Gert, open debate, not binary. Maybe what she's watching is binary.

We both experience binary. Well, they're causing it to be, right? There's vaccine un-baxed, and that's just it. There can't be any nuance. It doesn't matter that you have a scientist that invented the MRNA technology that, you know, is saying, I just don't like this vaccine. There's other things. I mean, there's no nuance.

And all is being taken away by these people. You're the ones making it binary. You drive it into a binary hallway. We're not allowed to have any real, you know, and the really, truly nuanced discussion, which has to happen. We're going to get to any answers. And then you're going to decide, well, you know what? We tried with you.

We gave you your position. We put up the straw man. You didn't follow it. Now, we're giving our argument. That's not working. So we're just taking control of the whole damn thing. That's right. And hey, this is why we call.

called the Highwire because unfortunately, normal conversation in the past now is death-defying and scary for a lot of people, but I'm glad to be here with you, Del, having these scary conversations that should maybe be censored. Well, we started this. And I think about a lot of people don't know that. Like our original, you know, slogan was the Highwire, death-difying news without a safety net. Sometimes it feels like that. I mean, I know we're certainly under attack for saying what we think and bringing in many,

many different perspectives. You keep doing such a great job at this, Jeffrey. I've met so many of the great other news anchors and people that have been kicked off of the BBC, kicked off of the news in Europe. They came up, and they wanted me to tell you, by the way, Jeffrey, what a fantastic job. They think you're doing so many of them wanted to meet you. We'll save that for another time. But I'm lucky to have you. Such a great team here.

Keep up the good work. We'll see you next week. Thank you, Del. All right. Great. Well, if you want to get deeper into these topics and really get into more detail instead of just the singular repetit. headlines you're seeing everywhere else in the news. Want to go to the Highwire and check out the Jackson report.

Jeffrey Jackson writes these brilliant articles, sometimes breaking the stories before we get to him here on Thursdays, and you get a sense of what that is all about. All right, look, it's the topic of the time. It's there. It's in the moment. It's probably got you scratching your head. If you've got any brain cells going on in your head, are you saying, really?

Monkeypox? Monkeypox? Take a look at this. A mysterious new outbreak of monkeypox is growing. Expert stress. There is no need for alarm. There is nothing to panic about. We don't want people to worry. I'm not sure we're at the concern where people should have any sort of sense of panic. Guys, the fatality risk is low. The WHO says the death rate from monkeypox is usually around 3 to 6% of cases.

It's less contagious than smallpox and causes less severe illness. Most people recover from it in a few weeks. Symptoms include fever and headache, feeling tired and swollen glands. The majority of people who get this have a self-limited illness. They do not proceed to some of those graphic images that we've kind of seen flash across the news.

There's a lot of good news to think about. One is not nearly as transmissible. It's transmitted by really close contact, usually with bodily fluids. It isn't one of those types of viruses that are so well transmitted, COVID where people in a grocery store can get it. I don't think it's going to be widespread in terms of an epidemic that we've seen, you know,

in the order of COVID. The good news is we've known about monkey pox for a long time. We have a vaccine, a smallpox vaccine that appears to work well to control this. The U.S. government has ordered approximately 13 million doses of a vaccine that protects against monkeypox. Well, you know, when I look at those headlines, you know, I wanted to point something out because on the one hand, you know, they're playing it pretty mild, right? I mean, they're saying, you know, it's really not that infectious.

I don't think it's something you should fear. You know, there's only a few cases right now. Many people don't get the postules. They sort of stay, they have more of a dormant version of this. And it all kind of seems like, me, you know. But I want to point out, and by the way, I hope it stays at meh, and then just burns out and disappears. But there's just something weird because it's not just here. It was in England where I was.

This is an international story. And as I was reflecting on it, you know, we want to remember that COVID just set off with this bang and they're like, oh my God, people are dropping dead in China. But it really wasn't the case. And what I want you to contemplate is if this is scripted, if these things truly are scripted, then we would see, you know, a similarity. We would see the way this all scripts out. So you just saw us how they sort of lightly peddle it.

We want to tell you about it. It looks really scary. We're going to send you really scary images, but we're going to tell you it's not a big deal. We just don't see this being a big deal. It's almost exactly how coronavirus started. Just to remind you, listen to this. Coronavirus officially hitting the U.S. The outbreak of a new viral pneumonia in China is on the move.

Should we be changing our habits? And if so, how? No, right now at this moment, there is no need to change anything if you're doing on a day-by-day basis. There is absolutely no reason. for the American population to panic. People are worried. Should they be worried? Are they worried unnecessarily?

I don't think people should be frightened. I mean, the risk right now, today, currently, is really relatively low. Public health officials in the United States deem the overall risk to the US population to be low. There's a lot of confusion among people and misinformation surrounding face masks. People should not be walking around with masks.

You're sure of it, because people are listening No, closely to this. Wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better. The drugstore masks that sell have a lot of loopholes in them that led the virus through. You think about the initial cases of SARS. Case fatality rate was much higher, so it looks like this virus is less severe. You are more likely to get sick, to be hospitalized, and to die from the seasonal flu by far than from coronavirus. It's milder than we ever knew.

Worry about the flu. That will kill you. So, I mean, it's shocking, right? You kind of forget that that's how this all started. Now, my point being is you have to understand nothing you're seeing on television is accidental. The television is owned by the pharmaceutical industry. Your television is literally thought of as a billboard in your house. I worked in television, I know.

When you work on a television show, they make sure you know that all this work and you're working these crazy, ridiculous hours into the night For me, it was the Dr. Phil show, then the doctor's television show. But really, your job is to keep people glued to the television so that they don't go away for the ads. To keep them there so they get to the advertising. Keep their attention on the billboard in their house. That's what this is about.

So when they start rolling something out, there's a way they have psychologists all of the world. They've studied this. They know if they just jump out with a panic, you might be skeptical. That might trigger a skeptical thing. But what they say is, hey, I remember that when they were. telling me this really wasn't a big deal, but now that they're ramping up, obviously something's changing because they were totally honest with me before. At least that's how this could go, and I'm not saying I have any idea. I'm just as shocked as you. I went away to England. All of a sudden,

there's an outbreak out of nowhere. So I'm just trying to put out some thoughts on what we need to be aware of. And the reason I'm really skeptical of what I'm looking at and why I am having a concerned that they're going to try and move with this monkey pox thing and see if they can't ramp up another giant fear porn event for all of us is number one they're already buying vaccines they're already talking about the vaccines but number two there's been this guy that keeps predicting things are going to happen right around the corner and he's one of the greatest psychics we know on this earth this guy is more accurate than almost any psychic you could go to of course i'm talking about our good friend Bill Gates.

Let's remember what he is prophesized is going to happen in our very near future. Bill Gates, how to prevent the next pandemic. Why are you saying there's going to be a next pandemic, Bill? Why are you putting that juju on us? Given all that we've been through, it may seem surprising that I'm optimistic that we can prevent the next pandemic.

We have to make sure that we're ready because there will be another pandemic, And there's so many lessons about how we weren't prepared, how we should have handled things differently. Asia's a big risk in Africa is also a big risk, because the boundary between humans and animals is getting closer and closer. You know, if we're rational, yes,

the next time we'll catch it early, and it won't go global like it did this time. Something people don't like to talk about much, which is bioterrorism, that somebody who wants, caused damage could engineer a virus. What if a bioterrorist brought small pots to 10 airports, you know, how would the world respond to that? Stopping the next pandemic will require a big investment.

But I think of this as the best insurance policy the world could buy. Certainly there will be more pandemics. You know, we'll have to prepare for the next one. That, you know, I'd say we'll get attention this time. God, these people smile in the weirdest times, don't they? It's so bizarre to watch it. But look, I'm getting the point, and I've been thinking about this a lot. I think I'm going to say this officially to the audience.

What I would say this, whatever Bill Gates predicts is going to happen in the future, I would go ahead and take his word for it. I think I'm at that point. Now, I don't know if you think he's a seer in a visionary, or somehow in some strange way, all of those things that he's investing in like Wuhan laboratories and the WHO and all this stuff around the world gives him an inside look at what's coming our way. Either way, he keeps being right. If he's telling us there's a pandemic around the corner, I would act accordingly. Now, obviously, we would act differently than he wants us to act. And when he's saying, I think we can do

a better job in the future, I could find it as well show you how enamored he is by how Shanghai's handling this, you know, really getting it locked down. We just didn't do it hard enough. That's why we failed. It's like communism. The only reason communism hasn't worked is we just haven't done it the right way. We haven't locked you down the right way. Yes, we can hide from a virus. We haven't achieved it yet, but we could if we really took away every right that you have. And the other thing that really makes me nervous is I look to Davos, Switzerland. And we have the great reset discussion that's continued to go on is the types of conversations are going there. And the fact that we just won, folks. This is why I think you've got to be really alert. We won this battle.

They did not get the vaccine passport. They wanted to be tracking every one of us. Every billionaire meeting this week wants control of your body and to know where you are, what you're doing, what you're buying, what you're saying, who you love, who you hate. All of that is a part of the technologies that they're going to make their next trillion dollars off of. So if you think this is over, we don't have a vaccine passport yet. I think that's a problem. So what are they going to do? They're going to have to find something that makes us do that.

Remember, this is what was being discussed when it came to coronavirus. COVID is critical because this is what convinces people to accept, to legitimize total biometric surveillance. If we want to stop this epidemic, we need not just to monitor people. We need to monitor what's happening under their skin. That was Yuval Noah Harari, one of the big, exciting voices that appears in Davos and works hand in hand there with Klaus Schwab. I mean, he's telling you right there, the great thing about coronavirus, or really you could just replace it with the great thing about a pandemic disease is it makes people decide that they have to comply because we've made them terrified. And then once they're terrified, we can start tracking them. And I'm not just talking about tracking where they are.

I'm talking about tracking them under their skin into their bioidentification. That's where we hack into the human body. This is literally what these people are saying, you know, behind closed doors where cameras are running right now as we speak. So as I think about what is this all about, I don't think we can just brush this aside. I think we should recognize that monkeypox is nothing to be afraid of, but let's just watch how this plays out. Now, we looked at the CDC, I believe it's the CDC that sort of talks about, the symptoms of monkey pox. Let's just look at that really quick because I think this plays into the whole thing. What is monkeypox? A case of the rare disease has turned up in the U.S. Here's what to

know. Here are the early symptoms. Fever, headache, muscle legs, backache, swollen lymph nodes, chills, exhaustion. What? I mean, do you realize this is how they do it, right? You know, I got monkey pox. You know, you got a cold, bro. Chill out. You know, oh my gosh. my daughter's coughing, she's got monkeypox. This is how they do it. And by the way, those would be all the symptoms of coronavirus. Those would also be the symptoms of the failure of the vaccine or perhaps even a vaccine injury that's kicking in.

Maybe you have Guillain-Barre syndrome setting into your body. They could call it. I mean, this is a lot of people are wondering, are they going to try and hide vaccine injury in monkeypox? I don't know. You know me. I hope you realize on this show that I'm not a conspiracy. theorist. I am a theorist. I look at the science. We can put it out there. We can discuss it.

Are there conspiracies going on? I think that you could call what's happening in Davos, Switzerland, a conspiracy. It's a conspiracy amongst billionaires to decide the fate of the world. That's what it is. But as we look at it, we can breathe into it. We can try to imagine where it's going. I don't know what it is. And I'm not going to make any strong statements. But to get to the bottom of what we actually know about it scientifically, what we know about these vaccines. I want to bring in a scientist and a doctor that is one of the greatest in the world that has been doing just that.

I'm talking about Dr. Peter McCullough. He just appeared at the event I had there in England at the Better Way conference. And I think what he said there was prophetic to this situation we are discussing right now in Monkey Parks. Just take a listen to this. What we're seeing now is the utilization of vaccines

as an inroad to global human compliance, subjugation of the entire world's population at the same time, via the same method, subjugation, having our rights linked to the end of a hypodermic needle. That's the common theme. That was Dr. Peter McCullough just moments ago at the same conference I was at in the UK and Bath, England. Obviously, I'm just excited to have Dr. Peter McCullough just moments after that to talk about the monkey pox. So, Peter, you know, my first question for you is, as soon as you saw this monkey pox thing,

I know what was running through my head. I mean, for me, it was just like, oh, come on. But what was your thought when you saw this headline starting to sweep the world, really? It's here we go again. That was the first thing I remarked on. But, you know, quickly, as a doctor, I do have to be prepared.

And, you know, brief review, monkeypox is in the orthopox virus family, double-stranded DNA virus. There's cowpox, smallpox, camelpox, and monkeypox. It's a puscular rash, basically. It's transmitted through the postules, the blisters on the skin and through the saliva, close facial contact, kissing, sexual contact. It was discovered in 1958, first human case in the 1970s. 70s, US outbreak in 2003, when prairie dogs, as pets were mixed with giant pouch rats from Africa, the Congo Basin, that's where this emanates from. And then humans contracted it. Importantly, no deaths in that US outbreak in 2003. So my first question. And then a huge literature

developed. Yeah. My first question then is there's a lot of people that will say this is just like, what about, you know, we're seeing these herpes that are, I mean, the, the, the herpes aust or the, the shingles and chicken pox, you know, they're going to try and make that the smallpox or something, but they are very, they're different viruses, right? They're not even in the same family. Like, there's a big difference between the chicken pox and, you know, these monkeypox, cowpox, and things like that. Correct? Yeah, there's no doubt about it. There are different skin lesions. They're larger and more puscular. They involve the palms, which very few rashes do that. But there's actually quite a literature on monkeypox because it's related to smallpox.

And obviously we hear smallpox. That's a terrifying, you know, horrible thought. When we talk about vaccination, you know, the one thing you always hear when people say, like, I'm really, I'm starting to delay some of my vaccines or I'm hesitant, I don't want to do it. We hear smallpox and polio. We've eradicated smallpox,

we've eradicated polio. That's what vaccines are for. And so, you know, when we start hearing pox, It's very scary, right? It's a lot, you know, as soon as we start thinking about lesions and things like that and attributing to smallpox. So the monkey pox, they've been around. You're saying that the last outbreak was not deadly.

Have there been any outbreaks of, you know, is there a strain that we've seen of monkey pox that was deadly? There have been some deaths attributed to monkeypox. You know, over the decades, you know, there have been thousands of cases most in Africa The deaths have occurred in regions where there's little or no health care or in advanced HIV, in younger men with advanced HIV who are already ill. But the reason why this is such a big deal is because there's an effort afoot to counter-protect against smallpox or even monkeypox bioterrorism. Right.

We have, you know, that's sort of this idea that we're already hearing, right? We're already hearing that they're going to order vaccines and things like that. But before we get into it, I want to just, I just want to really understand this virus. You're saying it's not deadly. How contagious is it? Because my understanding is monkeypox is very hard to transmit, yet we're seeing, you know, multiple countries and not even countries that share borders. This thing just sort of all of a sudden starts appearing around the world. There's something suspicious about that or am I just missing something?

You're right. It's very hard to transmit. And as evidence for this, the CDC told us about a case here in Dallas, Texas last summer, Dell. A man from Africa traveled to Atlanta and then to Dallas, and he had many, many contacts. He developed this puscular lesion. He finally was hospitalized. He was given the FDA approved drug called Tico Viramat or T-Pox. He did perfectly fine. But importantly, the CDC has a monkey. Pock's response team. There was nearly three dozen authors on this paper in MMWR, which just appeared last month in April of 2022. Importantly, they checked every contact and despite him having the illness, not a single person contracted it, not a single person. So it's very hard to transmit has an R not way less than one. And so what this means is that it takes a lot of contact, like I say, kissing, sexual contact, touching the lesions. And so there are some reports now coming out of Antwerp, Belgium in Europe that it may have actually been transmitted

at some sex raves or orgies. Well, I mean, I guess that's one of the side effects of, you know, promiscuous, you know, sexual interaction, hepatitis, hepatitis issues. Those are the types of things that, you know, that those are the types of people that are at high risk. I'm not gonna tell anyone how to live their lives, but, you know, that would be a high risk group

for these types of illnesses. So then, so is the understanding we think it was a bunch of people at a rave that then flew back to the different countries they were from. That is how this suddenly sort of got into, I think nearly right around a dozen or so countries right now so far involved in this.

You know, we really need confirmation. I've seen at least four sets of fraudulent internet reports where they're actually using old pictures from several years ago almost as a scare. You know, I think everyone should have some healthy skepticism. In March of 2021, the Nuclear Threat Initiative, which is a think tank out of Washington, met in Munich with a Munich Biosecurity Group,

and they did a Monkey Pox bioterrorism tabletop exercise. This is the timeline in the report from NTI, and the release date of the Monkey Poc's outbreak is scheduled in May of 2022, almost, you know, according to the schedule of when we started to see the monkeypox cases being reported. Wait a minute. Another sort of event, 201 type scenario where they were gaming out a potential biological threat or release that could sweep the world, and their scenario starts a year later in May of 2022. I'm sorry to wonder, are these people psychic? Do they know something we don't know? Or are we somehow, is this like the ultimate

proof that what you fear you draw upon you? But it is really bizarre that timing. And so when they ran this scenario, what was the results? What kind of numbers were they looking at when, you know, when they went some worst case scenario with monkeypox? They had conceived of a scenario where the monkeypox would not be responsive to a vaccine. And there would be many, many, millions who actually die of monkeypox. The numbers were extraordinary that they cooked up. But I can tell you that release date of May 15th, that's just a week before the WHO meeting on the global treaties for pandemic response and right just before the Davos meeting for the World Economic Forum. You know, the timing of this would make anyone naturally suspicious.

Right. It really is very suspicious. And here's what it's also suspicious because before we started, I played, you know, sort of the similar, the similarity in this moment we find ourselves in to just at the beginning of coronavirus. They were down playing it, Tony Fauci saying, this really isn't that big a deal. Americans don't need to worry about it. We're hearing very much the same thing now around monkeypox. And you and I both think, I mean, that should be the case. And it should have been the case with the coronavirus, by the way.

That ended up having a death rate of about 0.26% across the world, you know, depending it fluctuates a little bit depending on what age group you're looking at in my mind not worthy of the level of extreme lockdown shutdowns denial of access to to proper medical care you know total government control of doctors none of that should have happened with the death rate that that had and this feels so similar it's it's again almost a benign disease that will be bad for maybe a very small group of people, but we're hearing the same language that it's really not that big a deal. And what's bothersome about it for me, Peter, is why did they pick this monkey pox a year ago? So a year ago, you have a major gaming of monkeypox in particular. And then ironically or, you know,

prophetically one year later, it's monkeypox that comes out. But then the first knee-jerk reaction is to say, oh, go back to sleep, everybody. This isn't a big deal. I mean, we only gameed it as like wiping out millions of people last year, but we're going to tell you right now it's not a big deal. There's just something really stinks in how this is all lining up. But to fill out the information, you know, there have been some planning for this. So there actually is a smallpox monkey pox medicine called Ticoviromat known as T-pox. It's oral. It's safe and effective. And just a few days ago, our FDA has approved it for intravenous use. So this case that landed in Dallas last year, he got Tico Viramatt. So it's safe and effective. It inhibits a cell surface receptor for the

virus and looks very good. It's got some drug interactions, but it inhibits the VP 37 receptor and can easily manage. So it's available to us. The U.S. has a stockpile of 2 million doses of this. When the monkeypox story started to evolve, we heard a report that the U.S. government had actually purchased 13 million doses of the Genios vaccine. The Genios vaccine. So wait a minute. The Genios vaccine was coming along in 2018, 2019. And in fact, this is a live attenuated vaccine.

And with it, in a study of over 3,003 people in the package insert, you know what the trouble myocarditis or heart inflammation. And now there's already reports of heart inflammation with this vaccine. Kieneth and colleagues reported in 2018 heart damage with the product in a young man age 36. Now the interesting thing is clinically, though, the people who are at risk for dying are young individuals with HIV. We can't use live attenuated viruses in people with HIV because they're immunocompromise. Well, here's and then, so let's just stay right here for a second because I want to jump into the idea of being immunocompromised in just a second. But we ordered 13 million of these vaccines.

Now, is this the same vaccine I was seeing headlines on last year that could be used for smallpox also, this live attenuated vaccine? And I'm like, wait a minute, why are we introducing alive anything with smallpox or pox, especially like an eradicated disease? Why would you start messing with that? And so we have 13 million of these vaccines, and you're saying the known side effects, and the numbers are fairly high, right, in the trials of this vaccine, they had pretty high issues of myocarditis, and then I believe troponin levels, is that correct? Right. So up to 18 percent had elevations in cardiac troponin. This is worrisome for subclinical myocarditis. We know that the smallpox virus itself has some tropism for the heart.

And so the last thing we want to introduce is a live attenuated virus that, in fact, would cause heart damage in ostensibly well people. There have already been case reports proving this with MRI and other clinical sources of data. So the U.S. pulls a trigger for this. And actually the former FDA chairman, Scott Godlieb, was on CNBC the other day advising on what's called perimeter or rim vaccination, meaning if there's a monkeypox patient, anybody who's in a rim of exposure, contact, that they would take one of these vaccines. Now, the vaccine has to be given a shot number one and then four weeks shot number two. It's obviously going to be too late for any

type of protection for someone who's come in contact with monkeypox. So do you think they're going to use this prophylactically if we see a few more cases starting to spread? I mean, that's always my concern. The truth is, Peter, when it comes to vaccinations, if you're using it as a treatment, And if you're using it for a very specific group of people that are maybe going into a very high risk situation, maybe a doctor that deals with blood all the time and are worried about hepatitis B. That's one thing. But like giving a hepatitis B vaccine to children that aren't going to have no risk at it as babies, that's why I start having an issue. And so I'm really concerned. If there's risk to monkey pox, look, if you work in a zoo with monkeys or whatever, I mean, like, however this works, that's one thing.

But do you think we have a risk where they may start prophylacting delivering this, this vaccine? I think the vaccine would be certainly a greater risk than never getting monkeypox. I agree. You know, if they had monkey handlers, veterinarians, trappers, other people in the Congo basin, you know, if there was a reason to get to the source of it, it always comes out of the central African Congo basin. That's where this emanates from. Yeah, I wouldn't have any problem with that. But I'm deeply concerned that, you know, Americans.

are going to be petrified. And you know, another important point is that the smallpox vaccination program phased out in 1976 in the United States. Smallpox vaccine in a paper by beer and colleagues published in 2019 clearly provides protection against monkeypox. So here, anybody over age 50, Dell, they're already covered. And so I wouldn't see any reason for those individuals to get the monkeypox vaccine. I did notice, though, in the genios program,

They went ahead and tried the vaccine and people had already taken the smallpox vaccine, again, with this intent of almost over-vaccinating somebody. Okay, so now let's get to what I think is really my concern is something. When I first was looking at this, of course I jumped to, I mean, are they just pushing another sort of fake pandemic, whatever it is? I mean, you know, you can never prove it. I don't want it. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I'm super skeptical for all the reasons you've already pointed out. But we are in a different scenario here.

So much of our reporting, I know much of your investigations has led you to many of the same conclusions. A lot of the strong statements being made by Dr. Ryan Cole, looking at the toll-like receptors, we know that this coronavirus vaccine that we just gave the hundreds of millions, really over billion people around the world, many of the first world nations where we're starting to see this thing, have very high vaccine rates. here in America, well over 60% have gotten, you know, two of these vaccines. And if the side effect, in fact, the design of this vaccine is to shut down the toll-like receptors,

to affect your T cells, I mean, all of this in a space. And we're even hearing mainstream media recognize. Even Dr. Jennifer Ashton said on the news just last week, you should really think about that fourth booster because a lot of the reports and the problems of the fourth booster, is immune exhaustion or some description of the immune system just giving up and shutting down. And it's not just shutting down for coronavirus, it's shutting down for, you know, it's why we're seeing herpes, we're seeing the shingles as a side effect. Clearly the immune system is not, is, is, is, is, is, is being suppressed by this vaccine. So when you say that the monkeypox is really at risk for people

suffering from HIV, you know, it's kind of amazing that when we talk about immune exhaustion, and an immune system that's been wiped out by the coronavirus vaccine, we're not hearing compared to HIV and AIDS. But essentially that's what they're saying. Isn't it? We're talking about, you know, an acquired immune deficiency. This, in this case, acquired by the previous bunches of COVID vaccines you had. Is it possible that monkeypox or even other viruses that tend to not be a big deal in a population that maybe have a really deficient immune system caused by the vaccine campaign we just went through, that we could see this start to spreading communities outside of gay communities where, you know, HIV and AIDS is much higher.

We are seeing examples of a second hit hypothesis. This is what you're bringing up. That is the first hit being SARS-CoV-2, whether it be the respiratory infection or the infection plus multiple doses of the vaccine and getting loaded with genetic material and spike. protein. But one of the first examples of a second hit problem is the pediatric outbreak of hepatitis. And there in a paper in Lancet Hepatology, Broden, and our DT published a paper summarizing the data saying that what's at the base of this is called spike protein super antigenes. And there the children have either gotten COVID-19 been exposed to the vaccines or parents been exposed to them.

And then they get adenovirus 41 and develop a very serious form of hepatitis, some leading to transplant or death. We have now a clear track record of varicelisoster reactivation after COVID-19 and the vaccines. And now Epstein-Barr virus reactivation. And you're pointing out something even more, I think, important, that there's a term that's been generated called vaccine-induced immunodeficiency syndrome. Now, it's not HIV. It's not AIDS. It's not the HIV virus, but it's like HIV where we see acutely there's lymphocyte depression. There's impairment of the immune system. And in fact, there's even impairment and immune system of fighting off COVID. So we're seeing worse cases of breakthrough COVID in those

who are most fully vaccinated. That's supported in the literature. Recent paper shows that those who've been vaccinated, they have a less robust immune response against all the epitopes of SARS-CoV-2. So when you now as a doctor I would think there's almost like two personalities going on through everything that we've all been through this pandemic you are obviously as mainstream as it gets you're the most published doctor on the coronavirus itself the most published heart specialist in the world when it comes to all these other you know the medical knowledge you have but on the one hand you're here telling us don't worry folks monkeypox is really not that big a deal. It doesn't tend to cause deaths. It shouldn't spread that fast. This is probably

a bit of an alarm going off that we could be over the top. But on the other hand, when you look at the health of the world after coronavirus and even more specifically what we're talking about, after this massive corona vaccine program where they have delivered three and four shots knowing it's suppress the immune system in some ways even on purpose. Is there a part of you that this sort of wakes up a deeper concern for for a real drop in overall health amongst those that have really taken a lot of these vaccines? They have this spike protein floating around their bodies. It's not a natural RNA. It's something that Dr. Robert Malone's talking a lot about. We didn't make the vaccine out of a natural human RNA. We put in the uridine. This is a special molecule. We don't know how long it's

going to persist in the body. Do you have a concern? Does it make you look at this differently? Like, on the one hand, yes, I want to be able to treat monkey pox. But on the other hand, we may be dealing with a monkey pox on top of an immune system that has been hampered by a vaccine or previous infections that could take this to do a totally different world. It's certainly possible. Two things come to mind. One is actually intentional release or spread of the virus, exactly what the NTI in Munich group thought was going to happen. Right. That has to come to mind, right? They're doing a scenario to play this out. The CDC has a monkeypox response team. So we have to play out that possibility. And so if there was intentional release or intentional spread to cause harm,

and we see far more cases than we would ever expect naturally, that has to come to mind. The second issue is could the immune system of these younger people have been knocked down? We need good case data to figure out who's had SARS-CoV-2 and who's had the vaccine. We still don't know. The good news here, though, is it looks like the elderly, and I guess you and I potentially would be in this group, we've already had. I had to call my mom to find out if I got smallpox vaccine and my mom knew that I did, me and my brothers. I can tell you, Del, we don't have to worry. We're protected. All right. So to get into what we're,

get into what you just said though this idea of a release a purposeful release or even an accidental release this was at the heart of the coronavirus the the COVID-19 pandemic obviously I got in a lot of trouble talking about lab origin two years into this now that seems that's really the the the consensus and I'm not the consensus means anything but we're all leaning towards it was a lab in Wuhan is there any suspicion that the monkey pocket has been being worked at in any labs around the world, especially in the middle of this Ukraine-Russia war. We heard so much about those biolabatories and the concern that what if Russia went in there, what if they blew it up or people, you know, ran out and were not protecting what was inside of

there. Where are we at with monkeypox inside of labs? You know, have we been doing any work with monkeypox? That's a very good question. In 2022, a paper has appeared by. Yang and colleagues from the biosecurity lab level four in Wuhan, China. So here we are, right back to Wuhan. Now here, the paper deals with development of PCR techniques for a segment of the DNA code of the monkeypox virus. But to answer your question more broadly, I don't see evidence of an intentional release. If you look at the case count over time, you know, there have been thousands of cases and cumulatively they're going up over time. It was a this case in Dallas last year. No one made a big deal out of it. Took the CDC about nine months

to publish it. There wasn't a scare. It actually never even made the news in Dallas that I can recall. So I think right now I think we're okay. It's just that too many things are a coincidence right now with monkeypox. And then the fact that this would rise to the level of a statement by our president. President of the United States puts out a warning that we should all be concerned about monkeypox. Well, you know, any last thoughts? I mean, as we watch this, it's so hard. We're not doctors.

We're not scientists. We have a media system that just keeps repeating a very small anecdotal incident, which we then personalize. It starts ramping up our fear and our concern. I kind of wonder sometimes, you know, whether these things are happening on purpose, like you said, even coronavirus, if there's like a litmus test where they're trying to see how stressed out we get to see if they could hook us enough to really make another push to

try and make this the reason we get the vaccine and get the vaccine passport and get ourselves signed up to that technology you spoke so clearly about at the conference in Bath. You know, we know that's their agenda. They keep looking for that opportunistic moment. I mean, I guess I wonder, is it our reaction right now that determines whether they think they can turn this into a reason to engage in all of that technology they want to leash upon us. But for your average person out there, what do you think we, how should we be carrying ourselves right now? Should we be suspicious?

Should we keep our eye on it? Should we forget it exists? How do you think we avoid being manipulated by these types of concerns? I think it is a test of our hypervigilance. That's what psychologists say that we are in a state of hypervigilance on microbial disease. In 2017, CEPI, the Center for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovation formed by the World Health Organization, a World Economic Forum in the Gates Foundation. They created a business plan, and their business plan is published. It says that CEPI will look for opportunities.

They name something like monkeypox as an opportunity, a business opportunity, to come up with a response. And in CEPI, the only response to these business opportunities is mass vaccination. And we saw the trigger pulled already for this company, Ginios, with a vaccine that is, you know, by the way, the Ginius vaccine has never been demonstrated to prevent a case of monkeypox or camelpox or small. It's only been approved based on antibody testing, neutralizing antibody testing. Genios just got gened up with 13 million doses purchased by the U.S. government with no questions asked. What should people look for, though? Honestly, if you're traveling, you're seeing people here and there in the airport.

If you saw postular lesions, particularly postules on the hands, you saw people who are sick in your circles. Maybe you're at a clinic or you work with veterinarians or in zoos and elsewhere. If you saw something like this, you know, have some awareness. in terms of testing, simply can burst one of the little bubbles on the skin and test the PCR of the liquid within the blister to find the answer. The CDC has the essay. And we have a stockpile of the medicine, the Tico-Viromat, the oral medicine twice a day is well tolerated. Again, we even have IV approved. Older people over age 50, I would not have any worries. I think now is a time to be reasonable. If, you know, these, these kind of sorted activities like sex raves and orgies and things of this

nature, you can imagine someone covered in pustules, you know, I think most of the time it's just being reasonable. A reasonable person is simply not going to contract this illness. All right, let's talk about your book. Your book is releasing as we speak. Just tell me about it. The courage to face COVID-19. Seems like a good time to read something like that because we're going to have to have, you know, the courage to face monkeypox, the courage to face whatever new coronavirus or flu, the news just loves to make us terrified about these things.

So what's really, why did you write this book? You know, courage is a key word, and I teamed up with best-selling true crime author, John Leek, who's a medical historian, a forensic examiner, And we've worked together on it for a year. And John, through his careful review of the evidence in my struggles as a doctor trying to treat patients, we tell the story in a narrative format. It's the only book out there that's in a narrative format. And what John has convinced me of is that despite all our presentation of data, Dell, and you do it great on your show, people actually better learn through understanding a story, reading a story.

So this is the true narrative of. of my journey and the journeys of people in my circle, we go all over the world on this through the well-documented Senate testimonies, other events that happen. John believes, and I believe that the suppression of early treatment that created fear, suffering, hospitalization, and death was intentional, and it was designed to prepare the population to accept mass vaccination. And we believe that rises to the level of a crime. of mass negligent homicide and we make the case in the book and it's already hit number one I think in viral diseases communicable diseases and interestingly true crime wow fantastic so where do people get it where do we pick up the book right now if we want to to read it well go to the website courage to face COVID.com read a little bit about it and you click the button that'll take you to Amazon and we're working on some other distribution options shortly and an audio book but it's going great we're very very very

very happy. The paperback is the bestseller. And it complements all the other major books out there. You know, Robert F. Kennedy has a terrific book focusing on Anthony Fauci. And this is going to complement. This has also patient stories. So there are patients and about their struggles. And we've interviewed these patients. And it's all true. It's all nonfiction. We've interviewed them, including some family members who gave the story of those who didn't make it because they were denied early treatment. Dr. Peter McCullough, thank you for taking the time today and sort of giving us a better understanding of what we're seeing in the news. You're so busy. You're doing such great work. Everywhere I go, you manage to find time to get, you know, the truth out there.

So I want to thank you for taking time with us today, and I look forward to the next opportunity we have to speak. Thank you. All right. Take care. All right. Well, you know, as it turns out, just a few weeks ago, the last time I had Dr. Peter McCullough, Instee, He was traveling and just finishing up his book with his co-author John Leake at that time. And so we had the opportunity to sit down to talk to the both of them. This is my conversation about the courage to face COVID-19.

Joining Dr. McCullough and I is author John Leek. John, thanks for joining the conversation. Thanks for having me. So just very quickly, how did you meet Dr. Peter McCullough? I was home visiting my family in Dallas over the hall of at the beginning of 2020. They shut Europe down. We naturally, on our side, shut our side down too.

I began paying very close attention to the story, and I began to wonder, well, is there someone on the medical side who has academic medical authority who is taking a different view of the matter from the official one? And I started looking around, and then I discovered Dr. McCullough, Dr. McCullough and then I discovered he lived about a mile away from my family home. So I contacted him and I did an interview with him in May of last year and that was the

beginning of our conversation that led to this book that we're working on. What is the goal of the book? No, the goal overall is to lay the historical framework for how this could actually happen, and how the whole world could get into this simultaneous lockstep, this type of thinking with respect to pandemic response. And the idea is that there was a small group of doctors, myself included, that in a sense had a courage to face COVID-19, to treat COVID-19, to start to manage this.

But at the same time, we were battling this giant mega-biamaceutical government complex. Right. Is it a fiction piece or is it is it no it's it's true crime. Yeah. If you if you read a lot of true crime and you read a lot of true crime history. Yeah. You begin you become adept at spotting distinct patterns of fraud. Yeah. And you know I was very interested in in this OxyContin story, the Purdue Farma. Yeah. Sackler family story and and I came across the article in the New Yorker in 2017, which then became this big book. And I called my literary agent at the time. He said, well, it is a great story, the Purdue Pharma, but someone's beat you to the punch. But it was really looking into that story that I began to realize on a very large scale, the biofarmaceutical complex with its friends in the FDA, its lobbyists, can really shape a phenomenon, public perception of a phenomenon, in this case, the addictive quality of oxycontin, and conceal the true danger of it.

There's so many different elements, it's such an enormous story that we've had to kind of find a narrative thread. And I would say the narrative thread is Dr. McCullough's efforts working together with his fellow physicians to try and tell the truth of what we've been up against, starting with the suppression of early treatment. Right. And that's really the focus of the first book is the suppression of early treatment. When you think of medical tyranny, it seems like you need to know who the bad guy is,

yet I feel like in this conversation we keep saying we're not exactly sure how high up this goes or who's pulling the strings ultimately. Is that a problem when you're trying to write a book like that? I don't think so. I mean, I think if you look at these huge international foundations that have gotten very interested in, for example, mass vaccination, Robert Kennedy talks about the capture of these regulatory agencies. We've seen this in the financial industry as well.

The revolving door between Goldman Sachs and the Treasury or the SEC. see. This is very, I think, intelligible anthropological phenomenon that we're dealing with here. As you look at it as an author, does it appear to have sort of a dystopian novel feel to it? It does. When I was a kid growing up in Texas in the 80s, we were assigned George Orwell's 1984 and animal farm. And I just remember thinking, well, this is a story of the foolishness and the tyranny of the past. This could never happen again. And we see now this censorship and this sort of thought police. And, you know, you've expressed a point of view that is in some way heretical.

So we're going to censor you. And I mean, you think, are we back to Orwell? Yeah. You know, my dad was the one that gave me Brave New World in 1984. And I remember what bothered me about those books was you kind of start where it's already a problem. You already start where Oceania, you know, there's a war going on. You never see this sort of a matter. Like all of these places.

And my question was always, how did you get there? And I feel like these last couple of years, and I'm sure there was like a slower grind here. But this pandemic, these two years, has unearthed things in a perspective of the world I live in that's either, I mean, keep asking myself, is it just super accelerated right now? Or have I just been blind and asleep at the wheel? For, as a doctor, I mean, you're so, you know, entrenched in reality, right? Medicine's reality. What's really going on with you? Do you find it difficult to wrap your head around the state of the world?

I do. I think the rapidity of things. is so fast. Like how this could virus could in a sense come here uninvited as this cloud that just influences. And I think so much of from my perspective, it's driven by fear. I think for the first time physicians, nurses and others, they had a fear that they could get it themselves. For the first time they had a fear of their patients. I have patients who's told me yesterday, my primary doctor still has not seen me in two years. They're still on telemedicine. They're still in a grip of fear. But what happened very quickly was, I think, in a very overt way, doctors were told they should

not treat COVID. So for the first time, they were told not to treat a serious illness that was resulting in large numbers of hospitalizations and deaths. And they were relatively public, clear-cut examples of doctors losing their job because they attempted to treat and help patients with COVID-19. That itself should have been the most newsworthy bomb that one off that doctors attempting to care for patients were being threatened. It was not just, it was pressure, there was coercion,

there wasn't just threat of reprisal, there was reprisal, and there was professional damage. What happened on the patient's side, for the very first time, patients were told that they don't have any autonomy. Normally patients can kind of say what they want. No, they couldn't. And they lost what's called shared decision making. Shared decision making means that the doctors and the patients share together,

like, oh, we're going to use these drugs or that drugs, we're going to do this or that. That once those things were lost, then what happened, patients got into the hospital. It became basically the most frightening event of so many families. millions of families in America now think of the hospital as this horrific place where their loved one was put in isolation. The family members could not visit. There was no discussion of the types of treatment that occurred.

And then in the worst cases, the patients died. Peter treated his own father in the very early stage of this thing. And there was no guarantee of success. It was his father. And we'll tell the story. My father was in a nursing home. He was one of the first people in this large Dallas nursing home to get COVID. And we just had to go with it in terms of the principles. And the principles include reducing the self-inoculation, getting fresh air, don't keep rebreathing the virus, using things to sterilize surfaces. We didn't know about vibracidal oral nasal washes. I wish we did. I would have used them. But we certainly used hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. We didn't know about steroids back then. So we didn't get any steroids. That was rough. to treat, you know, he probably had the original Wuhan wild type strain.

But we knew about anticoagulance, and he was immobile. And I said, boy, that's something. And so we used, that's probably what saved him. He got very sick in the middle, very sick, but he pulled through. That's incredible. So books going to come out. What is the goal? What do you want the book to achieve?

Is it just a good read, entertainment, or do you have? Well, I think what we are looking at is a true crime story. I think the suppression of early treatment was an act of fraud. It may amount to an act of something like mass homicide. So I think it's a true crime book and it should be documented as such. Well, I really appreciate the fact that you're both involved in documenting what may be probably the most interesting and horrifying moment, at least in modern history. I look forward to reading it myself. Thank you for taking time to come and join us.

Thank you. Thank you. I want to thank Dr. Peter McCullough and John Leek, both for joining me in the studio to have that great interview, but also taking the time to write this book. You know, there's been some great books out there. I love Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s book, The Real Anthony Fauci. But the approach is this. To bring in a crime writer is really so brilliant in John Leek to think that, you know, if we look at this through the eyes, of a crime book. I just think that this is going to be such a unique way to tell this story.

So you can go to the website, Courage to FaceCOVID.com, click on Buy Now. Everybody should get a copy of this book. Obviously, celebrate those people that are going out of their way to bring information to us. Also a great gift, obviously, for all of your friends. I'm traveling a lot. I'm doing a lot of speaking engagements. It's so great to get in front of an audience. If you've never had the opportunity to see me live speak. It's a little bit of a different experience than what I do here. I've got a couple of events coming right up this weekend. I'm at the Advanced Medicine Conference in San Antonio, the fourth annual Advanced Medicine Conference. Just look at those images. The Who's Who are going to be there. Once again, this is all put on by my good

friend, Dr. Rashid Bhattar. Definitely check it out. Fourth Annual Advanced Medicine Conference. you can go to advance medicine conference.com for all the information how to get into that event. And then next weekend, I haven't been to Atlanta in a while. I'm going to be in Atlanta, Georgia for another spectacular event. This one's the Next Steps Conference on the UI Media Awards, June 3rd through 4th, Atlanta. If you want to get tickets, group tickets, just go to Next Steps Atlanta at gmail.com. I love this event. It's sort of like America's version.

of the better way. It's about next steps and it really, a lot of the conversations are how we become better advocates for this conversation. And so that's what a lot of the speakers are gonna be talking about. How do you talk about these subjects so we can start enrolling those people that we want to wake up before they die?

So those two great events coming up. Now to finish off this show, every once in a while there's an issue that I asked myself, you know, is this really something? something that's a high wire sort of, you know, point. Is this the right time to talk about it? But here in America, I'm not sure it's how it's affecting the world,

but here in America, another tragic event has taken place, actually very close to us, just miles away outside of San Antonio, Texas. Another school shooting, something that is just beyond comprehension. We cannot wrap our heads around how horrible this is, but this is what it's looked like in the news. America, here we are again. This is not a new nightmare. It is a recurring one. Another mass shooting in America, this time at an elementary school. Horror and heartbreak in this tiny South Texas community. What happened in Evaldi is a horrific tragedy that cannot be tolerated

in the state of Texas. In Yvalde, Texas is now the scene of the second deadliest school shooting in our nation's history. Nineteen students and two teachers killed. That rampage began in that house just behind me, the suspect allegedly shooting his grandmother. State officials revealing all were killed instead of a single fourth grade classroom. There are still 17 people injured as a result of this mass shooting. We're also learning more about who committed this heinous attack. Police say he is 18-year-old Salvador Ramos. He was from Yuvalde, and while investigators have now revealed a motive,

it is believed he bought two assault-style weapons right after, turning 18 just days ago. Law enforcement sources telling ABC News they're investigating possible social media accounts linked to the alleged shooter, which include images of guns and other violent material. Investigators believe Ramos posted photos on Instagram of two guns he used in the shooting.

The gunman was 18 years old and reportedly a high school dropout. He was shy that throughout the course of his time through education, high school and before that, that he was bullied, that he was troubled. Apparently, the reports say it had a tough family life moving between his own mother and his grandparents and back again. His classmates at Yuvalde High School telling ABC News the suspect was known for fighting and threatening classmates. He fits the profile of a loner, if you will. Nobody has come forward

to say they know him. Really the only person they've identified is his grandmother. They can't even find any biological parents, anything like that. Several classmates telling us the suspect rarely went to school, and when he did, he sometimes frightened students. Unemployed, we haven't able to identify any friends, a girlfriend, no gang affiliation, no criminal history, so a lot of unanswered questions. All right, look, this is a sensitive topic, and this is a sensitive time. And with everyone else, I want to say to those families that are going through this

just unbelievably horrific experience that no one alive would ever want to have to deal with. Our hearts go out to you. Our prayers are with you. But as I sit here as a journalist, I have got to make some things clear because I'm not sure we get it. And it's this. Our media is totally owned. Nobody is right on this topic. Everybody is a shill for somebody and I'm really, really tired of it. On one side, you have CNN and MSNBC and whatever liberal organizations jump right in there to say this is a gun rights issue and damn the NRA and we've got to stop gun rights and all that. And then you flip channels if you want to be on the other side and you flip to the other side and then the entire argument is how could the liberals and the liberal media, you know,

politicize this and make this about gun ownership. We should be talking about the families and yada, yada, yada, and Hannity and all these guys as though they're the ones that are just standing up for human rights. They're all a pack of liars and I'm really tired of it. Here's the truth. There is, you know, I want to say this. There should be conversation. There should be nothing about this conversation that is not on the table.

I don't care who you are. If you're saying, I'm sorry, but gun regulations, you know, that just can't be a part of the discussion. Bologna, it can't be a part of the discussion. I'm not saying whether I'm for it or against it, but everything is. has to be on the table. You just saw me do this at the conference that, you know, that I was in the UK. I do not have a problem standing room with someone that is pro vaccine. Go ahead and tell me what you think about the pro vaccine position, but you're going to see my position and I'm going to show you all the lawsuits I've won and what's going on. And then there'll be nuances and Peter McCullough

and Dr. Robert Malone will be here and Brett Weinstein will have a little bit different perspective. We've got to talk about it all. There can't be some part of this conversation that is being left out. But here's the issue. The biggest thing being left out isn't guns or lack of guns or the politics around this. It's drugs. It comes down to drugs. Where are the drug companies in this conversation? I mean, why is it? We never hear whether or not this kid was taking SRIs, drugs for depression and psychological issues, which have a known side effect of suicide ideation. They get away with it. They lose lawsuits, just like here an uncomfortable truth to look at the corresponding rise of antidepressants, SSRIs, and mass shootings. Now, you'll see these

articles, but they're not talking about it on CNN or Fox. You know, Hannity, you're not talking about it. Why? I know why. Because I used to be you. Because you are literally being paid by pharma. And so they'll argue at each other. They'll get us all arguing at each other, but we're not having the most important conversation. What part of this is due to children being hopped up on drugs that are totally messing with their psychological systems? Now, I don't know if this shooter was on drugs or not. What I'm saying is it has to be on the table and you should not trust any news anchor or any reporter that isn't putting that into the mix too. Put the guns on the table, put the drugs on the table. And by the way, while you're at it and Fauci's over there going, yeah, I know

that people got to press because I put masks on them and locked them down in schools. Oh yeah, I admit, I knew suicides went up when I took the rights of children away across this country. Well, guess what? Guess who's on the table too? Our government, because while you were accepting the fact you were making children suicidal, guess what suicidal children do? They shoot each other. That's what they do. Sometimes they just take it out of themselves. Sometimes they say, if I don't want to live in this world, then nobody else should either. So while you're giggling to your, that is a side effect of a government intrusion that should have never happened, you're on the table too.

Let's have this conversation. Let's really have it. Nobody's allowed to keep their secrets and their baggage and their skeletons in the closet. We don't get to see. All of it's on the table. Let's be honest. Let's be real. Let's be parents.

Let's be humans. Let's be children. Let's get to the bottom of this. We all need to rectify what is happening here. We are getting sicker and sicker as a society and there's a drug company making all the ads that is helping with our sickness which seems to be making it worse and billionaires that are going to help us but they seem to be making us poorer and all of it being celebrated by the news while we are the victims.

You'll never see these conversations happening that way on the high wire. I know I pissed some of you off today. Whatever your pet point of view is on these issues, I don't apologize. This is the high wire. It's death-defying truth without a safety net. And you can expect to see it next week. I love you all. Hang in there.