The Highwire with Del Bigtree - PANDEMIC TREATY ON LIFE SUPPORT AS PUBLIC TRUST PLUMMETS

Episode Date: February 19, 2024

The WHO, WEF, and legacy media are lamenting the lack of trust they are now experiencing by the public. We provide evidence for where exactly the fault for their lack of trust and popularity lie.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

A lot of people are celebrating at the recent news coming out of the World Health Organization. And doctor, I'm sorry, not a doctor. I always make that mistake. Tadros Gabriasis, he is the director of the World Health Organization. And remember, the WHO, they supported lockdowns. They supported the vaccine, COVID vaccine. They supported social distancing. Majority of their fundings from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. And all of the issues caused by the failed pandemic response that they supported,

they're using those issues to try to basically grab more power in the form of this WHO pandemic treaty. But they run into a problem and they're on the defense. Take a look. All right. This work is not easy. And it's occurring in a very difficult environment. The IMB and the IHR working group are operating amid a torrent of fake news, lies, and conspiracy theories. There are those who claim that the pandemic agreement and IHR will cede sovereignty to WHO and give the WHO Secretary the power to impose lockdowns or vaccine mandates on countries. You know this is fake news, lies and conspiracy theories.

You know these claims are completely false. You know that the agreement will give WHO no such powers because, you are writing it. We cannot allow this historic agreement, this milestone in global health to be sabotaged by those who spread lies either deliberately or unknowingly. We need your support to counter these lies. I love this video. Folks, I mean, you know, a lot of you have come up to me when I run into you in airports and restaurants, and you know, you're really panicked about this WHO tree, as you should be and as we have been reporting.

But nothing says you're winning, like hearing the people that are trying to pass something as ridiculous as this saying that these are all lies, everything is saying and stating what we're saying, which is you're not allowed to take our sovereignty away, not this nation, no nation, and more and more nations are stepping up to the point where now he's, you know, begging for, you know,

I guess world leaders to try and stop what they want to call misinformation. But then it begs the question, doesn't it, Jeffrey? If you are trying to control the world, then what difference does it make if this thing doesn't pass? What is so dynamic and incredible about this historic global treaty that you're not willing to just let it go when nations are saying, you're not going to tell us what to do? That's all we're saying. You're not going to tell us what to do. We can't have this. That's not what we're doing.

I mean, he's so confused, but we've clearly got him on the run. Everybody, you know, this is what we do on the highway. We've got to take these moments to really celebrate how effective we've been. And you've been at sharing videos. I know it's not just us. Lots of people are waking up to this. But every time you share those videos, every time you talk to a friend, this is what makes change in the world. And this is one of those moments.

And leaders anywhere droning on about misinformation and conspiracy theories, they don't have the same sting they used to as they did before COVID. These things are actually where people start their investigations. when you see a leader really just ringing their hands about these conspiracy theories. Well, here's the headline here. Remember, he's saying, we're working amid a torrent of fake news and lies. So headline, Global Pandemic Agreement at Risk of Falling Apart, WHA warns, and they're going to be voting on that at the World Health Congress in about four months here in May. So they're obviously coming down to the finish line.

But this speaks to an overall theme. We saw this at the end of Davos, the WEEF World Economic Forum meeting in Davos. We saw this at the end of that. The entire organization put the name of this year's WF meeting as rebuilding trust because all of the trust they lost during the pandemic. This is out of Associated Press. Here's the headline at the end of that week. At Davos, leaders talked big on rebuilding trust.

Can the World Economic Forum make a difference? But it even trickles down to the individual person. Here's a new Rasmussen poll that just came out, though. You're going to love this. Because of the failed COVID response, basically a majority of Americans, think it's more important to research health issues than simply trusting experts. And we can read in this article that says the latest Rasmusum reports national telephone and online survey finds that in terms of their own health care decisions, 35% of American adults

believe it's safe to trust advice from experts, while 58% say it's important to do your own research. All right. Cue the Rocky Music. I mean, we've done it. People are waking up. Stop trusting his lab coach. This isn't a religious.

You're not bowing down to some faith. You actually have to use your mind, do your own research, and start asking the right questions. I love this poll. And as you see people in leaders in healthcare, leaders in government going, why could this be? I don't know why people don't trust this anymore. Let's look at why. Let's go to Scotland where there's an inquiry happening right now into their COVID response. We have Diva Sridhar.

She's the chair of the Global Public Health at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland. and was the advisor to the now disgraced former First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon. And so this is the headline coming out of there. Nicola Sturgeon's advisor says, I was wrong to push for zero COVID. That's not a daily mail. She says this. This was a mistake I made using the words elimination, she told the COVID inquiry, adding that maximum suppression would have been a more appropriate phrase.

Other experts who spoke at the inquiry said that the Scottish government's refusal to accept that COVID was here to stay led to a much slower release of social restrictions than was necessary. So they kept people locked down for longer because of this. And so she goes on to say this. Speaking on Tuesday, Professor Sridar claimed she never believed that zero COVID could be achieved and instead likened it to an aspirational public health campaigns that sought to end malaria and tuberculosis. Wow.

So we have leaders pushing these edicts, these zero health edicts, the vaccinations that don't believe in them. This is where we're at right now. This is why people don't trust them. And that's just one headline. Let's keep going. Just last week out of Canada, a gigantic blemish, another blemish on Trudeau's back. Really, here it is. Judge rebukes Trudeau for not justify use of emergencies act to break convoy. Remember that as a trucker convoy. They froze bank accounts. They used militarized police to beat people. They arrested people. A judge has found that to be not justified. Obviously, the government's going to appeal this. But for right now, that stands and that stands as a big W for the people. people that wanted freedom in that country. Now, let's talk about the people in the legacy media and their trust that's been declining

for years, but it's hit runaway speed. Let's talk about the BBC. They have a COVID inquiry going over there in the UK. Here's headlines coming out of that. BBC misrepresented virus to boost lockdown supports as top scientists. Now, this is Professor Mark Woolhouse. He's actually testifying here. He's a professor of infectious disease and epidemi.

also at the University of Edinburgh, and he was an advisor to the Scottish government during the pandemic. And he says this, this is from the article. Professor Woolhouse said the public was, quote, not given accurate information about COVID in the early stages of the pandemic. Some media sources, notably the BBC television news did repeatedly misrepresent the risk posed by COVID, he said. One example is that they gave the impression that hospitals were being overwhelmed during the first wave. Some, mainly in London, were, but overall hospital bed occupancy, was at an all-time load during that period. A second example, he says, is that they routinely reported deaths of healthy young adults,

thereby giving the impression that these were common. In reality, such deaths were extremely rare. The great majority of COVID deaths occurred in the elderly frail and infirm. He concluded possibly this kind of coverage was an attempt to back up government public health messaging, for example, the hugely misleading claim that were all at risk. Wow. Yeah. Well, I mean, we were telling you we are not all at risk. We've been saying that from the beginning. We celebrated the Great Burrington Declaration as soon as it came out. And we'd even been reporting on many of those scientists and doctors before they even got involved with the Great Barrington Declaration. But basically said all along, we should be taking care of those that are at risk, which is just this very small group of elderly with comorbidities and let everybody else. And I got a lot of heat for this, go out and catch this cold. so that we can get to that herd immunity place. We got shut down on that reporting, but I stand by that.

And now this, you know, esteemed professor and scientists is saying exactly that. They overstated, overplayed the hand just to scare us. That was what the messaging was, was to scare us, talk about zero COVID, something they knew was not possible. They knew we were all going to have to catch this cold eventually, too. Only they didn't lose their YouTube channels when they, you know, avoided saying it. Well, the entire legacy media complex that supported all of these lies is in big trouble. It's often the people within the echo chambers of these legacy media complexes that are the last to know when their ship is sailed. This is Wall Street Journal head CEO Emma Tucker.

Listen to what she had to say. If you go back really not that long ago, as I say, we owned the news. We were the gatekeepers and we very much owned the facts as well. If it said it in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, then that was a fact. Nowadays, people can go to all sorts of different sources for the news, and they're much more questioning about what we're saying. So it's no longer good enough for us just to say, this is what happened, or here's this is the news.

We have to explain, almost like explain our working. So readers expect to understand how we saw stories. They want to know how we go about getting stories. that we have to sort of lift the bonnet, as it were, and in a way that newspapers, you know, aren't used to doing and explain to people what we're doing. We need to be much more transparent about how we go about collecting the news. Oh, my God. I'm getting so excited, Jeffrey, from this show. I can't sit still in my chair. This is amazing. I want to take this moment to everyone that maybe if you're new to the high wire, just to say that this is exactly what we are demanding

from the news. I know that she's shocked that now she actually has to show. her the work, the way that we all had to in school when it came to math. Where did you come up with it? How did you get to this conclusion? They were so used to owning the news, owning the truth, the facts. We own the facts. No one questioned us. We could say whatever we want and everyone believed it. Well, that is why we started, you know, our movement for transparency. We call it the high wire protocol. I've sent this to every major news organization saying, I want you to do your news the same way that we do based on accuracy, integrity, independence, accountability, and transparency. As you know, if you're watching this show, all you have to be is signed up

to our newsletter and we send you all of the documents that back up what we're saying. Right now, you can do it if you're on the highwire.com, just scroll down right there if you're not receiving it and sign in there. This is what makes us different than the Wall Street Journal. This is what they're just learning how to do and they don't know. They're not designed to do this. This is exactly. exactly how we're designed. I hand you all of our evidence. Every Monday, you will have this in your inbox, proof of what we've said, where we got our articles from, why we're saying what we're saying, how we've triangulated our story. Nobody else is doing this for you. And now that they're having to, they're getting pissed off about it. I want you to know it started here. And I want you to know

that it's penetrated at this level that now everyone is starting to demand this from the major news agencies. That's because of your support. So right now, We always talk about all the legal work we do, but look what we're doing to journalism right now. Look what we've done to the WHO treaty. Look what we're doing to the Wall Street Journal that is now going to have to start being honest with you or you're not listening to them. This is a part of what you're a part of when you are in the informed consent action network. You're our network. You're getting the story out.

So please help us continue to fund this incredibly important mission that we're on. All you have to do is go to the top of the page right. now on the high wire or ICAN, tag that, donate to ICAN and become a recurring donor. We make it really easy, just sign up and think about it, whether it's a $5 cup of coffee or maybe a $24 dinner, if you can even get dinner anymore for $24. We're asking that once a month, donate to ICAN so we can continue this very important work. That I can have Jeffrey continue to work with all the scientists. He's working around the world to bring you the story before everyone else.

does stories that all the time when we're looking back on how we reported on it, we are one of the only ones that can say in almost every situation that had to do with the pandemic, we got it exactly right. You didn't get that anywhere else. And now we're forced the Wall Street Journal to change their ways. You're making that happen. Your dollars, your $5, your $10 makes a difference. We're going to make it easy. You can text 72022. Type in the word donate, and we will just send you a little link right there. Honestly, if all of you just gave a $1, you can't imagine how many more lawsuits we could bring. You can't imagine how much faster we could go to trying to free the five, which is to bring back the religious exemption to vaccination in the five holdout states. This is all a part of our

plan, but we're limited. We're only limited by your support. The more you give, the more we can do. It's just that easy. I hope you'll join the mission.