The Highwire with Del Bigtree - THE CHEMICAL TRAIL

Episode Date: February 25, 2023

Today we are following The Chemical Trail: Fluoride Lawsuit Exposes Apparent Government Official Hiding Data; Big Win in Maryland; Gates-Funded Study Shows Two Years Later, Natural Immunity Still Better Than Vaccine. Why?; Nord Stream 2 Pipeline Attacked By The U.S.?; Tackling the Controversial Issue of Chemtrails; ICAN wins in CA Lawsuit Prohibiting Any Vaccine Mandates, Setting PrecedentGuests: Derrick Broze, Dane Wigington#FluorideLawsuit #NaturalImmunity #ICANLegal #AaronSiri Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

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

wherever you are out there in the world, it's time for us all to step out onto the high wire. I'll be honest with you. There's some times when I sit down at this desk where the name of this show really has more vivid detail and practicality than others. This is one of those days where this show is truly going to be dancing on a high wire. To begin with, there's so many elements. If I showed you how many slides that we are going to try and get through in videos that are coming on the topics that we're covering, is daunting. We don't have a script. We sort of wing it. We have an idea where we're going. So get ready. I'm trying to prepare myself too. At the heart of all this, though, is a concept that we hear all the time, a pejorative, if you will, that is raised against anyone that seems to, you know, to challenge the establishment. And that is this term. Conspiracy theory. This is Webster's definition, a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as a result of a secret plot by, usually powerful conspirators. Also a theory asserting that a secret of great

importance is being kept from the public. I really think I love the best definition I've ever heard was when I brought it up to Catherine Austin Fitz talking about you know when people say it's a conspiracy theory in her case is about banking she said I'll of course it's a conspiracy conspiracy in fact if you're not in a conspiracy you better get in one it is what makes the world turn and when you When you think about that, I mean, was it a conspiracy? Did Democrats sit and get together and think we were going to hire, you know, thousands of IRS

agents to go after and get more funding for money we can spend? Is that a conspiracy it is? Republicans weren't in it. There's a group that aren't in on it. They're powerful people. Are we in wars because of conspiracies? We are. You know, and by the way, what industry is in building some new technology or pharmaceutical

company bringing in lobbies to conspire to create products that then, we're going to we are either, you know, asked to use or forced to use if we look at the pandemic. So I'm with Catherine on this. Everything is conspiracy. It's a small group of people that have a larger idea, whether it's a good idea or a bad idea. But when we look into the topics we're going to cover today, they sit right smack on the bull's eye of what would be determined as conspiracy theories. And I mean the bad language version of that. To start off with is the concept of fluoridated water.

Now, there's an article that just came out that really sort of made me look at this, and this is in the last American vagabond. This is just recently February 20th. Florida Loss, Fluoride lawsuits, censored, reviewed on fluoride's toxicity will soon be made public. One of the opening paragraphs says this. Attorneys with the Fluoride Action Network and the U.S. government have agreed to the release of a censored report, censored, secret, on the toxicity of fluoride, the latest development in the ongoing fluoride lawsuit. After numerous delays and intervention by Assistant Health Secretary

Rachel Levine, the U.S. National Toxicology Program's Review of Fluoride's toxicity will soon be released to the public. Sounds familiar in all the work we've done with our vaccine issue. The move is the latest development in the nearly decade-long legal battle between the fluoride action network, food and water watch, organic consumers association. These are all groups that I really support personally and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. So obviously what's bizarre right off at the beginning is, I mean, how many of us would, you know, support the organic consumers group? I mean, these are people, I'm into organic food. It's something we talk about all the time on this show, and they're fighting our own environmental protection

agency. Isn't that weird? I mean, right there, you just get the sense that something's off, especially having grown up, I've said it so many times on this show. I'm from Boulder, Colorado, I still consider myself in environmentalists in the way that I see it. I'm not into carbon credit scores and enslavement, but I want clean air, water, food, you know, all those things for my children. I love for my kids to be able to fish in any river in the United States of America and be able to eat it. I'd love for them to be able to fish in the ocean and be able to eat it.

If they can't, I have a problem with that. So that's where I'm at. So why is it that these groups that would normally, it seem like the environmental protection agency was the one fighting for the environment? Why in this case are they fighting citizens that believe in organic food? That should set something off right there for you. Okay? Well, we've been covering this for several years.

So to bring you up to speed to what this article is really about, let's just take a look at how we've been covering the fluoridated water issue from the beginning. Take a look at this. A couple of weeks ago, we talked to you about a brand new study. Talking about brains, it was about fluoride in water and how it was affecting the brains of babies while mothers were pregnant. On the fetus, association between maternal fluoride exposure during pregnancy and IQ scores in offspring in Canada.

Beyond the study, the publishers of JAMA got involved in a discussion to talk about what it was like to actually decide to print this study. The paper is about fluoride and maternal fluoride exposure during pregnancy and its effects upon IQ scores of children at age is three and four. which in itself is like a shocking title because I had never known that there's even any concern that maternal fluorite use might affect children's IQ.

Right. In fact, for me, before they were anti-vaxxers, there were sort of anti-fluoriteers. And like the traditional teaching, when I was going through residency and my early professional career, was that there was fluoride is completely safe. All these people that are trying to take it out of the water are nuts. It's the best thing that's ever happened for children's dental health. then we just need to push back and get it into every water system. We didn't talk about the biological plausibility, which there have been other observational studies that have shown this,

and there have been animal models as well, that have shown this idea that fluoride could be a neurotoxin, which, again, was totally news to me. In fact, I thought it was junk science, that anyone would ever say something. Yeah, you'd be like the anti-vaxxers are saying, fluoride is bad for your brain, so let's not do it. You know, the same kind of a thing.

And one of the things we struggled with as an editorial staff was, as you alluded to, We certainly would not want to be the publishers of the Wakefield study and be the article that pulled fluoride out of water and led to decreased dentition. But, you know, the eponym of GM of pediatrics is the science of child and adolescent health. And science is an iterative process. It's not perfect. We had a very tendentious discussion amongst the editors because there was concern about what the public health impact would be. But I'm certain if we didn't take the paper, somebody else will have.

And I didn't want to shy away from a decision to publish it just because of the potential. But I did say my editor's note that science is iterative, and this is not the first nor the last paper to look at the potential ill effects of fluoride. So if mothers now come into their doctor's offices and ask the pediatrician what to do, what are you going to say? I think I would advise them to drink bottled water or filtered water because it's not a particularly odious thing to do and potentially does reduce the risk. They're basically having this epiphany. We get to go through, we get to walk through with them because they had an open discussion about what they didn't know and what they were taught.

And oh my gosh, this study really upends what their beliefs were. So it's a teachable moment for the viewers. And I don't think this is the last time that science is really going to look in on itself and speak like this. Grassroots organizations took the Environmental Protection Agency to court. So basically the background is citizens have the right to petition the EPA under what,

It's called the Toxic Substances Control Act. Organization called Fluoride Action Network and others did that in 2016, trying to get them to take fluoridation out of water, fluoride chemicals out of water, which are pesticides. And what happened was the EPA denied it. So this was the first time that a denied petition went to court. It was a fascinating trial. So the plaintiffs in the case had four experts that had consulted and worked with the EPA setting standards

in the past. So one of them, his name was Philip Grandeen. And in his expert declaration, he submitted to the court, he says, quote, the evidence of fluoride neurotoxicity in the general population is fairly recent and unlikely to represent the full toxicological perspective, including adverse events that may occur at longer delays. As has been seen on numerous occasions, the evidence available today may well underestimate the true extent of fluoride toxicity, with a reasonable degree of scientific certainty. I therefore consider the elevated levels of florid exposure in the U.S. population a serious public health concern. Wow. Well, that was back reports from 2019, 2020. It was really fascinating. Isn't it listening to that JAMA report and the editors

talking about it saying things like there was anti-floriders before there was anti-vaxxers and discussing that they didn't want to be like Andy Wakefield putting out a paper that then would have to be retracted. obviously around, I'd be curious to know where they're at after this whole COVID experience. But all that put aside, when you see an article that came out in JAMA showing clearly this toxicity, especially in pregnant women, and then you ask yourself, what is it we're still having to sue for? Well, this has been in court the whole time. And to get to the bottom of that, my honor and pleasure to be joined by the journalist that has been

following this for the last American vagabond. Derek Bros. Thanks for coming in. Thanks for having me. we spoke to you recently, you also are the head of the Greater Reset or one of the founders of the Greater Reset, which is an event I was at in Mexico. But we were talking about this issue. Now, that JAMA report comes out, 2019, it's pretty damning, right?

And so you would think that this would be enough evidence to at least put a hold or start moving in a direction. But what happened inside of the court? Because the court case starts in 2016, right? So when JAMA comes out, obviously that was brought in the courtroom. What happened with that? Yeah, so as Jeffrey was pointing out, the initial case started in 2016 through this petition.

The EPA denies the petition, bunch of back and forth in the court for about four years, and in that time, the JAMA study did come out. So summer of 2020, the trial actually began in a federal trial, federal court for the first time. The government agents, EPA, and Michael Connett representing fluoride action network and others were able to present their evidence.

The government brought in their scientists, claimed it's safe, nothing wrong. Michael Conant brought in the scientists from the JAMA study, the scientist from another Spain study, from a Canadian study, a Mexican study. We had a lot of expert witnesses. And that was really, you know, powerful in itself, but ultimately at the end of the summer of 2020, Judge Edward Chen decided to put it on hold, what's called abeyance, until another study came out, which is the study from the National Toxicology Program.

It's a branch of the U.S. government. And they tend to do these big reviews, what are called monographs. And we were waiting. The government said, hey, judge, let's not. make a decision yet we've got this NTP study coming out maybe next year is what they were saying so 2021 so so so the EPA was saying let's wait let's wait for this study because obviously fluoride action network things we got all you should need to see here we've got multiple countries huge studies but the judge is like no let's let the government do what

they do the judge played it safe and he said okay we'll wait and you know that was late 2020 so here we are to 2023 there wasn't any movement until at least besides legal filings until October of this past year 2020 to and that's when the attorneys with Florida Action Network were saying, hey, it's been two, almost three years now asking the judge, can we just restart the trial, present new evidence, and get a ruling because this could last forever. The EPA continues to argue, let's wait, let's wait. Let's wait for this toxicology report. And that report, which the court records have already shown, this national toxicology program study, it's already been reviewed five different times

by different committees, including outside experts. It's the first study to ever have that process. so it's already in the words of Michael Connett, an unusually long process. Yeah. And the government's asking for more and more time. And thankfully, the judge, he's not giving them full amount of time. The most recent thing, he delayed it until April is going to be the next hearing. Okay. And so why that's been going on, we've been getting court filings, and that's when some big information has come out.

Okay, so there's been some FOIA requests, which is a big thing of what we do here on the informed consent action network, which is our nonprofit that makes the high wire possible. so I'm really aware of, you know, getting FOIA requests, trying to get internal emails for people that don't understand that. Essentially, we are, the government works for us, right? They are our employees. So we're able to ask for information. So in this case, what's the damning evidence? So Michael Connett was specifically trying to get any internal communications between the National Toxicology Program, the CDC, the National Institute of Health, pretty much anything.

I think they probably filed, said, giving us the records that contain discussions on fluoride, et cetera. And I'm sure there was a lot of records, but there was at least a couple of key emails in there. And those emails, which they show two things. They show that the National Toxicology Program scientists in their own words say that the study was ready. It was done, completed, ready for release in May 2022. Really? Here we are February, 2003, and it still hasn't been made. So the scientists in charge of doing that study for the government said, we're ready to go.

We don't know. So they're not the ones holding it up. You write a paragraph in your article. Let's just read this, and then I'll let you sort of comment on it. The discussion around the comments related to the NTPs, that's the, how, what was that? National toxicology program. National toxicology programs, unreleased monographs stem from revelations contained within internal CDC emails, which were obtained via Freedom of Information Act request by Connett. The emails indicate the NTP report was not made public due to interference from Dr. Rachel Levine.

That's right. Assistant Health Secretary Rachel Levine and National Institute of Health Director Lawrence A. Tabach. One email from the CDC dated June 3rd, 2022, specifically stated the assistant health secretary Levine has put the report on hold until further notice. I mean, that's outrageous. You're in the middle of a case. Everyone's waiting for it. And then your own government, again, is blocking something. Now, I'm going to just assume if it's being blocked, this report is not going to be in the favor of the EPA and the decision to put the stuff in our water. I would say based on the evidence that's already been presented in the previous 2020 hearings from the experts, numerous experts involved in that JAMA study and others, which show IQ affecting prenatal and postnatal fluoride because like you mentioned earlier, people are drinking it, but the biggest exposure we have, the showers.

If you don't got a shower filter, your skin's the biggest organ you got, it's absorbed that fluoride through your skin when you make your coffee. So millions of people are being exposed, and that's why the Floyd Action Network's trying to get the judge to not delay it. the government wants to keep delaying it. But this shows that while we've been sitting around waiting for some progress on it, behind the scenes, the CDC officials, and there were more emails where they were talking to themselves saying, hey, this can't come out. We're pretty sure this is not going to come out. May 2022 passes, of course, this is all going behind the scenes.

We learned about this till recently. But the public has no idea that more than likely this NTP study says conclusively, fluoride is a toxin that can lead to IQ problems. We just had a new study released a week ago from NYU saying thyroid problems, and they're concerned about how that can affect childhood disorders. I mean, there's so much here that should be getting to the public. And now we know, at least based on these emails, that these two officials are named in being the ones to prevent it from coming public. Are they making them? What is the EPA's argument, do they argue why it needs to be there?

What I've never understood about this issue is, I mean, is this really about cavities that you would be blocking studies, clearly showing toxicity? because oh my god we can't have cavities and we're just saying off stage someone's like but you know Someone said one of our producers my mom said that you know cavities stopped after fluoride's like really every kid I know gets cavities No they I haven't seen it I haven't seen an issue stopped one of the side effects of what's called fluorosis which is a high exposure is yellowing of the teeth So it actually does the exact opposite and there's more there's more and more studies coming out that showing that claim we've been hearing since the 1940s when this started that it's good for your teeth and cavities isn't even inaccurate that there's and the other thing is like well drinking this full of fluoride it's gonna get everywhere not just right so well and that's the idea right hardens the teeth it sort of calcifies the teeth what is it doing do I want

to be calcified throughout my whole body do I want you know to be hardening it affects pineal gland kidney liver thyroid you know obviously IQ now we're learning bone structure there's there's been as we've seen there's observational studies now we got random controlled trials there's more than enough evidence the only reason I can think that the government would not want to let this information out is I believe that if this case does go forward and it's found to be toxic because that's what the TSC is about. We can petition as people say, hey, I think this substance is toxic, can you regulate

it, can you ban it? If they conclude in this court that fluoride is a toxin, then the EPA would have to ban it or regulate or just get rid of it. And then you've got to think, well, who's been recommending Florida for the last seven years? The ADA, the EPA, the CDC, the NIH, every government agency might open themselves up for class action laws. Right. Because there's people around the country could say, well, my kid, maybe he's got a low IQ because I've been drinking fluoride every day and showering it.

And I think that's the big worry is they are terrified that there could be massive lawsuits after this. You know, the conspiracy theorists out there are probably have a lot of reasons why the government's actually doing this. One of the things I like about your reporting is you're a lot like me. You sort of stick to the facts. When you look at this story, is it? Is it just as unreasonable as the COVID vaccine would just watch rushed? What is it they, why do they need this in our water? Do you mean?

Yeah, I mean, like you said, there's theories out there, things like affecting the pineal gland, you know, deadening people's, dumbing people down, that kind of thing. I can't prove that that's the case. I also think I would say this too, because I'm sure someone's going to comment it. There are claims out there about the communists and the Nazis using it. I've followed those threads. There's nothing that shows hard evidence. Okay. Maybe it used to be there and it's been erased from history.

But I don't think those arguments really help us. I would say that in the best case scenario, maybe in the beginning, someone thought this was good. But really, I would recommend everybody check out a book called The Fluide Deception. It is one of the most well-researched books, and it's been around for 20-plus years now, showing that in the 1940s there was aluminum phosphate mining industry. The biggest company these days called Mosaic Co. They're based out of Florida. These companies are mining aluminum, and byproducts of that are essentially waste, you know, toxins.

and they colluded with the American Dental Association to promote it as something that would be beneficial for you. And the craziest thing about this is these companies that are mining aluminum, they typically would have to spend their own money to dispose of this waste properly. There's government regulations about how you can store things and all that. Instead, they've sold the public on it being good for you, and they go to places like Houston where I'm from in the city of Houston contracts for $4 million to put this toxic substance in the water.

So instead of them having to pay to take care of it, they get paid to put it in the water. That's amazing. Okay, so now we have got these foias that are coming in. Obviously, those were taken for the judge, I assume. Yeah, the judge has seen them. You know, I would say this about Judge Edward Chin. He seems to be based on all the court hearings I've been watching and following along with everyone.

He does seem to be kind of neutral as much as you could see. Like, you know, for me, I was like, oh, my God, this is a bomb show. As soon as the judge sees this, the case is over. Instead, when Michael Connett brought it up, the judge said something like, I know, I know you have a theory on the narrative. He was kind of resistant to going there, but at the same time, he's also pushing back against the EPA wanting to delay this forever. So he is now the point we're at now is the records have been brought in, the judges seen them, and we're moving towards a second trial, basically is where it's at now. The last thing he did was he set a hearing for April 10th, and that was supposed to be, we'll set a date then, and in between then, we now have a new update, which is that the two parties met the government, EPA attorney, and the attorneys for the floor.

Wide Action Network, they met last week, and they agreed to release the NTP study. So that's coming. It is going to come. They said they will publish it publicly on their website by March 10th or March 15th or sooner. So within the next couple weeks, we should have a public version. Not only that, more importantly, what Michael Connett and the plaintiffs were arguing for was the interagency comments. Like, we want to see, well, what are these people telling you why it shouldn't come out?

What is their reasoning? Yeah. So we're going to get interagency comments. Really? We're going to get the NTP study. And this should reveal a lot. My guess is that they are concerned that, you know, now these emails are coming out, that it's making certain people look bad. In fact, we have another government agent named Dr. Richard Wojichek, who is head of the NTP and several other organizations.

He took the fall. He came out after that, after those emails came out and claimed it was his, that he's the one who made the decision. He might just be covering for his bosses. Wow. But he, you know, he covered the bomb. He took the fall and said, I'm the one who did this. I take forward. He published a declaration with the court.

But whoever did it, the point is somebody has been blocking the release of this. for almost the year. Now it was supposed to come out in May 22. The scientists say it's ready. Right. That's what's so fascinating. And probably why the writing was on the wall for the EPA, you know, Levine, all these players, which is the NTP, the ones, the scientists that did this study, now the government's saying,

well, we want to have more review. And they're like, we don't need any more review. We've done all the review. We stand by what this now says. We work for the government too. And it seems like they were not going to let this be hidden. Like we've done this work. I feel like at a certain point, you know, the train's already left the station.

There seems to be some principled scientists in the NTP, I would say. And a couple of them are named in those emails too. So my plan had been, and maybe this will happen eventually, is to reach out to them. Maybe they don't want to speak publicly yet. But I was kind of thinking, well, if they don't put it out, then clearly these scientists want it out. Maybe one of them would speak off the record or on background or something. So I do think there's going to be more to come from this. And I'm hoping with the release of this NTP study,

not only will average people, everybody listening at home, have more evidence to use to talk to your family and friends about why we should be avoiding fluoride and why it shouldn't be in the water, but then that's going to hopefully leave the judge to make a right decision. And the next move is more than likely April 10th at the next hearing, he'll review the latest updates and then set a trial date for the summer. And at that point, Fluide Action Network would come back, present more evidence based on what they presented before.

I'm sure the government would argue their way. And I mean, I would expect this is probably going to go into 2024 these court things. It's already been since 2016 when it first started. But thankfully, Florida Action Network and Michael Conner, he's been amazing work. I mean, they've been really trying to make it clear, though, to the judge, the reason they're upset and the reason they're trying not to delay this is because while the delays are happening and the judge is figuring things out, millions of kids, families and people are drinking fluoride, showering in fluoride, and being told, only crazy people think there's something wrong with this.

Right. So that's the disturbing part to me. Yeah, it really is. All right. So if we want to follow, I know you're going to keep writing about this. So where do we follow the work that you're doing? So I published all my articles at The Last American Vagabond, Ryan Christian. He's a great investigative journalist as well.

So I've been, people can go there. There's a tab for the fluoride trial. You can see everything I've written since 2020. I've got a dozen articles or so. If you want to get into the nitty-gritty about the detail, there's a lot of bombshells that, thankfully, again, I appreciate you giving more light on this Dell because, unfortunately, I think the independent media hasn't been following this as much as maybe they should. To me, this is like, hey, Florida emails, this is some headline news, or it should be in a different world.

We got proof of government officials covering up a study that is more than likely going to conclude that this substance in our water is toxic. So I want to invite anybody else out there independent media to pick it up as well, but I'll continue writing about it at the Last American Vagabond, and then I do video reports on theconsciousresistance.com as well. Amazing. As I was sitting going through this again and reading your article, then watching our past, you know, reporting on it. I often say to audiences that this vaccine issue is like no other issue. I mean, we can get in the corruption around banking in, you know, the military industrial

complex, all those things. But in the end, it doesn't include everybody in it, right? We're going to really clean this, you know, drain the swamp, if you will, or try to fix the government. Then everyone has to agree it needs to be fixed. And I always felt like the vaccine issue is that one thing that everyone was lied to about until I'm sitting here and I was like, you know, this fluoride conversation is exactly what you said, has all the same teeth in it. It has government collusion with industry, which is our big problem with these regulatory agencies.

Frankly, it owns the televisions. The news is never reporting on this. It's not coming out. And it's something that we are all being poisoned. If we find out, you know, all the long, you've been holding back all the studies and data that could have protected us, that's a gnashing of teeth moment, as I say, in an armaged. get in. I will say too, just one other thing on that is that I have, I guess, a personal stake in this. We all do. But for me, when I started to question the world about 13, 14 years ago and started getting to journalism, fluoride was one of the first things I found and read that book,

Fluide deception. And it was, I had that kind of revelatory moment like, why is nobody seeing this? And when I talk to people about it, they say things like, you sound like Dr. Strange lover, something that they've already heard. You sound like a crazy person. Of course, fluoride's okay. They would never put it in there, all those same questions with vaccines and everything else. But it is one of these topics that once you dive in and you look, there are mountains, mountains and mountains of studies proving that this is not something we should be exposing ourselves, our kids to. And I really hope that we're moving with this case into an era where people can be honest

and really talk about the facts without being dismissed as some kind of crazy. Yeah, we've got to stop all the censorship. Speaking of that, you also, you do your own podcast. You're doing lots of great reports, so where do we check that out? My main website for my documentaries, my podcast is always going to be at the Conscious Resistance.com. You know, I try to do what you do here as well. I bring in a little bit of spiritual element, try to explore some of that. But for the most part, it's my investigative journalism.

As I said, I write for The Last American Vagabond, and I tend to do the video reports at the Conscious Resistance and go a little deeper and break it down for people and hopefully give some solutions and some hope as well. It's kind of what I've got. Awesome. And you got a book. Let's check out of this book. I published this actually in 2020, 2020, January 30. out of the technocratic state. Yeah, how to opt out. So I was writing this in 2019.

I'm an investigative journalist. I've been following digital technology since 2012. I was based on, based in Houston. I found out the Houston Police Department had me under surveillance and some activists I work with. That began my, well, I need to learn about surveillance equipment. I didn't know anything about that. I learned about stingray cell phone surveillance tools.

I learned about internet, just all that whole thing. I've been diving and focusing on digital surveillance for years for over a decade now. And in 2018, 2019, there were plenty of people, no one was paying attention, but, you know, credentialed people warning about the dangers of rising AI, facial recognition, social credit scores in China, India, digital identities, all these things pre-COVID. You know, now everybody's paying attention. But I was writing about that then. And I started to think, how are we going to stay free in this world we're moving into what I call this technocratic state, you know, which is coming from the philosophy of technocracy? It's this idea that we've seen through COVID. Trust the experts.

Right. The technologists, the experts, they know what's possible. best, let them micromanage society. You don't, you know, don't worry about anything. And I wanted to write a book that was, for one, solutions focus. So there's some history in there about the problems, but for the most part, it's what can we do? How am I going to stay free for my family and my community if I need a vaccine passport to get in the grocery store or if they're going to check my carbon credits or whatever it might get to now that we're talking about climate lockdowns and things like that? So I published the book January 31st, 2020, which is either

a great or a horrible time to publish the book. In this case, it kind of worked in my face. because I don't like to say like I predicted things. I just was anticipating the moment. If you were reading the tea leaves, it was there. That's it. A lot of people was like, it's like you were psychic on the high wire. No, we just knew how. And when I published that, though,

it has become my most popular book over the last two and a half years because it's been very relevant to everything we dealt with COVID. And I'm very grateful for that. I've been able to tour the U.S. and Mexico spreading this book and people adopting the ideas and using them. And I decided this past year, 2022, to write an update. Well, because not only did I write it right before COVID, when I wrote this, we hadn't heard the word Great Reset. Right.

We didn't, most people didn't know about technocracy or digital IDs, and we hadn't seen vaccine passports and travel restrictions and all that stuff. Right. In my view, we've seen these people play their hand now. Yeah, we have. They're going to use lockdowns. They're going to try to coerce you, fire you from your job, restrict travel. And so I wanted to take all the lessons that I personally learned as well as lessons that I've kind of crowdsourced from our community, the Freedom Cell Network, which people can find at freedomcells. It's just a website that helped people meet people locally.

We talked about it before. And that network became, we went from 2,000 people before COVID to now 37,000 people on the website who use it to find each other locally. And then they meet in the real world. They decide, hey, I want to focus on food or homeschooling or whatever their interests are. We just kind of help create the container. That exploded because of COVID. It's been our best friend, I think, in that way.

People got motivated. And many people told me, like, what they had to do. Like, hey, I picked up my whole family, sold our house in Canada, drove all the way to Mexico or Texas because we thought it was going to be better. Yeah, at the greater resets, so many people. Expatts from Canada, America, living in Mexico. It's just at Nacapoko, very similar thing. There's people making real moves, and I wanted to take, like, the knowledge I gained from the community,

things they shared, tips and ideas as well as my own, and update it. So this latest version, it was just published about a month ago. It has five new chapters for post-COVID. I kept the book in its original form and just added a new section. So people can read it as it was originally written and see, like, hey, we were kind of, ahead of the game a little, but more importantly, get to the solutions and start thinking practically. And it's not necessarily to say, you need to live my lifestyle, it's just to say, here's some

ideas I have, use what works for you, adapt. You know, I think that's the biggest thing is being adaptable, being flexible, because the world we're moving into is going to be very different in the coming years. And each of us as individuals and as families are going to have to ask, what am I willing to do? What am I not willing to do, right? I mean, there's big questions, like if all of our money is in the bank, what do we do when they turn that into CBDCs or do I want to wait till then or what happens if again like my

local businesses want to start requiring digital identities we that's all coming into fruition now so there's a lot of questions that I think we need to be asking and ultimately that's what the book is about asking people to reconsider and reflect on our relationship with technology just like you I mean I love technology I use it every day for work but obviously there are some downsides and there are things that we are giving up and I feel like the era we're moving into is really going to be a battle of convenience or entertainment, et cetera, versus our principles. Because it's not going to be easy to stay with your principles and to stay free. It's not going to always be convenient.

And it might not always be entertaining. But the world they're selling us of smart cities, you owe nothing to be happy. They'll tell you it's convenient, good for the planet, et cetera. But we all know that there's something more to that. So I'm ultimately just trying to ask people to let's not wait till 2030. Let's not wait till things are too late, right? And the book can be. And we just saw how quickly things can happen now.

Things can change rapidly. And again, we've seen the car. they have to play, why wait till, oh, no, it's happening again, now I'll run back to Mexico. Why not start thinking about what am I going to do? I want to make sure I'm ahead of the game instead of just trying to play catch-up, which is what I think a lot of people felt like in 2020. And I want to mention the book is downloadable for free. People can order it wherever, all the usual places, but they can download it for free

at theconsciousresistance.com slash how to pick it up, use it, adopt it. It's in Spanish and French. I just signed a deal for Japanese and Koreans, so it's going worldwide, and we're hoping to just inspire people to have these important conversations and think about what can we do because again if we don't do anything whenever those digital IDs and CBDCs and all that stuff pop up we shouldn't act surprised and we see the plan they're telling us the plan maybe we should be proactive as it's sort of the approach i want to do with that and you know and final thing i'll say on that to the point that anybody who knows me and knows my work i'm a journalist i'm an activist i'm not a politician but i feel strongly enough about this that i actually this morning filed a campaign

to run for mayor of Houston to talk about these things because I feel like we're in such a crucial time. You know I can speak eloquently and intelligently enough. You put me on a table next to politicians. People see the difference between an authentic person and somebody else. So I'm trying to take whatever platform I can. So if it's running for office or writing books or doing journalism, to me, it's just about trying to get people thinking, paying attention, and more importantly, being proactive.

So I would love for anybody who is in Houston area who wants to connect, meet me, like, let's work together people can reach out through the conscious resistance.com or derrickbrose.com and yeah i mean i'm just excited to see where it goes love it brother man you're in action which is what it's all about it's why you know i've really dug the times we've gotten to hang out i love the work you're doing i really do like your reporting you've you know so far i haven't seen you overreach on a conversation which is okay those people are out there plant red flags and everything you see but you know i really dig that you know we should really be able to prove our points especially because there's such sensitive times we get it wrong

They tear us apart. They lie to us all the time. They're getting away with it. It's just the way the car. We've got to hold ourselves to a certain level, even if they won't. Absolutely. All right. It's good having you out there. Thanks for joining us today. And keep us posted. Any changes in this fluoride story or anything else you want to talk about? You're always welcome here. Thank you, brother. All right, the book, How to Opt Out of the Technocratic State. Anywhere you can find a book, free download at the websites that we've been discussing here. You know, look it. It takes a lot of work to write a book. You've seen how clearly Derek's thinking about these things. make this a part of your information that you are making decisions from.

Look, I'm going to say it, said it so many times. Here in the High Wire, we are not trying to tell you what to think. We're trying to show you how to think. Where you find your information. How red flags should be set off for you when you hear certain buzzwords. That's what this is all about. And so it's about educating ourselves so that we're as prepared as we can be for all of the, you know, I would guess, you know, corruption and censorship that lies in our future.

All right, for more on that, it's time for The Jackson Report. All right, Jeffrey, you heard Derek say that he's, I think he's going to try and get into politics. So you'll let me know, right? You'll let me know if you decide to, like, run for senator, governor or something like that. Never. Sorry, never. But hats off to him because we need people in there. We need people, more people for school boards, for politicians.

I'm not built for that. I'm built for some information here. And that's all I'm built for. And we have a big story. This is a story that's been going on for a couple of. couple weeks and it's not leaving the headlines it's one of the biggest stories it has geopolitical implications it has implications for our food source climate change energy it touches all the subjects dealt and we're going to we're going to break it down yet and it's still ongoing so we're talking about

the north stream two pipeline and this if we look at a map this is a pipeline that connects russia to germany north stream one north stream two and this is the natural gas and hydrogen pipeline that supplies a lot, or I should say supplied a lot of the hydrogen and energy to the European Union, to Europe states, member states. Well, on September 27th, 2022, the world was greeted to this, and this was the explosion of the pipeline. And we can see here from surveillance, military surveillance video, I believe that was from Denmark. That was the explosion there. And the media jumped all over this. All of the sudden, New York Times was reporting this, sabotage pipelines and a mystery Who did it? Was it Russia? So they're already pointing fingers at Russia. A lot of people were at that time. But then about a month or so later, Sweden came out with this evidence and it was off to the races. Sweden finds explosive traces at Nord Stream blast sites confirms sabotage. So this story's been going back and forth. Who did it? Why did they do it? A lot of people say it was an open secret who did it. Out of nowhere, a veteran Pulitzer Prize winning American journalist Seymour Hirsch comes out with his first

Substack article and it's a doozy del. This is what it is. Title, how America took out the North Stream Pipeline. Hirsch has several sources. I believe he mentioned 20 to 30 sources here on this article. This is a, this is obviously a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist. He does not really report things that he does not have a lot of sources on. He doesn't have facts on. And this article is written like a short story. It's very long. So let's just let's just go through some of the sequencing here. We're painting a story. It says this. And he hits, right in a third paragraph. Last June, the Navy divers operating under the cover of a widely publicized midsummer NATO exercise known as Baltrop 22 planted the remotely triggered

explosives that three months later destroyed three of the four Nord Stream pipelines, according to a source with direct knowledge of the operational planning. He goes on to say this. The direct route, which bypassed any need to transit Ukraine, had been a boon for the German economy, which enjoyed an abundance of cheap rushing natural gas, enough to run its factories, heat its homes while enabling German distributors to sell excess gas at a profit throughout Western Europe. Action that could be traced to the administration would violate U.S. promises to minimize direct conflict with Russia. Secrecy was essential. So let's pause right there for a second. Huge implications there from what's being alleged from his sources. Nord Stream is a holding company

and it's based in Switzerland. So that's the website right there. Russia's gas prom control 51% of the company. And this is what this is what hers begins to write. Just to give you an idea now, now we start to get into the geopolitical and the energy piece. Hearst writes gas problem controlled 51% of the company with four European energy firms, one in France, one in the Netherlands, and two in Germany, sharing the remaining 49% of the stock and having the right to control downstream sales of the inexpensive natural gas to local distributors in Germany in Western Europe. So it wasn't just whoever did this, you know, it wasn't just an attack on Russia. It was attack on those other European countries as well, especially Germany.

And what's interesting here is Hirsch alleges through his sources that the operation was based out of Norway with the help from the Norwegian Navy and its secret service. So with that being said, with that data point from Hirsch, we now see a current headline that says this. Remember, Germany doesn't have, it doesn't have the gas anymore. Norway, now Germany's largest gas supplier, future supplies from Arctic to support exports. So now Germany is relying on Norway for these gas exports. And so as Hershey is telling this story, as it goes in his writing, there was a NATO exercise during that time in June, a June of last year in the Baltic Sea. And this was the headline here for me wants to look at that. 16 NATO allies and partners take part in the exercise, Baltrops 22.

and they this is where this is the cover they used according to hers to um put those divers down there plant those remote explosives and then three months later detonate them in september so that's what's happening and that is the story as we see it and since that story has been written a lot of people are trying obviously as they always do as they've done with us they attack hersh they attack his character they try to point people away from the information away from the story but that's we're looking now at so let's take Take her a shot of the picture for a second. Do we have any evidence that this may have happened? Well, we have now Norway stepping in to provide gas to Germany when Hirsch was saying that.

But even in January, this was right before, it's about a month before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, January of last year, we have Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, Victoria Newland. And she was at a press conference and she had this to say. Listen to this. I want to be clear with you today. If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or way or another Nord Stream 2 will not move forward. John. How can you say that for sure? Where does your competence come from on that?

As I said, we've had extensive consultations at every level with our German allies. I'm not going to get into the specifics here today, but we will work with Germany to ensure that the pipeline does not move forward. Wow. Now that's a shocking statement and rightfully, you know, finally we're seeing journalists, rightfully that journalist, you could see him, you could hear him. He said, I'm sorry, how are you going to do that? And obviously no information was given there. But then just a short month later, and this is about a little over two weeks. It's not a statement that we've worked

with Germany. There you're going to turn the pipeline off and not take anything from Russia. It will not move forward. I mean, that's just a very, very odd statement. You have something that can be controlled on both ends. That is not what is being stated here. Because seems easily German could say, yeah, we're not going to touch the pipeline. Screw Russia. We're with you on this. That's not what's being said. Right. And this was after sanctions. So, you know, she wouldn't have said, we're going to try more sanctions. Obviously, what you said, we could have said Germany will turn it off. Now, President Biden spoke and said the same thing, or a similar situation. Just about a month later. Listen to what he had to say. If Russia invades, that means tanks or troops

crossing the border of Ukraine again, then there will be no longer a North Stream 2. We will bring it into it. What do, how will you, how will you do that exactly since the project and control of the project is within Germany's control? We will, I promise you we'll be able to do it. Doesn't seem like much of a mystery there, does it? Right. There will no longer be a pipeline. We'll bring an end to it.

We will bring an end to it. America. Germany is not a picture at this point. And so it's interesting because circling back to Seymour Hersch's article, according to his sources, this was supposed to be a covert operation. And when Biden blew it, according to Hersch, as he's writing it, everybody inside this operation was kind of flabbergasted and angry and thinking, well, it's not covert anymore.

We can't go forward with it. And of course, they did go forward with it. And right after that conversation with Joe Biden there, Russia did invade Ukraine seven months later. The pipeline was blown up. But now here's a couple other data points, just to wrap this up and give people a bigger picture of what we're looking at here.

So let's talk about the climate risk. We're right in the middle of the most heightened climate change conversation that's ever been taking place in the world. And we see this gas pipeline blow up spewing gas. And here with one of the headlines, shortly after North Stream gas leaks may be biggest ever with warning of large climate risk. It says colossal amount of leaked methane twice initial estimates is equivalent to a third of Denmark's annual CO2 emissions or 1.3 million cars. That's 1.3 million cars driven for a year. Nothing from Greta, nothing from Al Gore, nothing from John Kerry, nothing from anybody.

So not saying, you know, if this was America or whatever happened. I mean, if it is our policy from a president that's screaming global warming and bringing down the use of fossil fuels and this, and then you blow something up that's releasing it, God knows what is doing to the ocean and the air. Right, right. And so, yeah, it's not, they can't control that, so they're not going to try to basically grandstand on that and market it. But we do have some headlines from Russia after the, this was just recently after Hershey's article came out, Russia, this is out of Reuters. Russia says NATO should hold emergency summit over Nord Stream blast. They're calling for investigations. But Europe has bigger problems at this point because let's look at what was happening just before the blast. Remember, we're going into a time when we reported on this that fertilizer was really at a shortage. And so this was, again, Reuters, one month before the explosion, we have a company named Grupta Astoy.

They halted production of fertilizers due to high gas prices. This is a large Polish chemical firm, one of the biggest in Europe. Now another one, one week before the explosion, Norway's Yara, one of the largest fertilizer producers in Europe, says to halt Belgian fertilizer unit in the coming days, they too said because of soaring gas prices. So the explosion cuts off that natural gas. And this natural gas is used for the hybrid Bosch method, which is basically that makes fertilizer. So they use this natural gas from Nord Stream 1 to make this fertilizer. So even before it blew up, there's a problem. So now Europe is having a major, you know, it's compounding its fertilizer shortage at a time when it's

already cutting back on it. We saw what happens in the Netherlands with the farmers. But now let's talk about the energy, just the straight up energy. So this was, again, just to paint this picture how dire it is, days before the explosion, here's the headlines. Lights out, ovens off. Europe preps for winter energy crisis. Three months after the explosion, here's what looks like. Over half of Germans heating homes less or not at all. Now we're coming close to the end of the winter here. And here's one of the headlines of what the cost has been to Germany. Europe and Europe has spent 792 billion euros to shield citizens from energy crisis. So Germany is at the center of this.

And we've been playing videos on this of people literally like getting on TikTok and YouTube and saying, I'm having to decide whether I'm going to buy groceries or pay my energy bills. So this has been no joke. Concerns that they're going to open up. Remember it was like libraries and museums to citizens that couldn't heat their own homes, that they'll be heating those spaces. I mean, literally being dropping, you know, Europe, first world nations into a second and third world scenario where they can't even take care of themselves. And to think, and that's what's so shocking is, are we supposed to believe that, you know, President Biden, the United States of America made a deal with Germany, that they were cool with this?

Europe was all cool with us cutting off one of their major energy supplies. Right. And the conversation at that point is European people really are looked at as second class citizens. if this in case, if this indeed is the case with... Just a totally accepted casualty. Right. And we do know, I mean, the literature is ripe with the fact that cold kills more people than heat. So when you plunge entire European Union into a winter and cut out their heat, this is directly leading to deaths of people. So let's not mince words here. So the German government is protesting this move. So this is the latest headlines here. German political party wants

U.S. troops kicked out over allegedly blowing up Nord Stream pipeline. Another headline, German lawmakers denounce Schultz's silence on U.S. role in Nord Stream sabotage. That's Olaf Schultz is the chancellor of Germany. And this is what that headline says. This is one of the German members of parliament in the European Parliament. And he says this in the article. The problem is that this is tearing the German economy to pieces and significantly impoverished

Germany. Moreover the billions spent by Germany on this gas project, which ensured us cheap energy, are lost. but the coalition which governs Germany doesn't care. So there's internal strife within Germany and within Europe at this point. A lot of people voicing this opinion, the story is not going away. And I just find it fascinating that none of the people have been questioned by, you know, our Congress. There's been no special meetings or hearings held. Victoria Newland.

No one, they're kind of just freely being moved about the country. So it will be interesting to see how this progresses? Because we can't underestimate the gravity of this story. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, really, these are acts of war, you know, through any other lens. It's hard to imagine that it's not. Obviously, some dealings going on. You have, you know, German, you know, parliament upset with their own leadership.

And again, it's sort of asking the same questions I find myself asking here. Is my country being, you know, are we passing laws and are we being governed from inside of our own borders? Because it sure seems like you're working against our own people, our own good, you're destroying our jobs, you're locking us out, locking us down, without any scientific evidence. You're trying to take our cars away in England. They're trying to limit you to like 15 miles from your house. Like these were at this time and this strange space where who are you working for? It certainly is not for the people, because the people would never ask to have their

own heating builds and future growing abilities destroyed. Right, right. And the people would never ask to be masked and that's what we're going to talk about next. Okay. Because we just reported on this for about a couple weeks ago, the masks are essentially useless. They don't do much. And that was a big study that came out, a meta-analysis by the Cochrane collaboration. It looked at all the studies. It incorporated the new COVID studies in there looking at that SARS-CoV-2. And the world is kind of just sitting with that. Wow, these masks didn't work. And now the headlines are looking like this, as it really saturates into the public consciousness. The mask mandates did nothing. This is New York Times. lessons be learned.

I mean, that's incredible. New York Times, the fact that they're running that headline, one of the greatest, you know, arbiters and propagators of mask mythology is now, you know, has a headline admitting they did nothing. So, I mean, look, we've come a long way. I'm glad you're waking up, New York Times. How about an apology? How about a get straight up apology for the attacks on everybody's sensibility and critical thinking?

Incredible times. And so masks weren't doing anything. lockdowns hurt people. The vaccines didn't stop infection. So we have one lone soldier still standing there and that's natural immunity. So let's talk about that and let's unpack that. So natural immunity from as early as 2020, October of 2020, the Lancet published this paper, scientific consensus. Careful moving forward. Anytime we hear scientific consensus, we should now as a public be very concerned. Scientific consensus on the COVID-19 pandemic. We need to act now. This is also called the John Snow memorandum and just like the lab leak theory they tried to you know they didn't go so far as to say this was

conspiracy theory but they did say this and rachel wilinski signed her name onto this is the cdc director she says furthermore there is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS cobi two following natural infection and the endemic transmission that would be the consequence of waning immunity would present a risk to vulnerable populations for the indefinite future wow now let's look that lancet paper again just like the lab leak theory calling people conspiracy theorists if they question the origins ran cover for the media and the fact checkers and the social media platforms the de-platform people and it allowed them to write these type of articles so this was still at that time in 2020 this was a USA today fact check it says COVID-19 vaccines provide safer more consistent immunity than infection

and again if you say something different we're going to censor you now this is mother Jones couldn't have got it more wrong anti-vaxers have a dangerous theory theory called natural immunity. Now it's going mainstream. And it says here, the experts I talk to weren't at all surprised to see these discredited ideas making the rounds. They've seen them before in the anti-vaccination in extreme holistic medicine communities. This is the coronavirus edition of their pervasive belief in natural immunity. Rapali Lameh, a John Hopkins epidemiologist, who has studied the movement against mandatory vaccines, told me we have heard from those that are concerned about vaccines, the argument that they prefer to allow their immune system to be naturally exposed

to a specific pathogen to gain immunity. She wrote to me in an email. It's a spinoff of previous theories we've seen, concurred Omar, who has written extensively about the anti-vaccination groups. This is all the usual stuff. I mean, it's amazing they're calling natural immunity a theory. First of all, why are you making vaccines? The entire concept of a vaccine is to mimic natural infection. You've never achieved it. You've never mimicked it as well as what it does, but why would you even have a concept of a vaccine, except you're trying to achieve what immunity is, you know, incurred once you come in contact with a virus? It's absolutely insane that they're calling that a theory. That is proven facts since the dawn of man. Absolutely. And so this was the type of adversarial,

one-sided reporting that the public was up against, trying to really make heads or tails in the middle of this pandemic response, locking them down, putting masks on them. And just to remind people, we were there every step of the way pointing out every one of these studies, the moment they were published, we went to air and it looked like this. All right. The most vaccinated country in the world, this is Israel, they were going to be the testbed for vaccine herd immunity. Now it's saying this is a Jerusalem post.

Israel probably won't reach herd immunity. Maybe, just maybe it doesn't last as long as the studies are showing that natural immunity last. Wow. So shockingly, it follows the pattern of every natural virus we've studied since the dawn of man. Natural immunity after COVID-19 found durable and robust. It says here, this new study shows that most convalescent COVID-19 patients mount durable antibodies B cells and T cells specific for SARS-CoV to up to 250 days. Much like a lot of the studies that we have found on natural immunity, like this study, it only persisted to, the eight to nine month period because that's as far as the study went out to.

So this is a longitudinal study. So it's going to go up to two years. So there's going to be updates on this that we'll cover here. Natural immunity is our way out of the pandemic. The vaccines do not stop infection and transmission of this virus. And once you recognize that, then the argument, well, you should get vaccinated for the sake of other people just falls apart. Previous Amicron BA1 infection alone was the single most protective factor.

against BA2 reinfection, risk reduction of 72%. So here we're seeing natural immunity better than three RNA doses. That's two primaries and a booster. Natural immunity may be either more robust, more durable, or both in comparison to vaccine-induced immunity against the Omicron variant, leading to negative vaccine efficacy over time. This is like blaming the placebo for being too strong.

Well, perhaps it's because natural immunity was so effective that it's making our vaccine look even worse. I mean, this is a report that's never been confusing for me, Jeffrey. I always felt very safe in this space because, you know, as you know, we've been investigating vaccines, you know, since, you know, early 2017 when we started this show. And as I've said before, I mean, the one thing we know is no vaccine has ever achieved what natural infection achieves as far as immunity. That is just simply the state of fact. Never ever has been possible. And so when they started stating that the vaccine is more effective than natural immunity,

it would have been the first time in history. And to think that you achieved it with the most rushed vaccine that you ever had, had failed in every animal trial up until this moment. And suddenly you've achieved, you know, the speed of light, something you've never had before, by accident, I guess. It was rushing is what we always need to do. We just needed to rush faster. And then we've got it.

It made absolutely no sense. And I had a great conversation with Ryan Cole recently. We were both speaking in an event. And he said something to the fact that really stuck with me. And, you know, he said, you know, outrageous claims were, you know, extreme claims demand extreme evidence. And I think about that. To be claiming this vaccine was better than natural immunity was a really incredible claim, which would mean you would need some really incredible evidence because,

that would be rewriting science as we know it up until this point, literally from the beginning of vaccines over 100 years ago to now you've never achieved that. You better be able to prove that. And now as we've, you know, broken down the science and it all comes crumbling down, we realize there were no one ever in close. They never even attempted to prove any such thing. But here we are. Right. As we and other people were there reporting this, and it was an easy report, because like you said, this is not rocket science or science. It's just. known it's just known we had i can we had the attorneys uh an informed consent action network

writing legal demands here's in 2021 i can demands that cal ocha recognized natural immunity another one i can eviscerate cdc informal exchange regarding national immunity another one i can demand cdc authors withdraw rigged natural immunity study we're hitting them from all angles and now we have the headlines now the headlines are starting to make some sense and look rational NBC News. Let's check this one out. Immunity acquired from a COVID infection is as protective as vaccination against severe illness and disease study finds. USA News study natural immunity from COVID-19 infection provides high protection against severe disease. And what are they quoting? They're quoting this study from the Lancet. Past SARS-CoV to infection, protection against reinfectionist systemic review and meta-analysis. They looked at all the papers, everything that's out there they could find. And they wrote this.

past COVID-19 infection against re-infection, symptomatic disease, and severe disease for ancestral alpha, Delta, or Amacron, BA1 variants appears to be at least as protective as two-dose vaccination with MRI vaccines for all vaccines and outcomes. And it also goes on to say protection from severe disease was high for all variants. So at least it's protective. But now, Del, this is where the study, there's a little spike in this study. And people need to know this. So when they're, there's hailing this study and showing this and saying, this will be, This will lead us through COVID and light the way. Never to happen again.

We're safe. We've proved it. Right. Yep. Never going to happen again. You see this sentence right at the beginning of the study. The immunity conferred says by past infection should be weighed alongside protection from vaccination when assessing future disease burden from COVID-19, providing guidance

on when individuals should be vaccinated. And get this. And designing policies that mandate vaccines for workers or restrict access on the basis of immune status to settings where the risk of transmission is high, such as travel and high occupancy indoor settings. Wait a minute. I thought we weren't mandating these vaccinations for workers or for kids or restricting access for people or cutting their travel benefits because so this and also why are we trying to, why are natural immunity, why is it racing to try to catch up to the vaccine? Shouldn't the vaccine be trying to race and catch up to natural immunity? Let's look at this

graph from the study just to show exactly what they're talking about. talking about here. You can see at the top, that's past infection, that green line that's just shooting straight across. That's your protection from that's your protection from past infection. That's your natural immunity. And you can see it starts to wane just a little bit in 60 weeks. The rest of these are Moderna, Pfizer, Pfizer Plus booster, Pfizer plus AstraZeneca booster, just falling right off. You mean, from that they're saying is as good as vaccination, like that? That's the look of is as good as or maybe potentially better. How about clearly longer lasting? more robust. And the best we're getting out of that is, yeah, they're running neck and neck.

Exactly. And so, wow, why would the authors do that? Why? I love to go over these people to a horse race or something, man. You know, just bet them personally. Like, however you're seeing it, I'll take it. I'll take $5 on that bet. Exactly. Amazing. Well, let's look at some of the people that funded this study. And we don't have to look very far. It says it right there. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Jay Stratton, T. J. J. J. J. Jellapi. and J.E. Nordstrom. So Billy and Melinda Gates Foundation, now the University of Washington, that's the IHME, and that is where that this kind of duplicitous language probably is coming from, because in order to get funding like that, you probably got to put some language in there like that.

But remember, too, so the other point of this whole conversation, okay, it's admitted, natural immunity is great, is, I guess, just as effective as the vaccine we're being told. Remember all of those people that were denied the natural immunity for their job. remember these headlines. This is way back in 2020, 2020, 2021. No proof of previous, no, proof of previous COVID infection cannot be used to get around a vaccine mandate. Another one, U.S. judge upholds COVID-19 requirement for those with natural immunity. And this one, this is a great one in New York City. Hundreds more New York City teachers AIDS fired for not complying with COVID-19 vaccine mandate. So let's fast forward to present day. This is what happened to those teachers. New

New York City teachers who refuse COVID vaccine slap with scarlet letter in their personal files, according to a lawyer. It says the city department of education put a special code indicating wrongdoing the files of the terminated workers. The employee's personal file shows a generic problem code that could just as easily be for committing a crime as declining to take a vaccine for religious reasons. In some instances, when plaintiffs tried to obtain employment elsewhere, they were told that they were red flagged because of the problem code. And in New York, we have Eric Adams, their mayor. He has lifted the COVID vaccine mandate for New York City workers, but they're not hiring the people back.

What about the 1,780 fired? They're not getting their jobs back. And so that's the type of damage that accepting this idea, this ridiculous idea that natural immunity has no place in this conversation does. But perhaps no one put it better than Bill Mar just recently. He saw this study, and this is what he had to say about it. All right. I saw on the paper today, kind of a big story, I think. I wonder how much it's going to get covered in the liberal media, because it's a about how natural immunity, they did a giant study, 65 countries, or maybe something like 65 countries, many, many different studies, they looked at them all.

Natural immunity, as good or better than the vaccine. Something I've been saying since the beginning, and I get called an anti-vaxxer. That's not an anti-vaxxer. This is the kind of thing. My problem with the media from both sides is not that you guys lie, it's that you tell me your side of the story that you want me to know.

You don't tell me the whole story. I'd be curious as to how much play this story gets, because I remember reading that they did a study of Republicans versus Democrats. The question was, what percentage, this is like a year and a half ago, what percentage of people who get COVID require hospitalization? The answer is less than 1%. Almost half of Democrats thought it was over 50%. They listened to your network.

where do they get that kind of information? That was to you. That was clearly not wanted to answer that question. Talk about putting screws to them. Well done, Bill. Love it. Amazing. I love to see more of those.

Yeah. So, Del, as you speak to people, doctors, politicians, we talk about this, people, no matter what position in society they're at, they're still shocked that you can't sue for a vaccine injury. They're still shocked. Even doctors, I've spoken to doctors and nurses that don't know there's a special court, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, that you have to go through for this. And so when we watch this, when the COVID vaccine was rolled out aggressively and very fast, we said, how is this going to look?

And in 2020, Reuters was already reporting this. COVID-19 era highlights U.S. Black Hole Compensation Fund for pandemic vaccine injuries. So for the rest of the vaccines that aren't COVID, you have this national vaccine injury compensation program. For the COVID vaccine, because it's under emergency use authorization, it was rushed through for a pandemic emergency, you have the countermeasures injury compensation program. So this is a whole special thing, and it has a whole different special set of rules. So let's really, to really set this story up, let's look at, this is the Committee for Responsible

Federal Budget. It's a nonprofit organization. They've tracked government spending for COVID the entire time for the entire COVID response. And you can see there's basically $11 trillion that have been spent according to this organization. $11 trillion, this 12 zeros has been spent on the COVID response by America. And there's that chart there. So you add up all the amount distributed. That's what we added up to.

So I spoke to Wayne Rode. He's an author of the vaccine court. he's one of the most well-versed people in this process and this injury compensation process. He put forward a freedom of information act requests and received some numbers back for this countermeasures injury compensation program. Again, if someone gets hurt from a COVID vaccine, they go to this program. That's the only program you can go to. That's your only redress at that point.

And he says this is what this FOIA. Let's take a look at this. And this is what it showed. It showed the total amount, the total annual amount, budgeted for compensation, under the countermeasures injury compensation program. You can see their fiscal year 2020, they wanted about $400,000. Gee Liz.

2021, $931,000 in change. Apparently 2022, that's about $200 more. I guess they only thought about $201 more is appropriate. And then you see $203, $5 million. Now let's go to the next one. This is for the annual budget. So this is what they're going to use to hire all the employees and get this department up to speed.

They wanted by 2023, $15 million. So you add that together, it's $20 million. And you compare that to the $21, the $11 trillion that was spent. You're looking at 0.00018% of the entire spending of the total COVID response from the American government, the Treasury, everybody involved in that has gone to compensating people with injuries. So they're rolling out a vaccine. They're going to put on 330 million American. adults, children, infants. One size, let me just step in here.

One size spits all, which we know doesn't exist in any medical product. You know side effects are anaphylaxis. There will be allergic reactions. You have to know if you gave over 300 million people a product, someone's going to die. Several will probably die. And the fact that you were set up for a half a million dollars. So what do they even think of debt a life would have been worth? And it kind of gives you the sense that they never planned on paying anybody anything.

if that's the kind of money just on anaphylaxis alone, people getting through that or blood clots or all the issues that they knew existed, a half a million dollars for our entire nation? And this is the big story now. Expect this story to go global, because this is the big story now, because as these injuries are mounting and mounting and mounting,

there is no safety net. The safety net is adversarial. It's the payer of last resort or what it's called. So let's go back to that FOIA request. And so they're talking about the budget requests here. And it says that the fiscal year 2020, requests for the countermeasures injury compensation program, CICP is $15 million.

This funding will be used to initiate the review of an estimated 1,500 medical reviews of claims and provide compensation to eligible individuals for injuries and deaths directly resulting from the use of covered countermeasures. 1,500. Now, covered countermeasures are not just vaccines. These are the EUA antivirals as well. So you add that in there and just wrap your head around that right so they're expecting they said hey we need $15 million We're expecting about a thousand maybe 1500 injuries 1500 claims you should say right now let's go to this update we have an update as a February 3rd from HRSA and this is the numbers that this countermeasures injury compensation court is looking at let's look start from the left total COVID-19 CICP claims filed 11,196 a little more than

1,500. Pending review or in review. 10,653. They got a little bit of a backlog there, Dell. Decisions. 543. Let's make sure we get IRS agents making sure that I've paid my, you know, my bill this year. But if you've been injured by the vaccine, we forced you to get there. The line is around block down. It's actually the edge of the city. Go out past that. Hop on the boat over on that island. Back over there is the end of the line that you need to stand and wait on. Exactly. Eligible for compensation and pending benefits. determination 19 and here we go this is the biggest number that should shock everybody zero paid out zero paid out and now why has zero been paid out well let's talk about what this process looks like dell so we go to reuters again this is an article just posted in 2022 COVID vaccine injury plaintiffs face long odds in u.s compensation program they actually reached out to the our lawyer at i can erin syria and this is what Aaron had to say in this article article. The CICP is not a court, he said, noting that it's a part of the same federal health department that licensed recommended and mandated COVID-19 vaccines and then sit as investigator and

judge of any CICP claim. That is a mockery of the term justice. And on HRSA's website for the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program, they talk about this. This is what you are facing. If you try to put forward a claim, temporal association between the administration or use of the covered countermeasure, that's the vaccine, and onset of the injury, i.e., the injury occurs a certain time after the administration or use, is not sufficient. So if you get injured after the vaccine,

that's not sufficient evidence by itself to prove that an injury is the direct result of a covered countermeasure. So let's look at those 19, the famous 19- The ones that got through the gauntlet and seemed to have approved their case. I don't know how they did it. They must be gods of the legal system and medicine,

but okay. Here's the 19 that made it through. Exactly. This is the illustrious 19. And here we go. Look at it all. We have myocarditis, myocarditis. Everything is heart-related, pericarditis, angioidema, myopercarditis, one anaphylaxis.

We have one person with anaphylaxis that's waiting. And that anaphylaxis case has been pending, from my understanding, since September of 2021. So when they're looking at your claims, they're doing a mess. medical benefits review. So they're actually seeing what you paid out of pocket, what your insurance paid, how much you paid towards all of your injury from that vaccine. And they go ahead and subtract that tally from what they're going to probably owe you. They said, well, you paid, your Medicaid paid this. Well, we're going to take that off. You're not going to get that back because we're just going to pay you one lump sum. And that's not going to count towards this.

Got me, that's 500,000. I got to stretch that out for all of America. I mean, you can't make this stuff up, it's absolutely outraged. You know, as you're talking about this, what is striking me, and sure, they planned on 1,500, it's nearly 10 times at 11,000. But can we bring up the current open bearers numbers? I just want to look at this. Folks, there are 34,385 families that have reported death after a vaccine in the VAIR system. This system is very hard to get into. It's not easy. It's complicated. If you walk away from your computer and it goes to sleep, you have to start all over. Most doctors won't go near it. So let's look at anaphylaxis, of which they're paying out one case.

There's 10,400 claims of anaphylaxis. When we look at myocarditis, periocarditis, you've got 26,446 cases of myocarditis currently. And so just look at these numbers. 30,000 deaths, 42,000 allergic reactions, which would have been the anaphylaxis, 26,000, and ultimately 1.5 million reports, and out of that, we only only only have 11,000 people in this court system or non-court system that's trying to get paid. You're telling me none of those people would like to get paid for their injuries. They went through the work of reporting to VERS but didn't think, oh, let me go ahead and get into

the system to see if I can get paid for this. It says to me they don't know it exists, which is the exact problem we've always had with this vaccine court. Nobody's being told it exists. They don't know how to use it because there should be a million claims in there right now. And we know Bears is underreported by somewhere between, it's right around 10 to 1 to 10% of the total amount of people being injured. So something's wrong here.

This entire story stinks. I mean, sure, you're not letting anyone through this gauntlet. It's an abomination to humanity. And again, it's our government running these things. So there's more to the story than even what meets the eye right there. It's a horror. Yeah, this is a gigantic story. And even the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, you have three years to file.

This countermeasures is one year. One year. When the vaccine rolled out, how long did it take for the public to learn about myocarditis? For doctors, still don't know about it associated with the vaccine. It was over a year. How about blood clots? How about menstrual cycle irregularities? It goes on and on.

These things are, that's the nature of rolling this thing out too fast. Now the public becomes the experiment. And you don't know until years down the road of these injuries, the, the, statute of limitations has passed at that point. Yeah, as it turns out, you know, when you were fighting for your life to, you know, get over the myocarditis like Damar Hamlin, you know, currently is, or blood clots and things like that. You know, sorry you didn't think that you needed to go and get into the court system at that moment. You would think you'd have a moment to try and heal yourself and survive before you have to sue somebody, right? I mean, it's so outrageous.

And the people out there, this is something we talked about. You may be brand new to this show. This is one of our biggest complaints is this fact. This is even worse. There is no court. But I want you to think about what they're saying here. They're saying you have got to prove the science. It's not good enough that I got the vaccine. That night I had a raging headache, and then I had a stroke the next day.

Yeah, I know it's a temporal association, but that's not good enough. You have to have the science. And who's supposed to be doing the science for you that would be accepted in the system? The very people that just pumped this vaccine out to you. In fact, we have Alex Azar. This is the head of Health and Human Services while the vaccine is being rolled out. out. If you're in regular vaccine court, you have to sue this guy. Look what he had to say in the middle of this brand new experimental vaccine. He's working for an industry that's supposed to

make sure we're safe. This is what he has to say. It really could be within days of FDA approval. We'll start seeing vaccines in people's arms, which is frankly incredible. Think about this. Ten months into this pandemic hitting our shores, thanks to what President Trump has done here, we believe we're going to have people getting vaccinated millions of people before Christmas this year. It's just unheard of in the history of public health, this accomplishment. These guys have already written themselves in the history books with the rush of a vaccine. We raced it right through the FDA and CDC without even blinking about it. Didn't matter. It killed animals and animal trials.

And now good for us. Millions of you are going to be forced to get it. And now we expect that guy is going to do the science. And they all say the same thing. They look at bears and say, well, we don't really trust those numbers. We don't see any red flags with 30,000 people reported dying there. They're not doing the science. I've said it time and time again.

This is literally like a murder case where the murderer is the one doing all of your forensics. You know, that's interesting. I didn't find a knife anywhere. Oh, I suppose we could have run it for blood tests, but we knew that it wasn't the right person anyway. I mean, this is what's going on. And as Aaron's theory so clearly put,

you have the people that promoted it, that pushed it, that mandated it. Now they're the judge and arbiter of whether it hurt me. This is insane. Folks, we got some work to do here in the United States. of America. And when Alex Azar made that statement, he knew that that countermeasures program was funded to $400,000, which sounds like a lot, but they were rolling this thing out to every adult at that time in the country. And that program was funded to $400,000, and he knew that. It's amazing. Jeffrey, great reporting. So much revealed there. Really, really great. We'll see you next week.

All right, Del. Thank you. Now, make sure you check out the Jackson report, which is on the high water. You can go in there. He is writing for us. We've got lots of, we've got Tracy We've got lots of great writers bringing news now and getting much more in-depth. And we just sort of touched on some of these topics. You can go and get deeper and deeper in that. It's one of the things that we've got going and we're continuing to expand because of your support here at the Highwire. Now speaking of support, you know, every once in a while, you know, it can be a little bit like, you know, a movie, a superhero movie, in fact. And then you always had that arch villain, the arch nemesis.

Or, you know, in this case, it's this guy that is literally like a movie, you know, a movie movie, like the arch leader of an attack on sensibility, on credibility, on critical thinking, one of my least favorite human beings in the world. I'm, of course, talking about Senator Richard Pan. This is all going to make sense to do you in a second, but I will say this is one of the world's great morons on the planet. And I'll be honest, I'm empathetic to people that are very slow and they can't really, you know, get things to happen and maybe need some help. I get that. But when they rise to places of power and start writing laws that affect me, now I have a problem. And I really have a problem with this guy.

And just if he's brand new to you, or maybe just to be reminded what this genius that really, really, I would say, is the red-headed step-uncle of the anti-vaccine movement. This guy lit a fire under everyone's butt. Thank goodness. And here's why. Take a look at this. Invite Dr. Pan, Senator Pan, and he's going to draw the next five. numbers. Thank you very much, Senator. Okay, we call this fax for the win because actually getting

vaccinated is winning. People talk about watered in vaccines, right? They say, oh, I'm worried about formaldehyde. I'm worried about aluminum. You know what's the most dangerous substance in the vaccine? Water. More children die of water toxicity than anything else that's in a vaccine. I'm sorry, I don't understand that. Oh, more children die of drowning. Actually, it's the second leading cause of death in children that's between two and five. When it comes to a vaccination, vaccination is really about the public's health, about public safety. If my child has hepatitis B, may they attend school? They may, I believe they may attend school, yes.

But if they're not vaccinated for hepatitis B, can they attend school? Well, if they have a medical, exemption, then they will be able to attend school under this bill. Now is hepatitis B, can you transmit that? Can one child pass it to another? Hepatitis B, it is possible for a child to pass, well, basically people of close contacts, so who spend a lot of time with these jobs, can pass hepatitis B from one to another. I myself, I'm a health professional who studies epidemiology. your comments about autism and autism rates, I think does not actually refer it like the current science. Vaccines are not made from aborted fetal cells. That unfortunately is a myth.

So I checked the MMR insert last night from Merck. They do use descendants from the line, the cell line, that are still human fetal lung fiberblasts. So from the initial aborted fetuses that used in historically, they are still using the cell line. that have been propagated and grown still in the laboratory to create the MMR. State Senator Dr. Richard Pan is one of the bill's authors. He says he wants to make it nearly impossible to not get children vaccinated in California. Someone decides still vaccine is not for them. That's fine. You know, that's their decision.

We're not telling them they can't have that decision. Grounded by parents and babies, state senators Dr. Richard Pan and Ben Allen announced legislation that would stop nearly all exemptions for child. childhood vaccine. We want these kids to go to school and we are not taking away the parental rights to be able to make a decision. We want to be sure people have an informed decision. We are authoring legislation that abolish the personal belief exemption that currently allows

children who have not received the required vaccinations needed to protect the public health to enroll into our schools. SB 277 is restoring community immunity to protect our children and the public from preventable disease. We cannot allow a small number of unethical physicians to put our children back at risk. I am grateful for the moral courage of the medical community, which is calling for an end to these fake medical exemptions, and for action against physicians who endanger patients and betray the profession. It is so important to give as many people back to me as possible.

You're going to protect yourself, protect your communion. Guess what? You might have a chance of winning a great prize. He's officially the arch nemesis of common sense. I've locked horns with him several times publicly and privately, and he decided to lock up with me and the high wire and the informed consent action. once again. This is our latest release from our legal side. This is a huge victory, especially because this one is right in Senator Richard Bandspace. I-Can funded lawsuit prohibiting any local vaccine mandates wins final battle sets California precedent. We've done it. This is now precedent in California. It cannot be taken away. Let me explain what just happened because there is some

confusion. Originally, the school district of San Diego decided to pass a mandated COVID-19 vaccine requirement for all schools in San Diego. We immediately rushed in as we do in cases like this and brought Erin Siri to the task, and we sued saying that this goes against, you know, basically the rights of California, but you don't have the right to do this. This has got to go through the political system. It has to be voted upon. Now, Senator Richard Pan was quietly behind this. The reason they wanted to use the school district and the school boards to push the vaccine mandate was because if it came from the health department, the law SB 277. Now, Senator Richard Pan passed an AB2109 that started this debacle, SB 277 and then 276.

But in order to pass 277, he said, we're not just going to automatically force everybody to get every new vaccine. Any future vaccines will have to be voted on. And if they go through the health department, then they will have to be given a personal belief exemption. They'll be exempted out. You can just say, hey, I don't like that new COVID vaccine, therefore I'm not taking it. He wanted to get around the health department, and so they went to the school district and tried to do it there. That's why we went in to break it. We won in court. Then they filed, the San Diego filed against us in appeals. Remember, this is why these things cost so much. We went and appealed, and then we won in the appellate court. And then lastly, what can happen is the Supreme Court.

ultimately has this last decision of whether they sort of want to just, you know, erase that docket and just put it off and shelve it away so that it can't be seen or it stays and gets locked in as a president. You could have it where you just want for San Diego, but it's not a precedent for the entire state. Senator Richard Pan got involved and sent a five-page document that looked like this. Richard Pan, MD, M-B-H-F-A-A-A-P from his own letterhead in it, he basically describes this. My support for depublication is what it's called. They wanted to depublish our win is made to protect public health interests in California, meaning I want this to be kept only in San Diego so I can continue to lie and cheat and steal in the rest of the state as the author of vaccination legislation that was misconstrued in the opinion as an expert on California school vaccine laws, regulation and policy, and as a physician who understands the critical role that vaccination plays in mitigating against disease outbreaks that are both dangerous and highly disruptive to all. all aspects of everyday life. It went on and on and on about how great he is, how wrong we are, how we're going to save lives

by taking away your rights, your freedom. Aaron, Syrian, Glimstad, our law firm went in. They rebutted that, wrote our own sort of rebuttal to that, and this is the result. There it is officially on the docket. Parties and Attorney's Lower Court, the publication request is denied as of February 22nd. That is now the law of California. You cannot use anything outside of the health department and your government to write in new vaccine laws. No school board or anyone else can be used. It will never happen again, Senator Pan. Take that. And for all of you out there in California,

there's obviously much, much more to fight for. But we are winning. The informed consent action network has the most powerful legal team in the history of this movement, in the history of this issue. and we need your help. We've talked about it before. They want mandates on, you know, school children being able to vaccinate themselves and all sorts of issues. We have so much to do, and I need your help.

We can't, you know, celebrate these victories without you. So if you've been watching this show and you really love seeing, you know, what is, you know, like to say, wow, those guys are amazing. Actually, why don't you get on our team? Stop watching. Stop sitting in the stands. You want to be on the team.

All you have to do is be a supporting member of our team. Just go to the top of the page. at the highwire.com, click on Donate to ICAN. Please become a recurring donor that really helps us decide what lawsuits we can take on and win or not, or let somebody else that isn't going to have as good a case or nothing at all. We're asking for $23 a month for 2023. Honestly, if you can't, if that's too much for you, you'd rather pay Fox and MSNBC and your cable bill to lie to you every day.

I get it. At least give us what you can. If you can give more, it is seriously. are making a difference. They never saw us coming, and here we are. So thank you for all that made this incredible win. This one feels really good since it was like, mono e-mono, me and Senator Richard Pan, I want to thank you all for putting me in the middle of this fight. It feels really good. I hope you feel good, too. Okay. Now on to a conversation. There has been a conversation that so many of you've been asking me to get into everywhere I go.

This topic comes up. It looks like this. We see it all over the internet. Take a look at this. Look at that line. It keeps on getting longer. I'm not moving. He's about to leave my screen. And that's weird. What is it? What is it? This is not natural. Any idiot would know this is not natural. We've had a bunch of planes flying over the house. We've had local planes that have absolutely no trail whatsoever. Look at that. That's turning into a whole cloud. Look at that.

It's insane. All these clouds weren't here until the airplanes did that. Yeah, you tell me that's water vapor, guys. You're being lied to. Your climate change is being delivered to you like a soft serve. ice cream going. This is one of those topics where, you know, I imagine the audience is trying to figure out where exactly I am.

And in usual fashion, the only way I can do this show is to be totally honest with you. It's unscripted. Therefore, I would have to imagine so many different scenarios to try and lie or cheat or get around. It's not how I work. I honestly am investigating things that interest me. This is a topic that interests me. Now, there's so much that we could get into. but before I got into it, I don't, you know, I'm not going to get anything that has no science background whatsoever.

It's just some crazy thought and there's some out there and people can cover it. Maybe I'm wrong, but there has to be some evidence that even allows it to be something we discuss here, the highway we pride ourselves on the evidence and being an evidence-based show. So we did a quick analysis of what we could find. Is there such a thing as geoengineering and cloud seeding and things like that? and a lot of documents come up. I want to read through just a few before we even get started. This is what we found with our team and just sort of a cursory look at the history

of this concept of controlling weather geoengineering. Take a look at, oh, by the way, before I even get to that, the reason I even thought of doing this topic is China, and this is The Guardian. China, this is just recently, China modified the weather to create clear skies for political celebration study. I found that really shocking. China is now controlling the weather.

These are real headlines. What's the environmental cost? Not is that crazy talk, no. It's what's the environmental cost going to be? China allocates $8.8 billion for weather modification programs. So they're really invested. Jingyang reduces farming damage by weather modification. So they're obviously using it.

They're proud of it. They're celebrating it. And so that initially, because this topic's been out there, said to me, okay, there's legitimacy right there. You have a huge nation that is really technically advanced saying we are bragging about the fact that we made weather better so that we could have clear skies during an event. So that says to me this exists. Now let's get into the history of this concept here in the United States of American Round. Here's some of the documents that we found.

This is all the way back in, I think it's 1969. There it is. Air Weather Service, United States Air. This is from our government. This is what it had to say. It says in 1969, the Air Weather Service Mission includes the field testing and operational application of weather modification techniques. It is increasingly probable that at some stage in their careers, AWS personnel will be called upon to support one or more weather modification projects. This report has been prepared to provide the basic knowledge in the fields of cloud physics and weather modification required to furnish such support.

So back in 1969, we're already working on this. We've got our best and brightest looking at weather modification. It goes beyond that. That's 69. Now I believe this is somewhere around 1974. It is useful to start out differentiating between climate modification and weather modification. The former concern changes effective over large areas and long periods of time. Among the many suggested projects in the fields are warming the Arctic by damning the Bering Strait, melting polar ice caps, and altering the amount or distribution of insulation received by the Earth. However, even in such objectives could be achieved, even things,

could be achieved, a doubtful proposition in the foreseeable future. Unpredictable byproducts of the operation could well be catastrophic. Resulting calamities might include the flooding of heavily populated coastal plains, the turning of fertile areas in the deserts, the destruction of fish, bird and animal life, and the propagation of destructive insects and diseases into susceptible areas. Clearly, there are concerns about the ramifications. Despite the realization that man is not yet ready for experiments in climate control, inadvertent climate changes may possibly be taking place today.

It has been suggested that the release of CO2 from the combustion of coal and hydrocarbon fuels may significantly increase the greenhouse effects on the Earth's atmosphere. Similar to the effect of high altitude aircraft and rocket exhaust products in the very thin upper atmosphere, including the release of CO2 and water vapor and the possible destruction of ozone may in time lead to changes in our environment. Combustion products from factories and automials could add ice nuclead to the air and perhaps affect precipitation. So there is a document where there obviously our government is looking at.

into this idea of affecting the weather. Now cut to just a few years later. Clearly this has gotten further down the road. This is a document in which in 1976, weather modification technology is significant potential for preventing birding, moderating or ameliorating the adverse effects of such disaster and hazards and enhancing crop production.

They're talking about all of the droughts above and the floods and all these things. We could affect that. It goes on. Weather modification programs may have long-range and unexpected effects effects on existing climatic patterns which are not confined by national boundaries. So there, clearly now the technology is moving forward. They're starting to see the promise of it.

And then you have to imagine, well, what is the politics around it? And all that starts shifting. We see some documents on this, is weather modification hearings. This is subcommittee on oceans and international environment. This is 1974, this particular document. So now they're so far along. The subcommittee met pursuant to notice. 10.05 a.m. in a room. I won't get into that. Senator Powell this morning, the Subcommittee

on Oceans and International Environment is meeting to hear testimony concerning the need for an international agreement prohibiting the use of environmental modification and geophysical modification as weapons of war. It is regrettable that this hearing must be held. It would not have been necessary if the administration properly responded to the other complaints that we've made. It goes on and on. So here we now see that whatever the technology is and whatever our government understands it is now getting to a place where they're realizing, oh my God, this looks real for our future and we better have a resolution that stops people from using this as a weapon of war.

The UN even gets involved. Beyond our government, the UN has this document. And this is the Convention on Prohibition of Military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques. This is in Geneva, 1977. The state parties to this convention guide by the interests of consolidating peace and wish to contribute to the cause of halt in the arms race and of bringing about general and complete disarmament

under restrict and effective international control of saving mankind from the danger of using new means of warfare, determined to continue negotiation with a view to achieving effectiveness, effective progress towards further measures in the field of disarmament. Recognize that scientific and technical advances may open new possibilities with respect to modification of the environment. It goes on in there.

I'm going to take it. That's where I want to leave. it at the moment because here's where I'm at. As a journalist, I study humanity. I have been interviewing people my whole life. It's why I do what I do. And so when I come to this topic, you know, I come to it with, look, there is a past. It clearly we were working on technologies. We saw that they could be used for war. And my understanding of my government is they love war. And they will use anything they can for war. I've also seen scientists that will do anything they can to play God. And when you do polling around the United States of America, really around the

world, about 50% of people believe that science is the only way we're going to be saved. So I pump that ego justification into a bunch of scientists that just like they ran this through a pandemic and vaccines want to try and do something to stop us from the harm that God or nature has done to us. I have to believe this stuff is going on on some level. That's where I'm at. Now the question I want to deal with now is really at what level are we at? Because this all kind of disappears. It seemed like we're publicly talking about it. Now it's only conspiracy theories are talking about it. It's not really happening. I don't buy that. And so to get to the bottom of this conversation and to bring some of my own hard questions, I want to bring in Dane Wigington, who really is arguably

the leading researcher. He's the leading researcher of geoengineering watch, which is the most, I think, I mean, it literally has so much documentation. It's It's made this show difficult to put together. Let me just bring Dane on now because he's the one you always request for me to talk to. Here he is. Dane Wigginian joins me now. Dane, first of all, I want to thank you for taking the time. You've been very focused on this for years.

We spoke briefly about this several years ago with the beginning of the Highwire. So welcome back. Dale, good to be back. Thank you for your voice on the most dire issues that we face. And on this specific issue, the overlap between this and the CB19 scenario is also an arguable based on our most recent testing. We're finding polymer fiber graphene in our range of both of the use for biological carrier. Got you said back for three days with the initial scene outbreaks.

How much overlap is there in these issues? And again, if we hide from the VACs, we still can't hide from the air we breathe. So the data goes back a long, long way, and even the documents you outlined from the 70s that pretend that we could, may, might have to geoengineer someday. It had already been ongoing for over 30 years deployed immediately after World War II. So there's a lot of smoke and mirrors on this issue. They're trying desperately to hide this from public view. And obviously, why? Because the public would, I would argue, take to the streets of a picture between us if they knew that their government was doing this to them in its other warfare, DEL, it's a bunch of war.

All right, and I just want to let everyone know out there that you have managed to live completely. You're off the grid now. I mean, that is something that's spectacular for a lot of our audience. It's a dream. So the Internet is a little bit in and out. You're breaking up a little bit. We can deal with it. But this is what is like talking to someone that literally is putting his money and his efforts where his mouth is.

You're off grid. I just wanted to point that out for some of the things that are breaking up here. Now, Dane, this morning, as I was getting up, I have a small project in my house, and my contractor looked up at the sky and said, oh, my God, they're not starting it again this morning, and this is what I looked up. I shot it with my cell phone. There it was. These lines being drawn in the sky that literally happened this morning, and I said to him, it's ironic that you are pointing that out because I am going to be talking about that on the show today. And I said in all honesty to him, Dane, I'll be honest, I'm not convinced that every time I see a trail that's out there in this case, what we call chem trails, that that is actually a chem trail that is designed to make clouds or whatever it is or poison me. I'm just not sure.

And so that's where I'm coming to you at right now. So to begin this conversation, what is the difference between a con trail, which is condescension? that comes from a plane and a chem trail. First, let's examine what condensation normally does, Del. If we see researchers, for example, in Antarctica and their breath is condensing, if they're standing around in an area for half hour, do we see a cloud hanging above their head

that keeps getting larger and larger? That's not what condensation does. Or if you see condensation coming from an exhaust pipe on a car in a very cold day, does that start to form a cloud that lingers and spreads and disperses? That's not what condensation does. So we have up-close film footage of the... footage of these aircraft at altitude, nozzles visible, turning on and off.

That means it's absolutely a dispersion, too. We know all military tanks and all carrier are equipped with a bypass turbofan jet engine. It's a jet powered fan. That engine is by design nearly incapable of producing any condensation trail, except under rare and extreme circumstances because 90% of the air that moves to that engine is not combusted. So the whole condensation trail narrative has been a massive life perpetrated on populations all over the world. And that clip you just showed a moment ago of the World War II B-17 bombers, these massive trail, the people who are moving everything we see in this guy's condensation.

They've been laying the groundwork for this program. We've pulled up, and it's on part of that film clip, an archival military footage of one B-17 filming enough. in formation and the aircraft that was filming the trails were shut off instantaneously and completely as if they've been cut with a knife did that plane fall from the air no it didn't fall from the air because they were beta testing in World War II there you go thank you there's on you personally professional people on your end so again we have film footage of these aircraft at altitude nozzle visible turning on and off into discussion

it's not condensation same elements named and climate engineering batons are showing in our precipitation and we took a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration flying lab at tremendous expense, six figures plus, top scientists to altitude, measured with the heavy aircraft remitting, found exactly what we knew we'd find, starting with aluminum nanoparticles, primary element named in climate engineering patents. So again, there's no legitimate denial of this issue. Okay, all right. So then let me ask you this. Is there, there are, there are contrails, but You're saying that they disperse quickly and that chem trails are what lingers.

So are you saying that every single line that I see in the sky is a plane that has giant tanks inside of it that are releasing these chemicals into our upper atmosphere, you know, 30, 40,000 feet? I mean, is every single time I see that this is these toxic chemicals being atomized in space? And again, even if you see a short, bright trail that seems to disperse, which we see in the high pressure zone scenarios. When there's a high pressure zone, a very little atmosphere of humidity, we will see a different type of dispersion, very bright in many cases, almost a bluish in some cases. And what we see then is an atmosphere that becomes silvery white. And this is, again, is still a dispersion. It's still ionizing the atmosphere, which is more electrically conductive. commercial carriers. We are not implicating commercial pilots or commercial personnel,

although we are dealing with them. We are sending them our materials, commercial pilots, that they're leaving in lunchrooms covertly to try to wake others up because they know it's going on. They are not directly involved, but their aircrafts are definitely being used. And again, we know this because we have up-close photographs of the retrofit nozzles, mounted on the wing pylons, aimed at the exhaust jet stream, to make this look like, quote, condensation, which it definitely is not. You can't turn condensation on and off. And we look at the amount of materials

are short on the surface of the planet. We work with a large institution recognized globally. Hundreds of precision samples, and the extrapolation from how much material is in those samples, if we calculate that globally, it appears somewhere in the range of 50 million tons of nanoparticles are being dispersed globally, and nanoparticles being incredibly harmful. And let me leave it with this, though.

with this now when we have the entire global science community climate science committee saying that we need to geoengineering immediately we need to put aircraft in the air to spray light scattering particles to block some of the sun's incoming thermal energy to slow the warming of the climate and we see everything that they're describing everything listed in patents we have every government the same thing we need to do this city why would we think asked our permission before the of course they're not going to and they have it they've been doing it for decades

Okay. All right. I was going to try and follow. We have a lot of slides and things that you've sent over, but I'm going to see if I can get my team, and people have to bear with us because I want to address right where you're at. It was something I was going to get to, but right where you're at. We talk about this dimming of the sky. And by the way, your documentary, which I've watched several times, preparing for this, the dimming, very powerful, lots of grave evidence. I want to show some of it here. But so to your point, MIT recently, and I think I have a slide. of the C 40. Here we go. MIT, this is a recent article, December 24th. A startup says it's begun releasing particles into the atmosphere in an effort to tweak the climate. It goes on, a startup claims it has launched weather balloons that may have released reflective sulfur particles

in the stratosphere, potentially crossing a controversial barrier in the field of solar geoengineering. Geoengineering refers to deliberate efforts to manipulate the climate by reflecting more sunlight back in a space, mimicking a natural process that occurs in the aftermath of large volcanic eruptions. In theory, spraying sulfur in similar particles in sufficient quantities could potentially ease global warming. So MIT is doing it. I have a video. We know Bill Gates has talked about. I've made fun of it on the show.

This lunatic wants to block the sun, the life-giving energy of Earth and makes Earth inhabitable as we know it. Here's just a little clip on that process. Take a look at this. There is a line of research on what's called geoengineering, which are various techniques that would delay the heating to bias 20 or 30 years to get our act together. Bill Gates is backing the first high-altitude experiment of one radical climate change solution, creating a massive chemical cloud that could cool the earth. It's called solar geoengineering, and it's highly controversial. It would look something like this. Thousands of planes would fly very high and use nozzles to inject millions of tons of light-reflecting particles into.

the stratosphere. It would create a thin chemical cloud of those particles around the whole planet, blocking some sunlight from reaching the surface. It would mimic a giant volcanic eruption, which we know cools the earth. All right, so, Dane, here's the thing for me. This is, this is the difficult you have. I want to sort of relate it and compare it to when I've seen documentaries or things about UFOs. I will see some blacked out, you know, Air Force specialist that says, I have seen pieces of a UFO that was found in Area 51. I've analyzed it with my own eyes, and that documentary is over, and people like, wow. And then I'll see another documentary, you know, different blacked out Air Force or Navy

person saying, there are aliens among us. We've sent some of our people to their planet. They've got theirs here. We've done autopsies. And I'm like, these two worlds are, you're both like blacked out. You're both sharing me this top secret information, yet there are totally different worlds. And here's my thing. And the point I'm going to make is,

Is it happening already? If we are already doing this, why is it a news flash that just, you know, at the end of last year just recently, MIT is about to try this outrageous experiment? Why is it that right now Bill Gates is making headlines because he wants to block out the sun? Why would they be making headlines now about wanting to do it? And I believe the technology is there. I'm sure they could. I know they want to.

Yet you've been saying for, I think, almost decades now, this has been happening all along. That's where I get really where I start having red flags go off. I'm not sure what the red flags are, Dale. I'm not asking anybody to believe me. I never have. I'm asking them to believe what they see with their own eyes. We have film footage, again, of these dispersions being turned on and off at altitude. I don't think comparing it to aliens is a fair comparison.

We're not blocked out. We're not saying we have some film footage, but we're not going to show you. We have filter that's occurring at Altill Gates, red flag pretending and propagating the lie that we could, may, might, do this someday if we get desperate enough. Same thing with the balloon launch in Baja, California. Is that really a story? Summit single individual puts a few balloons in the air that might have sprayed or dropped a few pounds of material into the air? These programs are ongoing and happened for decades. I would encourage you and your listeners, perhaps you've seen it, but at the start of every weekly global,

Global Alert News broadcasts, which we pay for out of pocket and 21 stations around the country. We show a film clip of President Lyndon Johnson in 1962, 61 years ago, stating on the record, on film then, that we had the power to control the world's cloud layer then, and quote, he who controls the weather controls the world. I have that clip. Let's show it to people. Let's go ahead and show it. Please, thank you. Following your lead, absolutely. It lays the predicated in the foundation for the development of a weather satellite. that will permit man to determine the world's cloud layer,

and ultimately to control the weather, and he who controls the weather will control the world. And then that goes the point of where I'm at with this. I know that that power must be there. I see China's doing it. It is not lost to me that governments will try to, you know, do whatever they can to control the world. And I don't want to be, I'm not mean to be combative here, Dean,

but you said bring the hard question. and I have really legitimate questions here, okay? And so I want to bring this point. You know, yes, I have seen your footage. It is shocking when you see the Kemp Trail start and then it stops. That to me would be proof that clearly in that experiment they are releasing something, no doubt.

But I don't see checkered lines through the sky. What I see are these long lines that go on and on and on. And so I found a document. I want to read this to you. This is the document. Folks, it's, yeah, that one, the global research. This is planetary weapons and military weather modification, chemtrails, atmospheric geoengineering, and environmental warfare. Folks, by the way, this document has it all.

It tells all sides of it. This is just one little excerpt that I found interesting about this specific thing. What some see as chemtrails, the IPCC, and others recognize as persistent con-trails that are a normal effect of today's jet exhaust. In the 2006 book, Weather Warfare, Jerry Smith explains that persistent con trails are not necessarily chem trails. From the 1990s on, he explains all jet engines were modified with a high bypass turbo fan, which increased fuel efficiency, and as a side effect, left persistent con trails that hazed into serious clouds after several hours. This is the time frame when chem trail settings begin. And Jerry Smith goes on apparently in this book to say that doesn't rule out that chemtrails are happening, but he is saying a contrail can do the exact same thing. So to that argument, I'm sure you're aware of this argument, what do you say to that?

I'm not saying that when they start and stop, you have proof that clearly it does happen, but is it possible for a contrail? They're saying that this new technology, they saw it causing this problem. I say we compare this to Senator Pandell, who says vaccines are safe and effective. There's no difference between the two. The IPCC, the largest scientific panel ever created on any subject in human history is designed specifically for deception of the public. We have the entire so-called medical industrial community and all their so-called experts telling the world, trying to convince populations that vaccines are, quote, safe and effective when

they are anything but. Why would we put this in any other category? On the high bypass turbofan jet engine, think of the paradox of what was listed in that document. have a fuel efficient engine and the vast majority of air 90% that moves through that engine is not combust it. The laws of physics make clear that makes it far less capable of producing any quote condensation trail. Does a fan produce condensation? If you take an air fan to Antarctica and it's moving air, does that produce condensation? Of course not. So again, when we can clear documents like that which you just read, that's exactly comparable to Senator Pan and everything

he says is absolute total deception which you're so articulately exposed I yeah I absolutely congratulate for that you you're very very effective at exposing that kind of deception and the same is true here the same is true with the document you just read total deception okay let's get into some of the clips from your documentary which is powerful and I recommend that everybody watch it but this is some there are real geo engineers that exist yes I was shocked to find that anyone named themselves that here's just a clip of the types of things that they brag about. How we engineer the planet. It's about the fact,

an uncomfortable fact, but it is a fact that we have the technical ability to do this. They are all fast acting, they are cheap, and they are fundamentally imperfect. They're the problems of how you control something where an individual country can have tremendous leverage over the whole planet's climate and where there are winners and ways that really could be unpredictable. And I mean, not to frighten you, but I think you can imagine scenarios that lead to war. example is the array of technologies, often referred to collectively as geoengineering, that potentially could help reverse the warming effects of global climate change. One that has gained my personal attention is stratospheric aerosol injection.

There's all sorts of ways you could do this, but the standard idea has always been. Spray sulfuric acid in the stratosphere, 20 kilometers over our head, and use that to stop the planet warming up. The example many people cite was when the Mount Pinatubo volcano exploded. and all of this ash went into the air and had a cooling effect on the Earth. And so people have long proposed since the mid-60s that you could artificially add dust to the stratosphere and cool the planet. Not that this would be a good solution for global warming, it would not.

But it does show the way we're steadily developing the powers to manipulate the planet with comparative ease. That sulfur in the lower atmosphere is masking some of the climate warming from CO2. So... Is this the global dimming or something... Yeah. is basically to emulate what big volcanoes do, put material in the stratosphere to reflect sunlight.

So the problem is the following. If you add SO2 to the stratosphere, SO2 doesn't condense. So you might want to put alumina in. Aluminate has a very high nature of a fraction. It's very small. It doesn't coagulate. And you could engineer particles

have particular properties. You can get them of the stratosphere. You can concentrate particles near the poles. Costs are so cheap that the richest people on the planet could perhaps afford to buy an ice age. It's extraordinarily cheap. I knew it was cheap when I found that they were quoting in tons. It's also true that particles as they get bigger fall out a lot faster.

We sort of step back and then, okay, well, how would you actually make particles in the stratosphere? This is really engineering now. If it was aerosols in the stratosphere, it would likely be put there by airplanes. Start with a fleet of just two or three kind of modified business jazz. The basic idea is that if you let a plume off on an aircraft by just changing some little details, you can actually get much smaller particle size distributions by doing this kind of spraying. So there are all sorts of side effects. I'll get to them in a second, but if you put some sulfuric acid in the stratosphere, for example, you could deplete stratospheric ozone. Smaller size means more service area, but more service area means less ozone.

Oh, is the stuff in the stratosphere going to be killing some number of people that are going to be sacrificed by... It's an obvious concern. If it kills a million people, we're only doing a 1% more, we're just killing 10,000 more people. You can do math. Okay. But that's... So, killing people is not the objective here. So if I made a decision or if it was a collective decision,

to do a geoengineering program and you put say the kind of program I think makes more sense we put about a million tons a year in but let's say you might end up killing many tens of thousands of people a year as a direct result of that decision and so the only thing that we can do to cool the planet or that society can do to cool the planet is deploy these sorts of technology and by the way it's not really a moral hazard it's more like free riding on our grandkids and it means they're going to be winners and losers just like there are winners and losers for C or

two, but they're different winners and losers. So this makes the problem, if anything, harder to solve. You've introduced another dimension of complexity into the managing the planet's climate problem. All right. I mean, that comes from your documentary, The Dimming, very powerful for folks that want to watch it. It is free.

It's on YouTube. You can also catch it at geoengineeringwatch.org. Lots and lots of really important information. And clearly there, there, there's. discussing all the things that we would be afraid of. And this guy, Keith, he seems to be a pretty big figure in this whole thing and dreaming up, atomizing sulfur into the ionosphere, if you will, and one of my least favorite, you know, toxins on the earth, aluminum.

It's a terrible idea. And yet, clearly, they're saying, if we do this, there will be repercussions. And so is that, you know, what they're talking about there, is that what you believe is being done? Is it what are the elements that you think are happening when we're seeing these chem trails? What should be, we be concerned about it. If it was water, who cares? What is it? First, I want to say to your editing staff, I'm speechless.

They are so professional. Thank you. I'm very, very grateful for their efforts. I don't, I choose not to believe anything. I only look at what I see with my own eyes and what the lab tests have confirmed are there. It's raining down on us in unimaginable quantities. And what David Key stated at the presentation which you showed part of, which I attended, which I was banned from after that conference where I confronted him,

and that confrontation is in the dimming documentary. After a three-and-a-half-hour symposium of him proposing putting tens of millions of tons of aluminum nanoparticles, the most harmful form of aluminum, the smaller the particle, into the atmosphere annually, I confronted Dr. Keith at that conference. Have you done any toxicological studies whatsoever? He tried to avoid the question saying there's a lot of junk in there anyway, a little more won't hurt, paraphrased. I cornered him again and said that is, those materials in our skies so far is not aluminum. Have you studied aluminum? And his answer, no, could terrible things happen tomorrow? We don't know. What kind of an answer is that from a so-called academician? It's the world's most recognized climate engineer.

David Keith is the face of geoengineering disinformation, fueling the false narrative that gee we could may might do it someday when there it is glaring in the skies above us every single day and Dale that's what got me into this fight to begin with when I built my off-grid home cover of the world's largest renewable energy magazine solar wind and hydro and I was losing 60 or 70 percent of my solar uptake from what aircraft were emitting that cannot be condensation so let me let me understand that you are you know your energy for your off grade home is using solar. You're a solar specialist and you suddenly started recognizing that you're getting less solar energy through your panels than you used to or that you're supposed

to. Is that correct? Correct. Not a little less. There were days when just with the aircraft were emitting 60, 70, even 80 percent decline in solar PV uptake. That doesn't mean you have a 60, 70, 80 percent loss in visible light, but you're losing direct sunlight and that's exactly exactly what solar radiation management is designed to do. It's not just my home. We have huge commercial solar plants that are producing half what the rated output was. And this is the condition called global dimming.

It's not just affecting solar, it's affecting wind negatively and hydro negatively because of the droughts it creates. So how hypocritical is it, Del, for the so-called environmental groups that are actually not acknowledging climate engineering and actually in some ways pushing it when it is hugely devastating to

all three forms of alternative energy. How hypocritical is that? I agree with you there. And I know that you consider yourself environmentalists. We could get into a whole other debate on where we sit. This is obviously a broad concept, but I agree with you. And I keep saying to my own family, Bill Gates is your environmental. He is the head of your environmental movement.

He's trying to block out the sun. He believes in covering all of your crops with deadly herbicides and peasant. pesticides. He's buying up all the farmland. He doesn't think you can feed enough people with organic food. So, I mean, do you still consider, I say to my family, do you still consider yourself an environmentalist if that's what is defined by? Carbon credit scores and enslaving people to ideas and pushing technologies that may or may not be ready, all of that. But I don't want to get into that. And I want to keep moving. I'm actually going to skip a video. I will describe it because there's actually a bigger, more pressing question I have for you. But in your film,

You sent, there's a team that goes out. They fly through the clouds. They collect samples of what they saw, what were chem trails. In the cloud itself, you discover aluminum particles in there. And so I want to sort of talk to that. The aluminum is a serious concern for me. It is in vaccines. It's one of the biggest issues we believe with the dangers of vaccines and why they're

dangerous is aluminum. So again, this is somewhere where we cross over into a space. First of all, my question would be this. There is aluminum in fuel, in fossil fuels, one of the dangers of, you know, combustible engines and having cars drive all over the places. We're inhaling this stuff, and aluminum is a byproduct that's in the fuel. I have to assume it's also in jet fuel that there's aluminum in the burning of that. So how can you be completely sure that when you are flying through a cloud and collecting aluminum, it's just not. the aluminum that's already a product that we know exists from burning fuel. How do you know

that it's an additive that's being released as a chem trail? Because the cloud affluent layer that our samples were taken from was emitted from nozzles on these aircraft which we have film footage of. It's not out of the combustion area of the engine and the quantity that's showing up on the ground again based on our strapped up to 50 million tons. You can't run that much material through engines and have that engine still continue to function. So again, this is the stated purpose of geoengineering. The aluminum is the stated material to be used. It's in the patents. It's in our rain. The quantities, again, exceed anything you could run through an engine. Every single dot connects.

And I want to backtrack to one point DEL that I think is profoundly important. In the video clips that your editor's so professionally put together, they showed not just Dave Keith, but they showed Kin Caldera, the second most recognized geongering the planet, former Department of Defense scientists. We have an audio of Dr. Ken Caldera on the record stating what he did for the U.S. DoD was to design ways of spraying pathogens into clouds to infect the population below. In his own words, we have the recording at geogering watch.org. Yeah. So again, we have Italian researchers. You know that they found COVID-19 attached to airborne particulates. We have 85 countries infected in three days. This is all indicative of an airborne dispersion.

And we know the U.S. DoD routinely tests on innocent populations. Washington Post acknowledged this, 1977. Even as of that date, they acknowledged no less than 239 open-air biological tests conducted by the U.S. military over U.S. populations without their knowledge or consent. This is business as usual. Why would we think they'd ask our permission? Did they ask our permission to detonate 2,400 nuclear bombs, which contaminated everything and everyone?

Back to the why would they do this to themselves? Question. They already have. All right. I totally agree with you. And by the way, I don't think it's lost on anyone, certainly not in this audience, that they just tested a total experimental vaccine as a failure. It's dangerous, deadly, all of those things. So clearly our government has no problem testing on us. We've reported on genetically modified mosquitoes, all sorts of stupid ideas that are just unleashed upon us. And so to bring it back and part of the issue and why I'm being so hard here is there may be things happening. And clearly, But if I can't prove it in the court of law, Dane, and this is sort of how I see things, and I want my audience to understand this, too. It's not that I'm exactly pushing back because your evidence isn't there, but I'm trying to figure out, you know, if I want to sue, which is something we're really good at with the informed consent action network, what can I sink my teeth into? And so I'll be honest. When you say we know there's a nozzle on the plane, we have proof of it that's releasing these toxins, can I assume that there's two different things happening?

You have seen these nozzles, you have proof of these nozzles, but when you flew the plane through the clouds, you just said that you knew it came from a nozzle. Did you get video footage of that plane's nozzle when it released those clouds? Are you putting two thoughts together? You've seen a nozzle and you've seen a chem trail, and then you flew through the chem trail. Do you have evidence that the very chem trail you flew through had a nozzle on that plane? You can't get that close to a nozzle, Dell, in the air. You can't get that.

The air traffic controllers won't let you get that close. But again, how many dots do we have that connect here? And when we have the, just let's stop and think about again, the entire global science community, climate science community is saying we should do exactly what we see happening. Every government in the globe saying exactly the same. Every constituent shown in climate engineering patent showing up in our precipitation, our snow, our frozen precipitation, which is also another aspect. Del, if I could ask before I forget, you were in the big freeze in Dallas, Texas?

Were you not? Yeah, I was. I was. It was crazy. made absolutely no sense. We keep having crazy weather. Believe me, this whole conversation's on my radar. I just, the level of evidence that I can get there and do something about it is what I'm trying

to find, you know, how we get there. But, okay, go ahead. Okay, let's keep in mind. Let's keep in mind. You can have a 50-year chain smoker that dies of lung cancer and you'd have a hard time making that argument in court. Just the same with the vaccines, same scenario. I have been there.

In the case of what you brought up earlier, the Chinese and their acknowledgement of their weather modification activities, I encourage your listeners to search this. Chinese scientist engineer snowstorm, openly covered, Fox News, MSNBC, popular science, that they engineered what should have been a rain event over Beijing and turned it into a frozen precipitation event, exactly what's happening right now in the U.S. with winter storm, quote, Olive, where we have moisture coming out of the record warm Gulf of Mexico, much like what happened in Dallas, Texas a year and a half, almost two years ago now. And then it's nucleated with chemical ice nucleating elements. They're in the snow, the frozen precipitation. We test it so we know.

And that's how you get temperatures to drop 75 degrees in a matter of hours, as we just recently saw in Denver, from 50 plus above to 24 below in a matter of hours. That is not nature. That's chemical ice nucleation for weather modification. This is nothing short of weather warfare. We have the patents. We have the acknowledgement of the Chinese government doing it. And if they're doing it, why would we think our government's not doing it?

When we have a military that's bigger than the next 10 biggest militaries combined. I agree. And our military has three times more tankers, the jet aerial tankers, our military has three times more than all other militaries on the planet combined. All right. So let's get into that for a second because we're sort of moving into you just said warfare. You use that point. that is how our world unfortunately looks at things.

This is a clip where you have a scientist talking about how the paint using stealth and how we use metals is actually a way that we could change our atmosphere and do things. Take a look at this. Some of this technology actually came out of the stealth program. Stealth was the idea that you would try to reduce the amount of radar energy that would be reflected

off of an aircraft. You could put particles of metal into the paint itself. These particles would then absorb the energy. But if you put that up into the air and then you broadcast a signal that is tuned to the exact frequency that matches the size, and this is the key, all of these particles are the same exact size, so they respond to a specific frequency. So when you transmit this frequency, you can get all those particles to heat up. And if that massive air has moisture in it, any kind of humidity at all, it all rises and expands. So this This is how you can actually generate a weather system.

All right, so this is really interesting, the idea that, you know, beyond just this idea of putting a layer around the Earth, and I've read books, lots of different climate engineers believe that they may be a future. We're having a discussion if it's happening now or not. But this is how it would work. This gets into this idea of harp, right? Because if once these particles are in space, in your documentary, you really lay out, then how would you push them around, move them around,

just so that I can prove this is real. I'm going to play the video in a second. We looked up Harp and actually let's play the video. Let's play the video first from the film. This is the definition of Harp. In 1985, Bernard Eastland applied for patents. Many claim that these patents have become the blueprint for Harp, high-frequency active Aurora Research Program.

Harp is a large antenna where we beam radio frequency energy up into the upper atmosphere. Applications discussed in the patents included destroying missiles. Communications, control, and disruption were included. There were some other ideas both to possibly modify weather. What we can do with an antenna is change the portion of the sky into which we insert the energy. HARC's combined antennae generate a focused billion-watt high-frequency radio beam which penetrates the lower ionosphere and interacts with the currents of the auroral electrojet.

In certain applications, the military acknowledges that it can literally lift the ionosphere. And what they say is, it's not a problem, it's a short period of time. Yet when you lift the ionosphere up, the lower atmosphere rushes in and fills that void, which changes localized weather patterns. At its biggest size suggested, if you beamed it for an hour and a half, that would equal the energy in a hydrogen bottom. HARP is only one installation of perhaps a hundred that are on that scale around the globe. You can create high pressure domes in the northern hemisphere that creates a clockwise

spin, just like the pulley. That allows them to steer the upper level winds into nearly any configuration they wish. So the areas that are under that high pressure dome fry. fry. Take a look at that round bubble. Is that not telling? That's a high-pressure dome parked right over the top of us that ensures nothing, nothing can flow in. You would never see this meteorologically 20 years ago. Never. All right, well, as I was saying before, we wanted to see this harp thing, mythological in existence or does it really exist? I've obviously heard a lot about it,

but when we looked it up, it's still there. This is their own website. It is now at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, at least as who we're being told, is in charge of it. This is a quick little paragraph they have on the site. The high-frequency active auroral research program, or harp, is a scientific endeavor aimed at studying the properties and behavior of the ionosphere. The ionosphere stretches roughly 50 to 400 miles above Earth's surface, right at the edge of space, along with the neutral upper atmosphere. The ionosphere forms the boundary between Earth's lower atmosphere where we live and breathe and the vacuum of space. Operation Research Facility was transferred from the United States Air Force to the University of Alaska Fairbanks on August 11, 2015, allowing HARP to continue with exploration of ionospheric phenomenology via a land-use cooperative research and development agreement.

So this thing exists. It's there. Now, Dane, look, I am with you. It is clear. I have scientists that are slamming, you know, protons. together under the ground in, you know, Europe could cause a black hole. I mean, there's nothing stopping what I guess would say a geek that is onto something. And if you could move the weather or create patterns, I have to believe they're doing it. And I keep thinking as you're talking,

you know, how often, you know, the idea of, you know, cloning an animal is a discussion while we find out later they were already doing it, right? And that's part of what you're saying. They talk about the science as though it's somewhere in the future, but clearly the funding is going into them doing it right at that time. So that's in the back of my head. Now, how does Harp work? And you're saying they have these things all around the world. You sort of describe they heat the ionosphere, and somehow that pushes and creates a higher ceiling that creates sort of a vacuum. Explain that to me exactly. How does this technology, how do they use it? I'll get right to that. I want to make clear that the smoke and mirrors of the University of Fairbanks being in charge of that

antenna ray is absolute smoke and mirrors nonsense. Again, it's just the same as the medical industrial field doing whatever the matrix controllers tell them to do. The same situation with Hart, smoke and mirrors designed to throw the public off the beaten path. Hart can put out three and a half million watts of power that can be concentrated into a beam that can be up to a billion watts or more of power. When it is beamed into the electronically charged ionosphere it causes an electrical chain reaction which superheats that portion of the atmosphere so much so that it can cause a bulge in the atmosphere up and down the upward bulge militarily is stated for the use of creating resistance for an incoming ICBM intercontinental

ballistic missile but the downward push dell forms a high pressure heat dome much like you just showed the dot the diagrams for that's part of what has blocked precipitation from the US West for so many years. The meteorologists have termed this the quote ridiculously resilient ridge as they pretend they don't know anything about any of this. And why wouldn't our meteorologists speak out? I just want to make sure we don't miss this point. There's an illegal federal gag order on all the nations weathermen, national weather service and national oceanic atmospheric administration. Why would our government fill the need to gag the order? I have that gag order just to prove you're right. Let's bring it. Do we have that or did I cut that slide?

I know we had it. Here it is. This is what he's talking about. This is the public employees for environmental responsibility, weather service employees tethered by illegal gas orders. It goes, a gag order. Organization planning, the confidentiality order forbids disclosure of anything about the weather service organization, workforce analysis, which has the effect of musling, any revelations about agency planning and the rationale for planned actions. Collective bargaining, the National Weather Service has just added a confidentiality clause to its ground rules for collective bargaining agreement, negotiations, which requires that all information about the CBA bargaining process must be held confidential.

And you know what? You have a great clip, and I think this would be a good point. When you think about being muzzled, we know that things get censored in MySpace. It's censored in years. There's a couple of news anchors every once in while that let it leak out. This is a great little video. People check this out. We've been dealing a lot with some military activity in terms of chaff anyway, and that's something that I experienced for the first time yesterday. That was a whole lot of fun. And that's where the military just basically dumps some of the tiny particles. of plastic or metal mylar into the atmosphere.

And when you see this kind of a pattern like this, you can read the shirt, there's something going on. They're actually a little bit of magnetic, and little bitty strips of where there's aluminum. Then you see these bands of very distinct cloud cover moving into the region. That is not rain, that is not snow. Believe it or not, military aircraft flying through the region

is dropping chaff. Small bits of aluminum, sometimes it's made of plastic, or even metallicized paper products, but it's used as an anti-radar issue, and obviously they're up there practicing. Now, they won't confirm that, but I was in the Marine Corps for many years, and I'll tell you right now, but that's what it is.

I mean, that's hysterical that is getting out. Obviously, they didn't get the memo, but I want to get to in your documentary, I think one of the most compelling things is where you show these clouds that have these really hard edges to them. When we look on radar, that absolutely makes no sense whatsoever. You know, clouds that are sitting in perfect square lines like that.

Now, is that a part, am I putting two things together correctly? Is that particles in the air now being pushed by this harp technology? Not just harp, but also the NXRAD system, which is a ground-based network of transmitters that are used to steer weather systems, and including hurricanes. Again, I want to say to your staff, I am completely shocked at their professionalism and how much work they put into this.

Thank you so much. So we have in the case of, for example, Hurricane Ian or Nicole or Harvey, we recorded the interaction of these transmitters and their effect on holding those systems in place and steering them. So the spawning of the hurricanes is another issue completely. We have waters as warm as we have around the globe,

certainly nature can spawn them as well, although they can augment that with the pressure zone manipulation that we just described. But once they're near shore, they are very steerable, and we have absolute inarguable recordings of these interactions of the transmitters steering the storms. So in the case of Hurricane Harveydale, how did the so-called weather forecasters, which are simply script readers, they're reading scripts that are passed down to them from ultimately Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. Those two private defense contractors that are neck-deep in climate engineering operations do all the weather modeling for the nation's weathermen think about that you have the foxes running the in houses passing this schedule weather script all the way down to the

local meteorologist so in the case of hurricane harvey they knew seven days in advance it was going to go where it went and park there and deluge that entire region how could they possibly know that unless it was the schedule weather and if your listeners search geoengineer watch.org hurricane harvey look at the video decide for themselves we painstakingly recorded these interactions that you're of the transmissions in the storm. It's inarguable. Hurricane E in the same. Hurricane Nicole, the same.

Hurricane Michael, we have a number of these videos. So the bottom line is their ability to manipulate the weather systems now are near total. And we have military documents like owning the weather by 2025. U.S. military documents are very gold. I have that document. Let's pull that up.

This is the Air Force, folks. This is owning the weather, 2025. Here's just an excerpt from it. In 2025, U.S. Aerospace forces can own the weather by capitalizing on emerging technologies and focusing development of these technologies to warfighting applications. Such a capability offers the warfighter tools to shape the battle space in ways never before possible.

It provides opportunities to impact operations across the full spectrum of conflict and is pertinent to all possible futures. The purpose of this paper is to outline a strategy for the use of a future weather modification system to achieve military objectives rather than to provide a detailed technical roadmap. This is a huge document, but that's just an excerpt from it. It's there. You're right about it.

But here's the question that follows what you just said. You are saying that these hurricanes are being manipulated. They're hitting, you know, our coast. I understand a weapon. If you told me that hurricane that hit Japan or Germany or something, somehow we are waging war, but why would we be waging a weather war on our own country? How does that make any sense? Really important question. Thank you. And I think this is the point where the American population needs to wake up to the fact that they are not only expendable to those in power, but a rapidly increasing liability. And the COVID-19 Vax program should be a glaring red flag of that. That we are a liability to those in power and they are trying to call the herd as rapidly as they can at this point. The biosystems of the planet are imploding. Fisheries are imploding. Plankton are imploding. Insect populations imploding. Wildlife population.

populations imploding, those in power are concerned about their welfare, not anybody else's, and they are trying to thin the herd. So again, if the American population still at this point believes that those who actually control the American government care at all for their welfare, for their posterity, it's time to wake up. We are a liability to those in power, nothing less. All right, I'll leave that sink where it may. My audience struggles with me on this because I still, I do, I say all the time it doesn't seem like our government. There's certainly not our best interest. Every story I've said today, fluoride, you name it, you know, we are being poisoned all the time, this idea that they're doing it to kill us off, you know, in this situation,

the argument, though, is, it's always been the one that's harder for me. I understand how vaccines could be used as a weapon very easily, because you can spot hits very specific groups. You could pick a city, you could pick a county, and just give them a different vaccine that sterilizes and nobody else. If I created it, I'd know. I'm just going to avoid that vaccine. Bill Gates, maybe does or does not take a vaccine. He's promoting. That makes sense.

But when you're messing with the weather, when you're putting aluminum in the air, if that's what they're doing, Bill Gates is breathing that. These morons are breathing their own attack. They're attacking their own cities. The weather's hitting them. So how do you answer that? This is one of my biggest hangups.

Why would they be doing it to themselves? I don't see them walk around in gas masks. I don't see them. So why would they be attacking themselves? Let's address that. First, we have to look at this as they do. They look at it as a risk-to-risk scenario, the risk of doing it versus the risk of not doing it. They will do anything to retain their power and control. So let's backtrack, again, to the 2,400 nuclear weapons that have been detonated all over the world that contaminated every single individual that is in control, the matrix, those who print the money, the same individuals that are behind the vaccines, contaminated all of them. You have a population that does not want to change their behavior, does not want to acknowledge the damage being done to the planet, and the paradigm that's been created by those who created the matrix, i.e. the money printers. So they feel that they have no other choice but to continue to use the weather as a weapon.

And think about this, Dell. This is the crown jewel weapon with the military industrial complex in so many ways because they can bring populations to their knees. They can crush food supplies, and they are definitely doing that. We're seeing systematic impacts on agricultural production regions all over the globe from climate engineering. they can control populations without those populations ever even knowing they're under assault not just from the weather not just from crushing food supplies but from other elements that are in this spray mix so many people are in fact del waking up to the vaccine are they not they are yes

they don't want anymore they've had enough so that attempt at assault is run its course but we cannot hide from what's being sprayed in the atmosphere and those in power may likely have forms of chelation heavy metal chelation specifically that we're not given access to you know one facility in germany that does this pulls the blood from the body

keylates the entire blood flow in an individual and this is a method they could exempt themselves from some of the consequences they would know what else is in the mix that they might be able to exempt themselves from so the bottom line is this train is off the rails they are not going to let go with their power and i think we need to look at this still like a cancer this is a matrix cancer of control does a cancer intend to kill its host

no but a cancer doesn't tend to proliferate on check until the host eventually dies. These people are power addicts. They're not going to let go over that power. And climate engineering, again, is a covert weapon that they are using every single day, whether it's flash freezes, flash droughts, flash floods, to bring populations

to their knees, to manipulate populations. Those populations have no idea they're under assault. And they're not about to let go of this weapon, regardless of the consequences. And I'll leave this final note. Psychoanalysis of those in power, common thread, common characteristic, and it's this. a near total lack of comprehension as to the consequences of their actions even to themselves.

And that's straight from the manual. You know, I would agree that that has been my assessment in working in this vaccine space. And we're in science in general. I mean, I've now, you know, got well over a decade in my own investigations of science, whether working for CBS. And I would say that scientists in not putting them down, they do great work. But I now used to consider them the smartest, you know, people among us, I guess reading books and looking through a microscope, but in the whole

grander scheme of things, they have absolutely no intuition. They have no sight outside of. I now picture scientists as that's all they do, is they look at something through a little microscopic space, and that's their entire understanding. They don't care about the ramifications for what they do, and they actually believe, when I've asked them, that the problems, that whatever problem they're fixing in their little myopic world, any problem that's created by their fix is some other scientist's responsibility. So it really does back that up.

But you said weather modification as a weapon, whether it's ice storms or droughts. And we can look at deserts and nations that are in drought. But very recently, there's a video that has gone viral that I think is incredibly fascinating. This is just one senator. I believe she's a senator in Romania. but this is what she had to say, and we checked to make sure that this was translated correctly, not our video, but is it possible that earthquakes could be caused? Folks, take a look at this.

Stima, scorer, the three years, we've been at least a level of global, a deverathe campaign to inciner in mass, fie by intermediary unmeted pandemic and the need imminent to injecting with vaccines netested that are omohemps, be in intermediary in a warreduke the number of population of globuly but repun on other fagashour, political international, re-a-seas

poli-de-put-pute and modific the and the an aneurys to assist them and the production to tremor at comandah. In fact, it's an attack upon Turkey from part of the world, which has displacutut at all

the fact that they've been put up to Pum, the recept Aip Erdogan, presidentle Turkish. More, the position of neutrality and mediator in the war,

Ukrainian-rush, a derangea profound, more ales that Turkey is the two of the power NATO. Poziya

to blocka aderation of NATO, but also his course his course as well as the gesture to

to beckan in the mid-enflinth after shav, no, has remained without a

low and the world um... but nobody has thought that will be neverooo to moire

people, the people and in a muchelest and is to do allvertisement because that not the area the most populated

of Turkey. 150 of replicas of one with tremors devastating of the second the first

without existence a unifokar zone being stimulated artificial armele geologic existing for the

long long using using to without cause a many many many probably

for experiments now it was put in practice if if we're we're we're

we're gonna we're gonna be brought to conduct of gas and petrol, these are being, in fact, and one of the scopurgery of their but with 10 seconds

in an anointe in fact that's used to Turkish have inchised these conducts. In plus, with 24 of hours inanate of producing of seismul 10 states

have retrasas ambassadors in Turkey. With five days in the product of this May in from Romania emitea avertisari for the cetacein

Romani in Turkey though no exist a very pericol, the same other tern. Omorand women and have done interests

and the heart the internet on the television are that not has existed an epicentru and a epiline with mitty

with mitty the services secretesht investiges a possible intervention criminal I mean

those are outrageous accusations she's making but a lot of very interesting anecdotal stories she's talking about lack of an epicenter. We did see hundreds, I think it was, earthquakes, aftershocks, all through Turkey.

In your perspective, do you, does your thinking go this far? Could they use these weather modification tools to cause an earthquake? I would bet my last dollar on it. And Del, I have so much respect for you. You do not pull punches. Thank you so much for even exposing this aspect as well. and we have covered the Cigiontringwatch. So let's look at some of the data based on this from institutions like MIT, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Let's backtrack to the 2011 Japanese earthquake. Your listeners can look this up, and I encourage them to do so.

MIT atmospheric heating, Japanese earthquake. MIT acknowledged what they called extremely anomalous atmospheric heating directly above the epicenter for three days prior to that quake. That is exactly the signature we would expect to see with infrared emissions. If an ionosphere heater signal was being bounced off the atmosphere, which they can do now with the reflective particulates, as you showed in the diagram earlier, and they can beam that back down into the strata in a seismically sensitive zone causing not just heating, but vibration. And those tremors can fan out and expand, causing a reverberation. And this is scientifically accepted phenomenon.

This is not speculation. It's not fringe. So let's look at other examples. The Christchurch earthquake in 2016. John Kerry flies in during an election. What's he flying around the world for during an election? Flies into Christchurch, flies to Antarctica, where there's another ionosphere heater in Antarctica, flies back to Christchurch, pulls our diplomats out hours

before the massive Christchurch earthquake hits. Is New Zealand not in the hip pocket of the globalist with the vaccines and everything else in their hip pocket? Same with Japan. Japan was starting to ally with its regional partners before the quake, after the quake, absolutely right back in the U.S. hit pocket. There's Haiti, there's Chile. These examples go on and on and on.

Diplomats being pulled out, hours before the quakes hit. This technology is absolutely real, scientifically verifiable. Encourage your listeners to dig deeper on this issue. This weapons like harp are a weapon of mass destruction, period. And there is no question about this technology doing exactly what you describe, exactly what this Romanian governmental official described. So again, it's not coincidence that Turkey basically told NATO to leap and they'd had enough and then diplomats were pulled out, I believe, from 10 different countries in Turkey, days before this quake hit and the quake hits. This is not

some free coincidence, though. You know, it's, I mean, I'm sure we've covered, I'm sure my audience right now has covered the map on where they're at with this. I mean, some of this is so hard to accept or even fathom that these things exist. But as I said in the beginning, if we had this technology, if we had it, I know we would use it. And if we were onto something all the way back when Lyndon Johnson was celebrating, this was the future that he was dreaming of,

why would we have gotten off of it? I mean, this is where I'm at. Like, why would you get off of that? Clearly, whether it would be the greatest weapon that could be used, because how do you prove it? And, you know, it's silent, you know, what it can do. You know, your documentary gets into all of this. I have a few more clips, but really, I want to wrap it up because I want people to go and watch your documentary.

They should. You have so much evidence that's there, you know, whether or not, you know, this turkey. I mean, I think we all, here's what I'm at. I mean, clearly, you've got me to the point where I have to say I have to be critical. critically aware that things do not add up correctly. I know the psychology of my government. I know the psychology of scientists. I know the psychology of our regulatory agencies,

none of which seem to be working in our favor. And the biggest thing for me is when you're being censored, when you're being called a conspiracy theorist, or they're saying that's a crazy idea, and mainstream media gets behind that, that's exactly where we should be looking, it seems to me. So to wrap this up, Dean, you know, there's a lot of really diabolical information here. And it just seems so beyond anything we can do anything about.

And I'll be honest, you know, you and I are very similar. I feel like I was, you know, a lone voice shouting from a mountaintop when I really stumbled into the science around vaccines. And I felt like I had a whistleblower at the CDC. I could prove, you know, that a fraud had taken place and that set me off on a journey that I have not let go of. But vaccines, I always felt like at least this is something I can prove, I believed I could prove it's injuring people. Your issue is so much harder because I don't have a parent that says I was healthy today or my kid was healthy today or my doctor saying I was healthy today. I got the vaccine. I'm sick the next day. it's so much more vast.

When you do this work, you must be doing it for a reason. You must be hoping something can be achieved here. What the hell can we do about this if it's at the level that you're saying we're at? Our paths have been very similar, Dale. And when I started this journey some 20 plus years ago, I only heard my own voice coming back at me. But now, now because others realize that they are going down in the same ship with me, others like Air Force Generals, two of which are in the video the dimming, former Canadian Minister of Defense, former U.S. Presidential Cabinet members,

former government scientists, former Premier of British Columbia, and many, many others, now knowing that their futures, their posterity's future, also depends on stopping this willful destruction, not just to the planet's life support systems, not just to our weather and climate systems, but to the air we breathe. It's literally contaminating the entire web of life from the clouds to the ground. food crops full of aluminum. We know that the aluminum's killing tree boots, so we have tree fall happening all over the globe. We have trees dying, we have crops imploding. It's affecting literally every aspect of the planet's life support system. So as we bring this to light, as you reach a critical mass of awareness and people realize they are in fact

fighting for their lives, even those within the system realize they are participating in their own demise, I would argue only then by that critical mass of awareness. Can we have a chance of stopping these programs, Dell, from the inside out? And the difference with this issue with climate engineering, it's in front of the grill every day. It's not in the rearview mirror. It's in front of the grill getting bigger and worse by the day as the climate system implodes and they ramp up these systems so they can't hide it much longer. And I would argue when they can't hide it, Dell, they're going to play even bigger cards. They could spray Ebola. They could spray Marbury, hemorrhagic fevers. They can spray anything they want on us, any time they

want. We have to deal with this issue or we're not going to be around much longer and that's a mathematical statistical fact. So again, if we can reach a critical mass, Dell, I would argue we'd have a chance of stopping it from the inside out. I was talking to some scientists that have helped me on the work that I've doing, and they have a question, and one of them had a question for you that I want to ask you because I want to know how to help, but it comes down to this, and maybe there's a space here.

But you're doing all this research, Dean, and in it, why am I not seeing, or am I not seeing, can you point me to, why are you not getting peer-reviewed publications in journals to discuss all of these things you talk about the effects on trees the aluminum sampling that you're catching I mean you have videos of it what's keeping you from going that step to getting it published in in important you know environmental journals and things like that

the same thing that keeps the medical industrial community from publishing the fact that vaccines are killing people vaccines are causing autism a 40,000% increase in boys I believe from one in 10,000 to 70s you know this figure's better than me to 1 in 25 today you know same They control the entire matrix. There is in fact two peer-eviewed studies now on the geoengineering destruction of the ozone layer and the geoengineering is being used with cofly ashes of base material. There's two studies, but several studies have been rescinded immediately as soon as they came out. They put that fire out because they control the entire system.

And when we know about whistleblowers in general, anybody who actually have inside knowledge, we can ask Julian Assange about how well that went for him doing what he did. So, but I would argue again that the scientific community would show them very little courage so far. And I've been in the field with top California state officials that I know personally, USDA scientists that I know personally acknowledging. They acknowledge to me in the field that these programs go on, but they will not say a word because they don't want to lose their paychecks and pensions or worse. So we have a system that's controlled by that type of purse-string manipulation and outright threats. And we have a government that's totally corrupt. totally corrupt, Dale. I know you know that as well as anybody on the planet. Who is the last honorable government official, Paul Wellstone, who his whole family was taken out. That's the last

honest official that I know of. So again, they control the entire system, but they can't hide this issue much longer. The life support systems of the planet are imploding. Climate engineering is a big reason why, not the only reason, not saying that. But I'm saying that they've done so much damage in 75 years and they can't hide that much longer. It's a nonlinear equation. We are going hit the wall. They are chemically nucleating winter weather now. That's why we see these temperature swings of 50, 75 degrees in a day. This is not nature. It's so severe at this point, Dell. I would say in the coming weeks and months, they won't be able to hide this issue any longer. And then we should be ready for anything, including this, Dell, I'll leave it with this. We have open discussion in

certain portions of the U.S. government for using nuclear bombs to put enough particulate matter in the atmosphere because climate engineering isn't going to keep up with what's happening to provide temporary cooling. If they do that, we're done. And they're openly discussing that nuclear bombs to help cool the planet. Yeah, the stupidity goes really deep. All right, Dane, you still walk around. You haven't turned to Howard Hughes. You know, you're not walking around in a space suit. Is there any tricks that you do or things that you do that maybe for our audience, you know, you know, to handle your health? Is there anything that we should be thinking about that we can do to protect ourselves in some level from what is in the air and that could be just environmental pollutants.

But what do you do to stay healthy in this crazy world we live? Certainly have environmental particulate pollution from any sources. We're not denying that. But as far as atmospheric particulates of the most harmful elements, climate engineering, single greatest source, don't go out and exercise in anything but completely clear skies. If you do, you might as well smoke a pack of cigarettes or worse. And your listeners can go outside on a dark night. If they're aerosol spraying, it's hazy skies, take the brightish light you can find, aim it at the sky, and look vertically up through that shaft of light.

You'll be shocked. It looks like it's snowing, and we're breathing that. Recent scientific study states, DEL, that we may be breathing as much as 20 million nanoparticles in every single breath. That's inconceivable, but you have to consider how small these nanoparticles are. You can fit 100,000 across the width of a human hair. Don't exercise in this. Exercise inside, filtered air. Constant chelation, and even elements we need anyway.

Vitamin C, calcium, elements that are necessary can help to chelate. There's other chelation forms. You have to do it carefully under supervision. Please seek advice on that, but we have to constantly keep these elements moving through our system and not building up. They're very bioaccumulative, in case of aluminum especially. So, keylation, avoid breathing, especially exercising in this type of air. And bottom line, we have to fix this. We can't mitigate it any other way.

It has to stop or we're done. And there's many other layers, again, the biological aspect can't be overstated either, though. Dan, I want to thank you for all the time. You've dedicated to this issue. I know it hasn't been easy. You're attacked all the time. As a brother that, you know, as you said, very similar issues in how we've had to handle it. You have so much evidence on your website, so I want to make sure that people go and check out geoengineeringwatch.com, I mean, dotorg.

dot org, geoengineering watch.org. You can look at all information and obviously donate to the work. I'm sure, you know, Dane could always use your help. Dane, I want to say, you know, let's get together outside of here. If there's lawsuits that can be brought, if I can get some scientists involved that maybe would be bold enough to get some publishing done, let's have that conversation on our time. I want to help any way we can expose it. I know these people are crazy that are running the world. I plan on winning. I plan on, you know, I'm here for the species. I'm here for the earth. I know we're in that fight together. I want to thank you for your dedication. I want to thank you for taking your time to some really difficult questions today. There's

more. We can get into this more. Maybe we'll have you on again, but I want to thank you very much for being here. Brother Dell, the gratitude is mine. I am so grateful to you, your staff, at the work you put into presenting this issue. I'm truly speechless. You guys have gone above and beyond. Thank you so much. I'm here for anything, any time.

And yes, I will continue this fight. I will never abandon my post as I know you will never abandon yours. And we will yet pull back the curtain and expose the insanity. We march together in this battle. Thank you, Del. All right. Take care, Dane.

Thank you. Thank you. All right. I want to say it again. I've already said in the show. Look, this is the high wire. We are investigating where there is science that exists. I've shown you the science exists here.

I do not want you to believe that I'm telling you what to think, or that I'm saying that Dane should tell you what to think. We are in an investigation here. I want you to do your own research. You can decide whether these answers or the questions were enough. You should have the right to judge me, the right to judge Dane. That's what we're here about.

I am all about critical thinking, ask the hard questions. I understand that in the chat room right now, I'm being told by my team that you're all over the map right now and whether you like how I handled this or how Dean handled this. Good. Good. This is called a conversation, folks. This is what we all need to get used to having again. This is how we make smarter decisions. This is how we find out where each other is at. I don't just take things because someone says it authoritatively. I want to see the evidence. I hope that you will demand evidence in all the things that matter to you. All that being said, when we do get into these topics, this again is going to be a fairly long conversation. But I also want to say this. I don't get to speak to Dane.

In fact, I don't do it privately. I do it with you. This is what the high wire is. I use this space in order to have the conversation that I would like to have with someone that I think is very interesting. So if it's going long, I'm trying to get to all the questions that I actually have. But for those of you that say, hey, that went on too long. Well, we cut it down. And that is our program called Get Vaccinated.

It looks like this. Folks, it's time for you to get vaccinated. The Highwire is launching a brand new campaign to arm you with the facts. In short videos you can share anywhere, featuring the world's leading experts on COVID-19, vaccines, and everything in between. Natural immunity appears to be robust, complete, and durable. These are the drop-the-mic fully. cited facts to help you, the super spreaders of truth in this real war of misinformation. Share the link, download the short video, and post to your favorite social media platform.

All you have to do is go do the highwire.com slash debt vaccinated for all of the latest short videos. And make sure to grab your get vaccinated merch at the highwire.com. Click shop for the the latest in Highwire gear. We want you armed with the facts online and on the front lines. Get the facts, lose the fear at thehighwire.com. I want to thank my team as Dane did for a very difficult episode to put together. I can't tell you how many slides we were going through and they were moving all around in there. You guys did a fantastic job. There were some questions I want to get to and one of them with a really good friend of mine. And because this issue really does revolve around aluminum, this idea of atomizing aluminum in the air,

Dane is not the only one pointing it out, all of these crazy people think that that's a great idea. Let's just block the sun. Now, whether or not we're doing it right now, I'll leave that to you to decide, but these people want to do that. Maybe they already are, and that is why you should read this book. Aluminum is affecting your life in every way you could imagine. We live in the aluminum age. It's in the fuel, as we're talking about, when you're against, you know, the removal of fossil fuel burning cars. And I have my issues with electric cars.

But by the way, this is, we're breathing it. I want cleaner air. Any way we can get there. There's smart ways to do things. But you really need to understand this element that's affecting our lives in so many ways. Imagine you are an aluminum atom by Mr. Aluminum, Dr. Christopher Exley. We've had him on our show many, many times. He writes a little bit about the accusation of chemtrails.

He talks about some studies he's done analyzing that and questions whether or not it's happening, but there are some anomalies he couldn't explain. I was going to get into that a little bit, but I'd rather you read his book. Go ahead, buy this book anywhere that books are available. It is really, obviously, he has fun with it by the title. He is passionate about this topic. And by the way, you should be too. So, Chris, I asked a couple of questions you had.

I didn't get to your quote. I think people should read it from the book themselves. You know, there's so much going on, and there's so much that we can get really worried about and think, you know, there's no hope. But I want to say this. I think Dane is on a little bit more of a difficult road. It's harder to prove in some ways.

We don't have just direct impact evidence, even for me, those that came before being the vaccine issue has been very, very difficult to win. We have finally turned that corner. This show has been a huge part of that. The film that I made Vaxed was a huge part of that. But more importantly, you have been a huge part of that. You've gotten better at talking about these topics.

You've gotten more consistent about going and visiting your senators and your politicians and demanding answers, reasonable answers to these issues. And so we always have to celebrate. We celebrated our San Diego win. I want to celebrate a win that's not directly. ours, but it is huge. Remember when we said they were going to try and inject children in Maryland and allow them to make the decision without their parents? We have a legal case that won against this in Washington, D.C., but they won. Maryland State Senator pulls Bill Nixon,

nixing parent consent for vaccines after blowback. She pulled it, basically saying, ah, this just isn't a good idea at the time. Despite the fact that 17 states have allowed minor access to vaccines, my bill needed more research before it could be enacted in Maryland. I hope she never gets voted in again. Anyone that's going to make that stupid a decision to have a child injected themselves with a potentially deadly product, having no idea what their own personal history was that their parents didn't happen to tell them you almost died from a vaccine when you were an infant. And by the age of 11, we haven't had the conversation. Now, this moron wants you to make that decision for your life.

I don't think anyone like that should be serving the public. They don't serve the public. Let's make sure we don't vote in any morons. Please, we have control over that. There's a lot that we can do. But huge win in Maryland, and to all the groups out there that made that happen that visited your capital, you are proving that we have the momentum on our side. We are the citizens of the world.

Every government should be following the United States of America. Our edict is for the people, by the people. And, you know, I keep seeing stories of people being dragged out for speaking their truth at some assembly or a doctor talking about having used ivermectin or any of these things. By the way, if you're at any sort of hearing and you see police show up because someone was simply speaking their opinion, please stand up and make your voice heard. This is the United States of America that we broadcast from. This is a world issue. This show is here for the world. And though the United States has a lot of problems, I will say that we have one of the best constitutions ever written. And the basic foundational principle of this nation is that we have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in our hands, endowed to us by God, not given to us by our government, given to us by our creator.

And our Constitution is not to rule over us. It is to control our government. We must remember that. that these people that think they can atomize things in the sky without us voting for it, why don't you talk to your politician and say whether or not this is actually going on, here's what I want to say as my representative, they should never put anything that blocks one single element of the sun

without your voting on it. And if you won't sign on to that, if you won't make a difference there, then I don't think I'm going to vote for you. Are you with me? Can we be in control of things that are adamanty, in our air. Can we go ahead and start writing a law that says that we are in control of that again? Let's look at talking to our politicians about doing something for us. It's working in the vaccine

space. We're winning every day. We're going to keep covering all the different topics. And by the way, all of you that are supporting us, we are fighting for organic farming. We are fighting for your right to always have exemptions to issues that are happening around. We are looking at banking. And as you seed, I am going to talk to Dane to see if there's something I can, I can do to make a difference. I can is you. We, the people, are going to make our world a better place. There's no other news agency like us because we care more about you than we care about other outside sponsors. You are our sponsor.

This show today was because so many of you asked the questions. And when you asked me to ask questions, I'm going to ask all the questions I actually have. If I bothered anybody today, good. That's what we do here at the High Wire. I'll see you next week.