The Highwire with Del Bigtree - THE FINE LINE

Episode Date: September 9, 2022

Dr. Drew’s ‘Aha’ Moment; Doc Sues Board For $35 Million; Vaccine OK’d on 8 Mice; Journey into the Mind; Del Reveals ‘The Real Alex Jones’ 2-Part EventGuests: Paul Thomas, MD; Mattias Desmet, PhD; Dr. Maria Hubmer-MoggBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you are out there in the world. How about we all step out onto the high wire? Well, throughout the pandemic, Hollywood seemed to be the propaganda machine for all the ridiculous laws and rules that were sort of thrown upon us. So I think it's particularly important when we start seeing Hollywood celebrities coming out against politics, especially the politics of California that seem to be the head of these. draconian measures. And this time it's a doctor, one of America's favorite doctors coming out against a recently passed bill. Take a look at this. But I just want to explain how draconian this law is this 2098 in the state of California. Literally would be the case that if you were about, if I was evaluated a patient, let's say you come in, you're my patient, and you come in and you say, the CDC is recommending that I get this new Omicron vaccine, this bybinate vaccine. I'm concerned because

what I'm reading suggested it was only studied on mice. And if I say anything other than standard, what would it be, standard ship empty slogans as specified by the academic and the bureaucratic structure, which would be you're over 60 years old. It's recommended that you get this booster. Follow the proto. If I said, for instance, you're right. It was studied on mice.

I'm probably going to recommend my patients over 65, certainly over 75. I think it's worth the risk. There is antacidin, very, very similar vaccines in influenza. And this is sort of how we do it with influenza every year. We don't test it necessarily in humans every year. So there's a protocol out there. But if you were 30 years old, I would say, you know, there was just a study that came out in circulation last this week that suggested that in men under 40, the risk of myocarditis

is five times higher from the Moderna vaccine. than from COVID itself. Right there, that would qualify as misinformation, even though it's factually accurate. It's merely me discussing what's available in the medical literature with my patient. Let's say that patient was angry for some reason. That patient could make an anonymous complaint to the state. And he or she could go home and go,

you know what, mom and dad and brother and sister, you guys, I'd like you to make the complaint too. Here's what my complaint is. why don't you modify a little bit? I heard something he said in the public the other day. I didn't like either. So add that to it. Each one of those complaints would be dealt with as though a police report

had been filed for a criminal action. It will require a full response with citations and will take months and months and may require hiring an attorney for each case. That is what they are doing. It is absolutely out of control. Now, I'm sure they're going to say, oh, no, no, we'd never use it like that.

of course they don't intend it that's how these laws have unintended effect it will be absolutely chilling on the practice of medicine it'll become almost impossible to practice medicine the way we are trained to which is to use our objective reasoning to share ideas with our patients and to come up with the best possible recommendation for that particular patient for that particular circumstance Well, obviously, we discussed this last week. The bill AB 2098 has got Dr. Drew all pissed off. This is the bill that essentially is passed that allows the medical board to go ahead and investigate anybody, any doctor that says anything that basically goes against the standard operating procedure coming from the CDC. This is it. California bill. Doc, spreading misinformation is unprofessional

conduct. And we think about this, and I said this, I went off on this last week. At the same moment, the CDC is saying they basically got everything wrong. They're releasing, you know, relaxing all of the regulations when it comes to social distancing and masks and even vaccinated or where you can go because none of it worked. They were dead wrong on all of it, but every doctor that came out against it had issues. But I think one of the points he's making, we should just drill down a little bit more. He's talking about the new booster shot that involves the Omicron virus. They decided to sort of, you know, update the booster shot with Omicron. And instead of like doing a human trial, they decided to just do a mouse trial. But it's even worse than that. It wasn't just like a mouse trial

deciding the fate of millions, if not billions of people around the world. It was eight freaking mice. This is what Dr. Drew is going to be shackled to. He's not going to be able to talk out about, talk against this when he knows for a fact, just like many people that are tweeting out about this. Look at this. This is what some of the comments that were made about this trial. In 2020, this is Jay Batakaria. In 2021, the Biden administration Fauci and the CDC made a bet on the basis of incomplete, randomized trial data that the Vax would stop COVID transmission. Not. Vax mandates and discrimination followed. For the new booster, some are making the same bet based on data from eight mice. This is Ian Miller.

If intellectually honest, media still existed, it would probably be a bigger story that a new booster dose was authorized and will be relentlessly promoted based entirely on data from eight mice. And this is Representative Mary Miller. The Biden FDA has authorized the new COVID booster based on data from eight mice. The last time the FDA approved boosters, two senior FDA officials resigned. It's time for serious oversight and reform at the FDA, you think? And then lastly, our favorite Dr. Erso today. The FDA approved bivalent BA5 booster because of an unspecified emergency. The booster was tested on drum roll, eight mice.

That's it. It will be given to millions of people next week. This is not gallows humor, just gallows. I mean, it really is outrageous. And what you have to think about is they're trying to say it's just like the flu shot. Well, the flu shot's been used for decades. And so when they update that, they decide they don't have to do safety trials and efficacy trials all over again. I think they should actually.

I've been arguing that for a long time. It's still a different product. I don't care what they say. But in this circumstance, they never did the proper long-term safety trial because they put it out during an emergency use authorization. So we have no idea of long-term effects. We still have no idea of long-term effects. Always hear of football players and soccer players and softball players

slamming head first into the ground. Stars and comedians and people dying suddenly in their sleep everywhere we look. We see a rise in excess mortality all over the planet Earth that cannot be explained, but definitely let's go with this science and just duplicate it without any further review. Well, we'll throw eight mice out there for you. I mean, think how cheap that is. They can't even afford 50 mice or 100 mice or how about a thousand mice? And if you saw this study, it's a disaster. No mouse comes out the same. They literally are all being affected in different ways. But I want to say this to Dr. Drew, though. It's really great that you're

speaking the truth now. It's pretty much a day late and a dollar short. Where were you when all the people were gathering at the Capitol over the last several weeks trying to fight this bill for you. Regular moms and dads out there trying to fight for you, the doctors. Where were you when you could have made a difference? Can you imagine Dr. Drew if you'd have walked into the politician's offices and said, you know, I'm one of America's favorite doctors on television and I'm totally against this bill? You know, I would love to see it if you would just decide to every once in a while, be brave! Step off, stand for what you actually care about, like your own career and the future of medicine as we know it. All right. Let me just calm down here a second

because we have a huge show coming up. And I also want to talk about, you know, what it means to be a good doctor. If Dr. Drew is afraid of sort of stepping out there and doing what's right, how about the doctors that have been stepping out there? I want to talk to one of them right now. I'm going to talk about Dr. Paul Thomas, who has been there on the front lines at state capitals, standing in front of medical boards, taking it on, bringing the truth out from his. his own practice on what's going on with children and now he's got a lawsuit. Take a look at this. You want to talk about taking it to the man? This is how you do it. Portland pediatrician files a $35 million defamation suit against state medical board members. I like that a heck of a lot better

than whining about a law that you didn't do anything about when it mattered. So let's talk to Dr. Paul Thomas right now. He joins me. First of all, there's a lot of people that don't know who you are. So just give me a sense of how you really got yourself in trouble very quickly with your Vax versus Unvax study. Hey, Del, it's great to be on the show with you. You're cracking me up with all this story. But yeah, so here's what happens. 14 years ago, I started my practice, integrated pediatrics. I left a mainstream group practice because I was seeing kids were getting harmed by vaccines.

It was pretty clear. It was just bam, bam. So I started a practice where we honored informed consent. Well, over time, the medical board got wind of this. I guess, or maybe it was the publication of my book, the vaccine-friendly plan, whatever. They started coming after me just over and over. This book, by the way, folks, let me just point it out while we're here. Let's not go blowing through because you have to understand Dr. Paul, we have like millions more

of followers every time you come on this show. So I want to just make sure everyone knows the work that you're doing. For those of you out there that are questioning your vaccines or want to dip your toes, your book is a vaccine-friendly plan, which is sort of laying out a safer way to vaccinate, sort of spreading them out and maybe a different schedule if you're, interested in that approach. All right. So continue on. Okay. So that book was written with the best understanding I had back then, published in 2016. Two years later, the medical board starts coming with complaints. Now, these are not patient generated complaints. I don't know where they're coming from.

It's just actually they were going after my data. They wanted the data that was in that book, because that book showed that the unvaccinated patients had far less autism. They basically had far less health chronic health issues. So January of 2019, the medical board sends me a letter and says prove that the vaccine friendly plan is as safe as the CDC schedule. I mean, I had to laugh. The CDC has never done any study comparing one year to the next. They've never compared the full vaccine schedule to no vaccines or to partial vaccines. They just don't do that. So they want me to do that for them. I thought, that's impossible. And then somebody had a brilliant idea. Hire an outside expert, get the data.

But we did. We looked at every single patient born into my practice up to the point of that data set being closed. We had 10 and a half years of data. It was published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. And this was the largest real world patient data vaxed unvaxed. And so again, how many kids altogether did you have in your practice? You have a huge practice there. I mean, the numbers?

Well, yeah, it was probably at that time we had 15,000 patients. This was looking at a data set of a little less than 4,000 because we were only looking at the ones actually born into my practice. Oh, I see. Okay, so you're limited to being born in. And let's be clear, because I think this is quite brilliant. The CDC has never done a study. I've talked about this a lot of times. The Institute of Medicine verified this in an entire dissertation that they gave,

that they've never compared the outcomes of like the full vaccine schedule. So they asked you to go on a shadow boxing mission, because how do you compare your safety to their safety when they've never established safety of this program? So then to be clear, what you decided to do was, okay, but I do have a large group of children in my practice that use the CDC schedule. So I have all of the evidence that they provided. And then I have the other ones in my practice that didn't use the CDC schedule. And I can compare the two schedules that way. Is that basically what you decided to do?

Well, close. So we were definitely looking at. every single patient born in my practice. There was no cherry picking. There was no, we're going to exclude you for this or that. Every baby born was looked at and we looked at every single office visit. We stratified them according to the number of vaccines they had. Okay.

So basically we had over 500 who had zero vaccines. And then we had another 3,700 and some who had some vaccines. And what we found Dell was actually even mind-boggling for myself. I mean, I had a sense. I've had a practice now for 14 years where parents get to decide. The one thing I am absolute on is informed consent. You, the parent, get to decide what gets injected into your baby, if anything. You should always insist on that or else walk out of that doctor's office.

But because we do inform consent, we had a growing number of unvaccinated patients. And what I was clearly seeing was these kids don't get sick. They don't get chronic conditions. Well, the data spoke for itself. And you're showing your viewers the graphs. Those orange lines are over time, over that 10 and a half years, the more vaccines you had, the worse you were for whether we looked at infections, ADD, ADHD, neurodevelopmental issues, eczema, allergies.

It doesn't matter what we looked at, even just plain old anemia, skyrockets in the vaccinated when compared to the blue line, the unvaccinated. Wow. This data is so powerful that within five days of it being available online, They yanked my license. December 3rd, 2020, the Oregon Medical Board had an emergency meeting, suspended my license. I was supposedly a threat to public health. It's amazing.

I mean, really, like, they really should have come in and said, we'd love to see that data. This is very interesting information since we've never done this study ourselves, like we should have. Can we look at the data? Can you walk us through it? Did they ever do that? Like, can you walk us through where your data comes from? Let us sort of cross-reference it, maybe bring in some out. outside scientists to test, you know, whether or not, you know, this sort of repeats depending on who's

looking at it, right? Did you have any offers like that? No, nothing at all. They, I mean, you're absolutely right. The Oregon Medical Board, if their interest is the health of the population, they should have been spreading the news about this incredible difference in outcomes. I mean, it's absolutely amazing. So you've been battling back and forth for your license, you know, multiple times where are you currently at right now with your license are you licensed in Oregon yes so six months later my attorney realized wait a minute these folks didn't file uh when you take someone's license emergently you have to simultaneously or very soon after that file for why you're doing that right you you cannot just yank somebody's livelihood and then oh too bad well they

forgot to do that or they neglected to do that or whatever so they were were kind of in trouble and he got them to agree, I still signed this under duress, Del, because they restricted me from, I can't talk to patients about vaccines, I can't talk to my staff about vaccines, I can't see well children, and I can't do research on patients. I mean, that tells you what they're worried about. Right, right, like all of those things, but you have your practice back. But so now, but you're taking this step further, right? You're not stopping there, this thing, and obviously they're not going to stop.

Right? Every one of the doctors we've watched like you that's come on the show, you know, even Bob Sears again is back under review. They just keep coming at you because until they have totally crushed you and destroyed your practice and kicked you out of the business, they don't seem to let up. So you've decided to do the opposite. Instead of being on the defensive, you're going on the offensive. So tell me about this case. Yeah, so Dell, since they took my license in 2020, they've had over 30 different requests of me. I mean, these letters come monthly, sometimes weekly. You're absolutely right. They are intent on destroying you.

I have a hearing coming up in November, but it's just kangaroo court. And every single legal mind, including Aaron Siri, who I know works for you, every single legal mind is saying it's a kangaroo court, you will be destroyed, and you're going to run up a half a million dollar bill that they're going to force you to pay. Wow. So I kept looking for an attorney who would actually sue them, because what they have done is so illegal and so wrong. And thankfully, Steve Junkus appeared.

And man, let me tell you, we have sued the medical board on violating freedom of speech, violating due process, so they cannot take your individual property, be that my license or the destruction of my practice, by fabricating evidence. I mean, the utilization of government power to violate my due process is unparalleled. They have failed in their supervisory capacity,

so where I'm actually individually suing each member of the board. And on, you know, the, the ridiculousness of what they've done is that they're basing almost every single allegation on the fact that I provide informed consent. They want doctors to follow the rules of the CDC. I watched the beginning of your show and that's exactly what is happening in California. You just say what the CDC says and you're okay. Otherwise, we want your license. And, you know, informed consent is not the danger. The danger is people... It should be. I thought it was the law. Forget about the danger. I thought it was actually the law.

I thought, you know, since we like hung a bunch of Nazi doctors, we recognize that the free informed consent of the patient was critical to modern health care. So the idea that we are abandoning that and then attacking any doctor that wants to give you full informed consent, which is here is all the benefits, here are all the negative things, here's what we don't know, which Dr. Drew beautifully laid out. Yes, there was only eight mice studied in this. I'm being told I have to recommend it to you. And maybe if you're in an age where it's such a high risk for him, he says, you know, I suppose I would recommend it.

But if you're under the age of 40, I happen to know that it causes myocarditis at ridiculously increased rates. And as soon as I say that, I'm in trouble. And so, you know, here you are. But I want to make this point. You know, people can just see this as a lawsuit or some sort of vendetta between you and your medical board. But right now, you're representing the world. representing Dr. Drew down in California. The precedence that needs to be set right now is so critical.

We need to back these medical boards off and allow the doctor-patient relationship to stay intact to allow you guys to make decisions with your patient. Each patient has a totally different clinical history. Most of the time, you know their families, you know their children, you know their siblings, you know what's going on with them, you know weaknesses they have, you've done all of their blood tests, and so you should be able to evaluate them separately from what the CDC says from some backroom bureaucrats that have never seen a patient in the last five decades. You know, I'm obviously very passionate about this, but how do we help you with this case?

Because I think it's really critical. Thank you, Del. I'm absolutely fighting for every kid in the world. We have got to get the power away from these boards that are actually changing, as you pointed out, the whole patient doctor relationship. It's being destroyed in front of our eyes. So I've got a website for donations and prayers. It's Dr. Paul's Fight.com.

And I just urge you to, you know, if you're a prayer warrior, do that. I could use all that support. And if you can support with some financial means, we are going to continue to take it to them until I am six feet under, man. I'm not giving up this one. Thank you all of you viewers who have supported my work so far. We're in this together. Absolutely.

You know, Dr. Paul, you have been a warrior, a crusader. I see you everywhere as we travel around together and we end up, you know, speak on many stages together. I'm so glad you're bringing this fight to them. I hated the look of you running in the moments that you had to. And so you're standing strong. We stand with you. I support you 100% and this is a very important mission. So everybody definitely check out the website. Let's see it one more time. Here it is. If you want to send prayers or give a donation, Dr. Paul's Fight.com. That's where you go. This guy is really doing it, folks. And boy, do we need more doctors like this as we move into this crazy few?

future we're living into. All right. Dr. Paul Thomas, thank you for your time. Take care. All right. Well, look, I said it before. I keep saying it every week. I feel like every week I have like an interview that's even more amazing than the last week. I mean, last week, such a fantastic interview with Dr. Latipo, but coming up, I'm going to sit down with Matthias Desmond. This is the Belgian psychologist that really first brought us the mass formation concept and his book, The Psychology of Totalitarianism. I spoke with him when that book was just about to come out. But now I think we're seeing things, you know, we have a different view, right?

The pandemic for the most part is on pause, all the restrictions and all that totalitarianism has disappeared for the moment. And I wanted to ask, Matthias, and really get personal with where do we go from here? How did we get here? Does he see it any different now that we're looking at this in our rearview mirror a bit then when he was in the middle of it writing this book. So all those questions are coming up right around the corner. I'm really excited about that.

But first, it's time for The Jackson Report. All right, Jeffrey. I mean, I love it when we see, you know, Hollywood, you know, celebrities starting to squirm after they sort of stood silently or even promoted these ideas. And we've seen this coming, right? We saw when that comedian collapsed, Dr. Drew interviewed her. And we were starting to see, like, you know, a thread being pulled on. him where he seems to have had enough with this vaccine. And now this law is just taking it over the

top. So maybe someday in the future, we'll see him standing on a stage with us when we're fighting for freedom around the country and around the world. It's kind of fascinating how this rolling awakening happens. You know, people that come into the light. And, you know, at least he's being humble about it. That's a beautiful thing. They come in and, you know, whether they know it or not, there's a, there's a lineage of people that have stood up before them. There always is, even before us. So it's great to see them just being humble and just speaking out and taking that truth right to the mainstream audience that they have. Speaking of mainstream audience, let's go over to the UK ITVs show Good Morning. It's a very popular morning show there.

They recently went from kind of lighthearted messaging to kind of a tone-deaf dystopia. Take a look at this. Okay. Here we go. So we've got we'll pay your energy bills, we've got a thousand pounds as well. So this is energy bills, I think, for four. months if it stops on that so how are you how well your energy bills are you a bit worried about it all oh major yeah I've got I've got one of these pre-payment

meters and it's absolutely murder oh god right well let's hope it lands on one of those then whatever you're gonna win some money here we go one way or tubber here we go round around it goes where it stops nobody knows that da da da da Thousand pounds or energy bill. Thousand pounds or energy bill. It is going to be your energy bill. Oh, my God. Thank you. We are paying your energy bill for four months.

Oh, fantastic. No worries. Oh, what a relief. Thank you very much. Oh, listen, well done you. That's brilliant. Boy, are we slipping closer and closer to the Hunger Games here. It's like entertainment.

Will he feed his family or get to heat his house? Let's spin for the rest of his life. Does he survive or not? I mean, it's so crazy and it's so bad there, right? I mean, these energy bills literally, we talked about this. We talked about the last several weeks, you know, up to four or five times the amount it was last year and continuing. So it was amazing. You didn't see him going, oh, I really want to win the thousand pounds.

A thousand pounds was nothing compared to his home energy bill. really amazing. I mean, what's going on here? Where are we at? So one of the big headlines recently I just came out, and this is the ripple effect here, and this is really where it's going to have the showdown. So the European Union, most of Europe, gets its gas from gas prom, this pipeline, and European energy prices start after Russia cuts off a natural gas pipeline to Germany.

This is a Nord Stream 1 pipeline. It's a Russian state-owned company, Gasprom, owns it. And they're basically saying, you know, it's kind of a fog of war right now. This is like an energy war that we're in. And Russia is saying, look, because of the sanctions, we have a turbine that's broken, one of our major turbines at one of the engine pumping stations. We can't restart this thing. It needs to be fixed. The paperwork can't go through because the sanctions.

So lift the sanctions, we'll restart it. And Germany is saying, because Germany is the biggest importer of Russian oil over 50% before the Russian-Ukraine conflict. They've been trying to cut that back, obviously. We've been reporting on that in ways they've been doing it. But they're saying, look, it's not the sanctions. You're using this as war. So, you know, they're one side saying one thing, one side saying the other, but the population is caught in the middle of this.

And let's listen to, so are these sanctions coming off? What is Germany going to do? Let's listen to their foreign minister. Her name is Annalina Berbach. And she recently was in public and had this to say about the sanctions. Take a listen. If I give the promise to people, in Ukraine. We stand with you as long as you need us. Then I want to deliver, no matter

what my German voters think, but I want to deliver to the people of Ukraine. And this is why for me it's important to be always very frank and clear. And this means every measure I'm taking, I have to be clear that this holds on as long as Ukraine needs me. We are facing now a winter time where we will be challenged as democratic politicians. People will be go on the street and say we cannot pay our energy prices. And I will say, yes, I know, so we help you with social measures. But I don't want to say, okay, then we stop the sanctions against Russia. We will stand with Ukraine, and this means the sanction will stay also in wintertime, even

if it gets really tough for politicians. These are really, I mean, it's amazing. These are those moments when I look at and I think I would never really want to be president in the United States or something like that. a shocking statement that we essentially were more committed to the war in Ukraine than we are to our own people. At least you could take it like that. And I think the same thing is we start seeing, you know, issues here, financial issues, the billions of dollars being poured into some other country. And then you just think, where would that investment be if it was invested

into our own country? And I'm sure in Germany, as they're, you know, as we've talked about, they're planning on what heating museums and libraries for the elderly, People are going to die over there that this doesn't get worked out. And it just seems more important that they sort of stay in this war. I don't know. Just really odd decision making at the moment as we look around the world. Yeah. And, you know, Annalina there said that even if there's tests in the winter,

we don't have to wait until the winter to see the protests. We're seeing these protests happening in Prague right now. Here's the headline of American newspapers. 70,000 protests in Prague against Czech government, EU and NATO. And they're basically calling for neutrality in the Russian-Ukrainian war, and they're protesting all their energy prices and everything like that. So this is where we're going there. People are taking to the streets already. And they're identifying NATO.

It's interesting as the North American Treaty Organization. It's an intergovernmental military alliance that has been over decades slowly surrounding Russia. So it's interesting that they're saying, stop with this military interventionism and pushing Russia to this. this possible invasion. A lot of a lot of historians have said that's really one of the reasons this happened here. So you have a populace is very educated now with their protesting and their demands, their specific demands. And in that article here, this is what one of the organizers said. He said, quote, the aim of our demonstration is a demand change, mainly in solving the issue of energy prices, especially electricity and gas, which will destroy our economy this autumn.

event co-organizer, Yari Haval told IDNES.cZ News. And so a couple weeks ago, we reported on these PPM meters, these prepaid meters. And that's what the gentleman said in the wheel of energy there. These things are going across the UK and Europe especially. And this is the headline here. They're now being, they're now forcing them on customers. So smart meter fury, homeowners left in tears after men broke into house to install meter. Now, a couple weeks ago, we reported.

they're automatically going to be switching people over these prepaid meters. It's a form of smart meter where you have to, like the name says, you have to prepay before you get your energy. And there's obviously issues if you can't do that. And this is off gen. It's the government regulator for the electricity. They're the people that are doing this in Scotland, in this case, but in the UK as well. And so that's the, you know, so to speak, that's the temperature in Europe, which is a pretty

dire one going into the winter here. How is it happening in the United States? What's going on here? Well, let me be honest. I mean, you know, I know we get, you know, we talk about like paying off college here and things like that, which really only affects some, you know, group of people that went to college. How about all those that already paid there? I mean, we have those discussions, right?

But when you look at a situation like this, really honestly, this seems to me where the government, if they want to be in some war and be involved in this thing, why aren't there subsidies happening there? Why are the people being forced to sort of take the brunt of these, what are really, you know, geopolitical situations and they're just choices made by the politicians. So we can again, send billions of dollars over to other nations to just blow buildings apart and what have you. But where is it, you know, I think about this in the housing crisis we had. You know, where we had been, have we just taken care of the people that own the homes instead of bailing out the banks? This is the type of thing that just really starts to, you know, upset me. I'm sure

there's libertarians out there screaming, Del, no, you don't get it. I don't, I don't fully get this. where I get really confused on if there's money going out, where should it go? You know, shouldn't it take care of the people in a country that are paying taxes in that country? Right. And, you know, today's day and age, people don't really have the appetite for war that they used to saying World War II or even the Iraq War where, you know, World War II, there's a populace that was behind them. The sanctions were worth it. But now this is directly affecting people's food and energy bills and their ability to live and heat and feed their families. with a war that's really not that popular.

I mean, outside of like the Hollywood elites or the mainstream media, so it's interesting how this thing is going to play out on the population. I mean, Prague may just be an example of what is to come. In the United States, this is what we're looking at here in Colorado. It's a state you're familiar with. This is the headline coming out of there. Thousands of Excel customers locked out of thermostats during energy emergency. 22,000 people lost controller temperatures in their homes.

And we have a little screenshot here of what that look like. These are the thermostats, the smart thermostats that they have. And you can get the little things on the phones, like the alerts on the phones. And it says here, temperature locked temporarily due to energy emergency. They're calling it a rare energy emergency. Now, this is a shocking headline, of course, but it's important to understand that the people that had this happen to them, the XL customers, and a lot of states have this with Excel, it's called an XL AC reward. programs. So you actually opt into this. So when times where the the energy is surging in those areas, you agree to let them change your thermostat. Now the contention here was that they were

locked out. So a lot of the customers said, look, I went into this thinking, well, I can help the grid. You guys can just play around with my thermostat as you need to in the hot days. But they didn't know that they couldn't change it. They couldn't opt out and say, look, I turn this off. I want my I want my air conditioning back on, so I'm really having a hard time here. So that was one of the big things in the article. And let's be clear. I mean, this is just a trial on a small group of people. This is clearly where all of these things want to go.

So as you're installing these smart meters, all of your home and your nest machines and all of that, did you read all the fine print? I don't even buy those things because I'm not going to sit down to it. But I'll bet you somewhere in that fine print says that if this, you know, we decide to make a deal with your energy company, they may actually be able to jump in here and circumvent you, your cell phone, and your own energy. But what I think is critical right now is to show that these types of measures, we keep looking. I know we're an international show, but we're here in America. We just keep looking at these stories in other countries like, oh, that'll never happen.

Here I can, you know, just continue to waddle on through my life, not worrying about these things. But clearly that's not the case. They are working on measures so that they can control us here too on these exact situations. So it's really, it's very disturbing. And the fact that it's all happening at the same time around the world, just like COVID. I just don't remember when we lived in the world where every single nation was like moving in the same exact direction at the same exact time. It's almost like there's a smaller group in charge of the entire world and not necessarily our own political leaders, but that would be a conspiracy theory and I'm not going to go there.

Yeah, it's important to understand that the technology, obviously this framework exists. These aren't beta tests. These are operational technologies that are being used on tens of thousands of people, if not more. I mean, that's one headline. But a couple of weeks ago, we covered this from California as well. A lot happening in that state again. And this was California to ban the sale of new gasoline cars. And that was a shock headline for a lot of people.

But now the California is experiencing an energy crisis of its own because of the heat wave and the air conditioning units being used there. So this is the headline coming out of California just after the one we just showed. California won't let you charge the electric car wants to force you to buy. Kind of cheeky. I was saying that just like a week or two ago, right?

I mean, when they said this, we're going to move to fully electric cars, but we're going to have rolling blackouts. So then you're not, if you're not ready for the amount of electric cars on the road right now, can you imagine when that's all you can buy in California? It just shows how stupid this.

whole thing really is. And when they say rolling blackout, that's the next headline here. California's potential rolling blackouts. What are they who are affected? And this was the headline. But they called a level three energy emergency. And these were color-coded emergencies, you know, just to use to, you know, like red lights, green lights, just really to scare people, kind of like the war on terror or COVID.

And we've talked about that before, the social programming on that. But it was a level three emergency. see, apparently it has reversed to the point where they're not going to do these rolling blackouts, the potential was hanging for a couple days there. But, you know, until this temperature breaks, as we're told, it's going to be back and forth. Hopefully, they won't have to go to rolling blackouts. But understand that. If you're sitting on the side of the road charging your Tesla, rolling blackout means it's done.

The energy is gone. So you're going to be sitting there for another couple hours. Hopefully it's not nighttime. Right. So that's what's happening right now in California, the United States. But let's switch over now to something that, you know, we've, really our bread and butter on this show, it has been for the last two years, its potential focus of the COVID vaccination and the masks and the lockdowns. And let's start it where we always seem to start it.

Something that Fauci said, this was the headline here. And this was a recent interview, I guess before he goes out the door, he's going to lay some zingers for us to pick up. Fauci slam for denying school lockdowns irreparably damaged kids, no remorse. So he was asked if he did not, if these schools, lockdowns if he had any remorse over those and he said no I don't think they damaged the kids we're fine no big deal let's move on the best policy best policy measure we've ever taken and I'm going to go down in history as one of the greatest public health specialists but that's not the case and remember how did we get there and how did they stay locked down we've reported on that a lot but

some new emails released had some really shocking situation check this out so emails California Teachers Union ran oppositional research on parents who wanted schools open that's a headlines that were just revealed in a discovery in court documents. This was the California Teachers Union. They hired someone to run research. Now this is pretty, this is pretty standard for politicians. There's not spying on the parents that are like looking into these parents. They're simply stating what they want from their schools for their children. Right. And it was a group of parents who had won a court case. They sued the state of California, the San Diego, particularly to reopen the schools there. They won. So a month later, you know, instead of

saying, hey, you know, good job, or you won on the science or whatever. The California Teachers Association basically ran this oppositional research, said, we want to know who these people are, how they're funding this. What are the ideological leanings of the groups pushing for these reopenings, their politics? They want to know everything about them. So that is how they are greeted for opening the schools against that guidance. And why did they want those schools open? Interesting. Well, some new headlines came out showing actually more, more of the issues with those closings and this is what it looks like. Nations report card two decades of growth wiped out by two years of a pandemic. Now this is math and reading scores have just plummeted since the lowest

in the basically since the 70s. And what's interesting about this is, you know, a lot of the experts, educational experts said, you know, closing schools obviously going remote learning is going to have an issue on math because that's intensive. It's very, it's in the class room intensive learning. But reading they thought would be fine because it would be a one-to-one switchover didn't happen. Same thing. A lot of plummeting in the reading categories as well. And one of the biggest issues here, as Fauci said, this irreparable damage that he didn't think happens. There's a lot of research now. This was a great research article by the American Institute for Economic Research. School closures. Contra Fauci school closings will shorten lives.

So it's not just the lockdowns in normal everyday people. It's the school closings, particularly. And it says in here, this is a highly resource article. Everyone should go to this if they need some more information. But it says here, NWEA, a research organization estimated future earnings losses of around 44,000 for students in the United States. In another study by McKinsey and Company, researchers projected future income losses between 49 and 61,000 for student due to learning losses. Both of these studies suggest a lifetime loss of over $2 trillion for the current cohort of American children once they get into the workforce. It goes on to say a recent article by James Brogall from George Mason University and Kip Viscousy from Vanderpelt University found that each loss of one trillion income will lead to about 9,200 deaths. Therefore, the two trillion in lost future income for American children can be associated with over 18,000 early deaths in the future.

And finally, it finishes by saying this. Articles in leading medical journals such as Health Affairs in JAMA show little to no impact. of the school shutdowns on community spread. That's an inconvenient truth to a society that plays so much faith in shutdown proponents at the pandemic's beginning. And dealt, that might be news to some people, but if you've been watching the high wire

and the research of the guests that we've had on, back in November of 2020, all the way back then, we're going two years ago. We had Darren Beattie on, an amazing researcher at the time with Revolver News, and he had sanctioned a research through Revolver News. And this is what he had to say about that two years ago. Listen to this.

All right. Early on when COVID came, there was a lot of talk about, oh, we need to lock everything down because the economy is not more important than one human life. If it will save one human life, we need to shut down the entire economy. And what this study does, I think in the most general terms, is it totally refused. that frame of thinking, that in fact, you cannot separate lives from livelihood. But the most important take-home point here is that it's not this trade-off between economy and lives. There are very demonstrable connections between economic conditions and public health

conditions. Economists know all too well that this connection exists, and they unique We've uniquely ignored this connection in order to support this policy blunder of lockdowns. Wow. I mean, I remember we've stated these things so many times throughout this pandemic. We've had so many Toby Rogers on multiple times talking about the math behind this. And I think for a lot of people, this is weird, right? To equate human lives to math. But this is technically, you know, how these decisions are supposed to be made.

You were supposed to have looked at all of the different ramifications and potential outcomes of what you're doing. And none of these people that look at sort of life years lost or value of life ever were allowed into the room to be a part of the team discussing lockdowns here in America, which is crazy. And the same thing in England and all around the world. These people were locked out of the conversation. And now we're all going to feel these repercussions for years to come. Yeah, it's fascinating how no one was doing a cost-benefit analysis from America to the, the UK to any other country, really. That's a fascinating piece on this. But as we move forward, parents have fought every step of the way to get their kids back in school, to get these restrictions

off them. And they've won some big fights, a lot of them in court. And we're peeling back these layers, but there's still some layers on there. So the big thing, obviously, is school openings. No more closures. The kids are back in school, but they still have these restrictions on them. Remember, the masks have been associated with a lot of learning disabilities and developmental disabilities, They're still on. Look at these headlines. I was shocked to see this. Newark Public Schools Face masks rules will stay in place, but some parents are frustrated. Some parents. Then here, LA heat wave playground asphalt sizzles to 145 degrees in extreme heat waves. Parents demand school, shade. And there's a picture in this article. You can't really see it too well, but it's,

it has the kids out playing in the playground. They all have masks on. And this is happening across parts of LA as identified by this tweet. This is LA Uprising on Twitter page. Today, Mar Vista, West L.A. Rec Center, cooling centers open across the city for excessive heat. Kids forced to mask inside playing sports. At mayor of LA and the Los Angeles City Council should be ashamed. And then we have Secretary Miguel Cardona,

is the Secretary of Education for the United States. Someone tweeted at him as well, to give him an earful. He says here, Secretary Cardona, you are sitting in a room with a bunch of maskless older adults, as is your right. Now, will you please use your position to speak up against the federal toddler mask mandate in the Head Start program? Why should four-year-olds be condemned to another year of masks? And there he is sitting with Jill Biden, Joe Biden's wife, a bunch of other higher government figures. And plenty of people, by the way, the only ones that are in

any sort of risk situation, not four-year-olds who have zero risk, but people in that room, if you want to be a hypochondriac, that would be the place to do it. You're not doing it there. Then why are kids? And let me just make this point, too, because I know we have a lot of viewers, you know, living in California, places where this is going on, I pray nobody watching this show is sending your children to schools where they're having to wear a mask. I think that is unconscionable. They will never be the same again. You are destroying their spirit. They are going to have issues fearing the air they breathe for the rest of their lives. And if you really feel like there's no way out, I'm going to say something I never thought I'd say. I think you should wear a mask

all day the same time your kids are so that you're thinking about the fact of what your kid is going through because no adult that I know is wearing their mask all eight hours. They were going into their offices, taking it off, hopping your car, taking it off. Your kid isn't taking it off. It's not fair. It's not right. It's sick and demented. And please, please don't let that happen to your children. It's time to homeschool. It's time to get out and change your life. It's time to move out of California if you have to. But please don't destroy the soul of your child simply because you got to get to work and there's nothing you can do about it. That's just not an excuse anymore and your kids won't excuse you when they have all sorts of other health and psychological issues because of what's been done

here. And it's not 2020 anymore. We know a lot more about this thing. And, you know, if people take one thing away from this segment is to raise awareness about this, this is the Head Start program in L.A. They are still masking. And they're still following their interim guidelines. And this was what that tweet was about. This is their mask requirements to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 and Head Start programs. And it says here, universal masking for all individuals, two years of age and older. That means volunteers. That means teachers. Obviously, kids.

This is still going on. So we're not quite out of the woods yet, but we're making a lot of progress, especially in the courts. But we still have to peel these last mandates off. This thing is over. Let's let these kids breathe. Amen. Absolutely.

It's so important. It's so important. And it's just, it's clear now to me, since you now have the CDC not even recommending the masks anymore, that this is. social engineering. They want compliant human beings that will just allow themselves to be tracked and chipped or whatever they need to do in the future.

If you don't want that future, it starts with our children. We've got to make a difference now. Jeffrey, great reporting. As always, thank you so much for all that information. We'll see you next week. Thank you, Doug. All right, sounds good. And if you like what Jeffrey Jackson had to say, to definitely check out the Jackson Report, thehighwire.com,

where he writes articles and gets deeper into the conversations that we are having, I don't know. I'm sorry if I get, you know, if I'm hard on you in the audience, but I can't take it anymore. I can't take it. When I see, you've seen these adults walking on the street where they're not actually wearing the mask, but the kid is. So now the kid clearly has some psychological problem developed by this. And the parents are just rolling along with it. Like, okay, you know, I don't know. Sammy doesn't want to take his mask off, so we're just leaving it on him. Yeah, great. Well done. Amazing parenting job. We've got to engage. You know, we've got to be engaged. in this world. And that's what my concern is. I feel like, you know, we talk about so much science and

news and I thank you for hanging in there. We get into all the details. But I worry that we just see it going by as though it's like on a television and we're not fully engaged in realizing, wait a minute, this is the world I live in? Yes, this is the one you live in right now. We've got, we are making a difference. This show has made a difference. We are penetrating, but we're under massive pressure of censorship and all sorts of other issues. So I can tell you, there's no one on my team that forgets any day what we're in the middle of and what we're fighting for because we're having to fight to get this information to you every single day we work on it. So, you know, and I bring this up because there's a very interesting headline showing that I think

we're going to start seeing some headway in this space. Here is, this was the Epoch Times, judge orders Fauci and other top officials to produce records for big tech government censors lawsuit. I said it, you know, we've been talking about the Zuckerberg admitting that the FBI visited him to talk about things that, you know, couldn't be said politically. But there's also these issues on the COVID and all the doctors that spoke out and these laws that are passing, the Dr. Drew is complaining about all of this. And by the way, we sued, we brought a lawsuit for getting kicked off of YouTube, getting kicked off of Facebook. Our issue was we couldn't get deep enough in the case to prove that we had been targeted specifically, though I was,

I will tell you we have some very interesting FOIA requests that have come in that we're looking at right now and our investigation is going deeper. But when we see headlines like that here at the high wire, I will tell you we might ride on the back of this. If that information comes out and we start seeing ICAN and the high wire being spoken about specifically, I have news for you. We're going to bring that case too. We've got to stop the censorship. It's at a horrific place right now. And all of this, I mean, this is where we are constantly doing FOIA requests. constantly using our legal team to get information. I believe, you know, my lawsuit and other

lawsuits that went towards this all sort of set the precedent and stage so that a lawsuit could get to look how many legal wins we have right now. These are the ICAN and legal wins. You know, when you're sitting there at home and maybe you're having a day where you didn't fully, you allowed yourself to just enjoy the day, which I'm not against. Trust me, have a day at the beach. Forget about this crazy world. But when you're checking back in, I hope you get to watch the show and say, oh my God, I really made a difference. That cup of coffee I gave up this, this month for, you know, the $5 I donate to I can. Like they are really achieving things. Well, we can only do that with your help. And this game is only getting bigger and bigger and

more important as we have a president walking around calling people names and the, you know, the censorship that sits on the horizon and the investigations of people and turning down our thermostats. Who else is really diving deep into following us? on who's doing this to us? What's going on and how are we going to stop it? We are and we really, really need your help. You know, when I put out a pretty hard call last week and many of you that hadn't signed up before signed up, I'd love to see that happen again this week. So many of you around the world are watching at the highwire.com, you can just go up and hit the donate button, especially if you're internationally donating. This is a great way to go. We're asking for $22 for

2022, but whatever you can do helps. But look at this. We're going to make it really easy for you. If you're in America, we can now just use a texting system. Right now, if you just text on your phone, even if you're watching the show on your phone, you can flip up off the high wire, go to your text really quick and text the number 72022 and write donate in your message and you will immediately get a link so that you can help be a part of making the change. We are not just a news You know, reporting on the news. We're making the news because we are about making a difference in this world. So please help us do that. All of you that have been helping. I ran into someone this week. I feel like you're pressuring me to give more. Okay, look, let me take the pressure off if you're feeling it. We love all of you that have made this possible. Look what we've achieved. Pat yourself on the back. It's an amazing moment. I'm just saying for the rest of you out there, you should feel what it feels like when we have these wins, when we, you know, when we win, you know, when we win. these lawsuits or we bring these stories that, you know, break a story that no one else is getting, you get to say, I had something to do with that. I think that's important. Well, you know,

speaking of, you know, this draconian world and whether we're living in it or awake to it or what's going on, I think the big question is, are we really through it, right? Have we made it through this pandemic? Is it over? What's going to happen this winter? I think we're all wondering what's going on there. Monkeypox seems to have disappeared. There's a polio story floating out there. It's like these lines, like, you know, these globalists just keep throwing lines in the water to see where they can hook enough of us where we just go, and suddenly we're locked back into mass formation and following each other in some sort of arbitrary line we're being told to follow and following through with crazy rituals like wearing masks that we know don't do

anything and masking our children as they're sending them off to school. Well, of course, when I talk about mask formation, we're only talking about one person and that's Matias Desmond, the psychologist out of Belgium. Well, he made his way into America miraculously. He's been making his tour around the news stations. We're psyched that he's here. This is what he's looked like on part of that trip. We're honored to have join us a Belgian academic called Matthias Dismat. Very honored to have a special guest through Dr. Malone, Tias Desmond. The book is the bestseller of the psychology of a totalitarianism or Professor Desmond. You have erupted into the public eye for your work on what is called mass formation.

So 10 years ago, I think this would have been considered a kind of esoteric academic theory, you know, relevant to your specific study, but not really relevant to the society that we live in. And all of a sudden, you've so perfectly described what the rest of us have been watching. During the corona crisis, people started to believe, bought into a narrative that in many respects was blatantly wrong and utterly absurd. Massformation has existed as long as mankind exists. The modern masses often live in a rather isolated state, what makes them extremely susceptible and extremely vulnerable

for all kinds of propaganda. I received many messages of people who told me that once they heard my theory and they started to understand why they brought into the narrative for a certain time. So important to write my book, if you understand the mechanism of mass formation, you will understand what you have to do, no matter what happens, continue to speak out. Even if they kick us over the internet, then we will have to speak out in a different way. But we will continue to speak out no matter what happens. All right, well, his book is called The Psychology of Totalitarianism by Matthias Desmond.

It is my honor and pleasure to be joined here in studio by Matthias. Thank you so much for being here. Oh, thank you for inviting me. Obviously, we had a very in-depth discussion a few months ago. Your book was on its way out to discuss this idea of mass formation, which sort of swept the world. We talked about it then, and I don't really want to sort of get caught up in rehashing all of that. But first of all, thank you for being here and making the trip and sort of continuing to speak out with your thoughts. Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here and I'm really grateful that you invited me again.

Let's just start right here. You know, coming into America, is there a difference when you think of this nation compared to Belgium where you've been living throughout this pandemic? Do you mean in terms of... Life? Life, yes. Of the psychology of humanity. Is the psychology different? Yes. To be honest, I think that Belgian people, people are more conformist than American people. For instance, the percentage of people who took the

jab was extremely high in Belgium. Maybe that had to do with the fact that there are extremely high levels of psychological problems in Belgium. I think that Belgium is the country with the highest percentage of depressed people. Really? Yes. And that could have to do with the fact that, or that could be one

factor that plays with role in the fact that maybe more people fell prey to what I call massamation because the more people feel socially the more people feel psychologically a psychological position the more they usually are vulnerable to the massamation who could play a role but actually I don't know right I don't I'm not sure this book is beautiful what I found interesting about it is it's not just about sort of this COVID crisis we've been through. I found myself reflecting on my own personal interactions with my family, my children. It really is an exploration in, I think, what moves us, what drives us. It's absolutely fantastic, engaging. There are four

pillars essentially that have to have happened in society to make us vulnerable to mass formation. Can you just sort of take us through that very quickly? Yes, yes. Maybe first, in a nutshell, what mass formation is. It's a specific kind of group formation, which has a specific effect at a level of individual mental functioning. And for instance, it makes people radically incapable of taking a critical distance of what the group believes in,

no matter how absurd the beliefs of the group become. People will still continue to buy into the narrative. And a second typical characteristic is that people who are in the grip of mass formation typically become radically willing to sacrifice everything that was important to them before the mass formation started. And a typical characteristic of mass formation is that it makes people radically intolerant for dissident voices to the extent that in the end, the masses typically start to commit atrocities towards the people that do not go along with them. That's in a nutshell the phenomenology of a mass formation. You talk about in the book, all the times throughout history

this has happened, Stalin, Hitler, you know, all these different examples, even down to sort of micro examples. Yes, the witch hunts and the Crusades were typical examples in ancient times, but it also happens on a very small scale as well. It can happen on a very small scale, but a few, with 10 or 20 people even, indeed, mass formation is as old as mankind exists, but the modern masses are not the same as the ancient masses. There are important differences. So indeed, this mass formation, this typical example of group formation, emerging, is when population is in a very specific state.

And the first and most crucial condition is that there have to be many people who feel disconnected from their natural and social environment. And once people are disconnected, they will typically start to struggle with lack of meaning-making in life. And once they are disconnected and experience lack of meaning-making, something specific will happen at the effective level, they will start to be confronted with so-called free-floating, anxiety, frustration and aggression. It means anxiety, frustration, aggression, that is not connected to a mental representation

or in simple words of which people will feel anxious, frustrated and aggressive without knowing what they feel anxious, frustrated and aggressive for. And this is a very aversive mental state because people feel out of control. They have the feeling that they cannot control their anxiety. And they have the feeling that they cannot take their anxiety out to their frustration to their frustration and aggression out to an object because they don't know what they feel frustrated and aggressive for, meaning that all this frustration and aggression piles up in their psychological system and confronts them with a very aversive tension. And in this state, something typically,

typical might happen if in this state a narrative is distributed through the mass media, indicating an object of anxiety and at the same time resenting, providing a strategy to deal with that object of anxiety, for instance, the lockdowns for the coronavirus, the witch hunts for the witches, the crusades for the Saracens who occupied the grave of Christ. If under these conditions such a narrative is distributed, something very specific might happen, all this free-floating anxiety might connect to the object of anxiety, and people might be willing to participate in the strategy to deal with the object of anxiety, no matter how absurd the strategy is, simply because in this This way people experience a symptomatic control over their anxiety.

They now know what they are anxious for and also very important, they also now have an object at which they can direct their frustration and aggression. And that's the first step. It leads to a specific psychological advantage in the first place at the affective level and in the second place it also seems to tackle the root cause of the problem. namely this first condition which is the social isolation the loneliness yeah because all these people participate in the strategy to deal with the object of anxiety together right they have the feeling that they fight this heroic

collective battle with the object of anxiety and they feel connected again but without going into detail the big problem is that the connection is never a connection between individuals it's always the masses or the mass is a group that is formed because every individual separately connects to a collective idea. So basically, I'm lonely. I start having a sense of meaninglessness in my life. I'm doing a job. I hate. You know, my family doesn't care about me.

I'm working too hard. I now have anxiety, a feeling of tension all the time, but I don't know what actually I'm angry, you know, which is creating anger. I don't know where to focus energy. I don't know where it's coming from. And then someone comes along and says, We all have a singular problem we need to deal with.

Here's the solution you all have to lock down, get back today to go through these rituals. And anyone that doesn't go along with that is the problem and focus on them. And so suddenly I'm in a group. We all have a common mission and those not on this mission, we will attack that smaller group and now I have a purpose in life, essentially. All problem solved. All problems solved. Seemingly. Right, seemingly.

Except that as we discussed the last time, I'm not really getting social connectedness. I'm not in, you know, giant parties. In fact, this time we're isolated, but I'm online and I'm being told that I am a part of a greater whole that is creating an important function that's going to save the world. And as mass formation has the function of channeling all this frustration and aggression at something, it will constantly need new objects of anxiety, new objects that have to be destroyed and... Sure.

And so we'll get to that because I think what's interesting is this book's written... You know, as you said, I think you start the idea of it in 2000. 2017, right? And ultimately finish it in the middle of the pandemic and release it. And in some ways, I guess, you know, it must have been, I don't know, ironic or prophetic that you had thought I should write about this mass formation idea and then found yourself in the middle of probably the largest mass formation event in the history of mankind. First, worldwide mass formation in history. Would you say were you an expert on mass formation prior to the pandemic and writing this book? I lectured about it.

Okay. My focus of the focus of my academic work has always been individual psychology. But, well, during my PhD I focused on methodological problems in scientific research. For instance, in 2005 when I made my PhD, it became clear that up to 85% of the academic research papers is flawed. Right. Completely wrong. And I started to study that and I started to study the mathematical.

basis of the problems and I explained them in a very tangible and clear way in a little book. I showed why most research methods impossibly can lead to valid results in such a simple and tangible way that I thought everyone would open his eyes. But they didn't. They became angry with it. So you're talking about this phenomenon. We've discussed on our show a lot, which almost the editor of almost every major medical journal in the world has come out in one way or another saying we can't repeat the scientific experiments that were said to come to conclusions. You know, some say 50% of those that we attempted to repeat using different scientists,

but the same methodology didn't come up with the same results. As high as 85% of, you know, especially when you get into the pharmaceutical products and doing their own studies, it becomes very fallible and its ability to be repeated. And so we start recognizing that you can't trust. And these are major statements by major editors of these journals saying, you actually can't trust the peer-reviewed science that we've been publishing because it is too easy for it to somehow be manipulated. They haven't, they don't state what the cause necessarily is,

but this has sort of become a focus of yours. Yes, yes, because I noticed that no matter how clearly you explain what the problems with the research methods are, for most researchers, it just doesn't make a difference. They continue to believe in what they believed in before. And that was the moment when I started to become interested in mass psychology because I had a feeling that this phenomenon of this radical blindness or for the absurdity of what someone believes in can not really be explained on the basis of individual psychological mechanism. It's rather on the basis of group psychology and mass psychology that you can explain it. I had a very specific, I think, revelation to this myself. Let me share it with you.

Early on, I made this documentary Vaxed, which was about the MMR vaccine and its study at the CDC looking at, does it cause autism? That was early 2000 to 2004. This study was done because Dr. Andrew Wakefield in England had made this accusation that the MMR appeared to be somehow causally related to the rise in autism epidemic. At a certain point, Donald Trump is elected president early 2017, and I got a call from Robert Kennedy Jr. that he'd been invited to a meeting at the National Institute of Health. So we got together and laid out what we thought were all the problems with the vaccine program.

And we are gonna have the opportunity to speak to Francis Collins, head of the NIH, Tony Fauci, I can't remember all their names, but heads of autism development, all of the sort of the science body, about 10 people to express our concerns. And a representative from Donald Trump's cabinet was there to oversee and sort of moderate this discussion.

And essentially we laid out two major tenants. Number one being the biggest issue was we can't find a single double-blind placebo study performed on any of the childhood vaccines that are in our childhood vaccine program. We can't find a single one of those studies to establish safety prior to licensure of the vaccines. Simple question. Are we not doing proper randomized control studies using a placebo for vaccination? or are you just hiding that information from the public? And it started out with at first, some guy at the end of the table says, of course we're doing double-blind placebo studies.

You know, that's how science is done. It's just in earlier phase trials than we published for the public. And so, RFK Jr. said, great, that's why we're here. This is the National Institute of Health. All the archives for that information are here. I'd love to go back to the people that are questioning this and show them the evidence that you now said it exists. We'll wait as long as it takes.

And then it was just silence. I mean, one of the most, like, incredible pregnant pauses I've ever seen. And then Tony Fauci said, we don't do double-blind placebo studies because it would be unethical. And so the whole conversation shifted. And then Francis Collins says, that's right. Jumped on his bandwagon says, that's right. And then so they ended up admitting that they don't do any double-blind placebo studies because as they see it, and to your point, they have such a strong group belief that vaccines are great

that even a brand-new vaccine being entered into the population, to have a placebo group that isn't getting this great life-saving measure that's never been tested, to deny them access to that product in their minds would be ethically reprehensible. Okay? And then so we took it one step further. We said, okay, well, then how about a retrospective study? I get it prospectively, meaning before the product is released, you don't want anyone to be denied the product.

But after it's been released, there are certainly plenty of antivaxies or whatever you want to call it, databases that can be studied. We can look at these studies and just simply compare the vaccine to the unvaccinated who has higher rates of cancer, who has higher rates of autism, who has higher rates of diabetes and all these issues that are plaguing our country. If you want to shut me up and Robert Kennedy Jr. or anyone that's on this topic simply do the most obvious study known to man compare the vaccine to the unvaccinated and show us, look, the vaccinated live longer, they're healthier, less cancer, all these other issues. You know what they said to us? We can't figure out a way to do that study. I was looking across the table at the greatest body of

scientists gathered at the most important research institute in the world, and you can't figure out how to compare one group to another. And as we asked more questions, I went back to my wife, and I knew nothing about mass formation, but I said, for the most part, these people aren't evil. There is something, and I described it as there's almost like an innate self-protective mechanism that keeps them from opening the most obvious doors to a third grader where they would see the problem in their science. They don't even see that door. It doesn't exist.

There's something in them that keeps from asking the appropriate question that would unearth their belief in their thought system that they are saving the world with these products. I would hold withdrawal except one person. I said to my wife when I got back, except this one guy sitting across from me who I didn't really know at the time, Anthony Fauci, I said, I believe this guy is evil. I think he knows damn well what's going on here. But that was my experience. Yeah, indeed. Yeah.

It's a kind of group ideological blindness, I think. Yeah, blindness. Yeah. A group that is in the grip of an ideology that shares an ideology and that became completely blind because of that ideology. Now, this is what's fascinating, I think, about your book because you talk about, you know, where we sort of have this separation. We start out with our lack of, you know, science or a mind. Most humanity seems to start in a religious space, a belief in something bigger themselves. Different cultures create different gods of these things, but there's a spiritual relationship,

and that God is usually vengeful, keeps us in control. If we step out of line, then we will be smited or whatever, you know, it is. I'm using my own words, not yours, but essentially there's this theological construct that controls humanity. And then along comes what you described, I believe, as the mechanistic society or the science, right? No, there's a logic now. We can be free of this mythological fear that's got us all bound up, but now we can be logical. Tell me about that. Like, how did that start and did it free us?

Well, indeed. First, scientific discourse was a kind of a discourse through which a minority went against a dominant discourse. The dominant being that sort of spiritual theological... Institutionalized. ...organic religion, I think. Yep. And in the first place that yielded nice results, I think. I mean, science represented a kind of open-mindedness, kind of... a positioning through which people started to listen to nature, to the phenomena, to reality around them in a new way without being blinded by dogmas and all kinds of prejudice. But after a while, because of its successes, science became a dominant discourse itself.

And that was the moment when it got perverted. Okay. That's always the case, I think. So once, when it was the minority, it was healthy. Once it becomes the majority discourse. Of course. Why? Why is that?

Once a discourse starts to get the grip on the majority of the people, it is that discourse that is used to manipulate society, to manipulate, to make profit of it, to be successful at the level of careers. That's logical actually. As soon as a certain discourse is shared by or is believed in by the majority of the people, everyone who wants to manipulate or who wants to have a grip on the majority of the people will exactly use that discourse. Think about all the commercials that say scientific research showed that this product. Eighty percent of doctors say you should use this. The consensus of says

blah blah blah. Or at the academic world, just the more academic papers you publish, the higher the chance that you will be successful at the level of your academic career. That are all examples that show that the more more successful discourse is in a society, the higher the chance that it gets perverted and that it loses its qualities of truth speech. And that is what happened with science. Science changed from truth speech in the beginning, it changed into a certain ideology. It got perverted, lost its qualities of truth speech, and in the end it was a purely ideological matter. Science is no longer today, is no longer a kind of open-mindedness.

No, science starts from dogmatic beliefs, the entire universe, or scientific ideology starts from dogmatic beliefs. The entire universe is a material phenomenon. It's a set of elementary particles and all these particles interact with each other according to the laws of mechanics and this entire universe machine can be perfectly rationally understood. And that's why we need experts to this society, the people who have this rational understanding of the machinery of the universe and of society to lead us. We do not need to radically elected politics.

Well, you become our gods, right? You now are the all-knowing, and I no longer challenge your quote. Just as I didn't challenge the religion, my priest held it. Now you hold the truth of the world and the cosmos. I bow down to that, and it really is just, we've just shifted from one controlling God to another. First science declared the throne of God empty, but very soon man sneaked to the throne himself and put himself in the throne.

Literally, literally. That's super interesting. Let me just take it to this moment then where is it at the moment that it becomes the majority thinking process? Is it that it, it's weird to say it is it, but let's say science in this, this free thinking ability to ask questions to delineate and by asking appropriate questions to triangulate the actual truth that now sets us free because we're in control of it seems perfectly healthy. Is it at the moment that it becomes the majority because you says now it controls people?

Is it the realization of the power that it now holds that ends up being the sort of incriminating factor? Or is it the love of having that majority that it fears losing that and losing, you know what I mean? Is it recognizing, oh my God, the masses are now with us, we have power here. To a certain extent, definitely, to a certain extent, it can lead to power. And at the same time, it can give you power, it can give you money, that are two factors that always play a role, but in the end, I think it's about something else, really. I think that the real factor at play is always the fact that people fear uncertainty.

Everyone, or the human being, struggles with a profound uncertainty in life. We always think that human beings differ from animals because they know more, because they have more knowledge. But actually, rather the opposite is true. A human being distinguishes itself from an animal because it constantly is confronted with a lack of knowledge. A human being is constantly confronted with questions it cannot answer. What is the meaning of my life? What will happen after I died? Does the other love me or not?

What do I mean for someone else? Our human existence circles constantly around something that its mind cannot grasp. Animals don't suffer from that. And it's simply because the animals, mental functioning, is based on sign systems. Sign systems in which each sign refers to one thing. And there is no doubt to what it refers. This cry means hunger, this cry means danger, this posture means aggression and so on.

In a human being, the human mind is based on language. And in language, the so-called language signs do not refer to one thing. They refer to other signs. This word refers to another word. If you want to know what one word means, you need other words. But these other words need to be defined again by other words. and you always lack a word that can make sure what all the rest of the words mean. And that's why the human mind is constantly uncertain.

And that's for most people that is extremely painful. It's extremely painful. Well, it's perpetual insecurity. Yes, absolutely. And it's extremely painful, painful at the important, with respect to the important issues of life. For instance, at the level of love, at the level of dying, at the level of what our existence means and so on.

And that's why you can take two positions towards this fundamental uncertainty. Or you can, it can make you anxious because you don't know what to do in life, you don't know what to decide, you are afraid of risk, of the risk of life, of the uncertainties of life, or this uncertainty can be, you can recognize it in this uncertainty, the uncertainty, the very basis and the very precondition for your existence as a human being. In that case, you make the following reasoning, you just say it is exactly because nobody is certain and because nobody can be certain about the questions to the answer to the great questions of life, that I have the right and the duty to answer the questions myself.

Right. Only one who can choose and determine how I have to live my life. is me. The only thing I have to do is I have to make sure that I stay loyal to certain ethical principles. But for the rest, I have to make the decisions in my life. I have to live my own life. So that are the two possibilities. Individual, you know, the individual and recognizing that you create into the space where knowledge is not giving you any answers. In fact, you know, I think we've all experienced this if you're good in any profession, remember like being in filmmaking the more talent the more talent the more talent had the more work I got the

more I did the more I saw was capable in film and the more as intimidated by what then was possible the more you have knowledge the more your knowledge is of how much you don't know yeah right yeah indeed that's so great so great as the conclude exactly that the more I know the more I realize that I don't know right that's wisdom that's wisdom it is no if no if it's not debilitating yet we we want to have control. And I've always said, I don't know if it's accurate, but my belief has been that hyper-intelligent, people that are incredibly intelligent, I've always thought, have a greater propensity to go crazy because they, and because it comes down to chaos in life. Certainly,

I can find a mathematical function and truth that irons out the chaos that's all around me. Your average person that just accepts, you know, life sucks, move on, you know what I mean? It happens. And but super intelligent people are always working at trying to give in order to things. And I think ultimately you will fail. I think you'll fail. And they see through the conventions,

the social conventions and that's why they have only two options, I think. Either they reinvent the convention or they just perish because they never find a way to live their lives. So, but I think that's the, the point is that there's in certain. uncertainty, many people isolate from business, many people buy into a common narrative, an

ideology that is shared by many people just to not be confronted with this uncertainty, I think. And that's why they are so, because they are so stubbornly sticking to a certain narrative that is shared by the group, while in many cases that not. narrative is utterly absurd. That's the totalitarianism. That's the essence of totalitarianism, I think. What you see is that people start to become completely incapable of accepting that there is a certain uncertainty in life. They want one answer, the one and only answer. The totalitarian leaders provide that answer.

They totally and completely provide your answer for you. Insert our belief system. And for you're your same. You started out with a sense of meaninglessness, the more your knowledge left you, you know, all alone and finding that there was even more you didn't know. I want to just stop this right now. Go ahead and insert for me my meaning, what my purpose is here, and let it be with the total group because the more people involved in it, the more true it must be.

Yeah, indeed. So when we, you know, when we look at sort of this, ideology, what I thought was interesting, is this idea that science ultimately runs into this problem. We get into quantum science. And I think everybody has a sense now that the basic concept of quantum science is the scientist is changing the results simply by the focus by the scientist on the problem at hand. That their singular involvement. You give many beautiful examples, you know, that we're affecting our environment. Even clock, you know, arms all, end up starting swinging in some sort of unison, that the clocks change each other, and that's not

even a thought, a thinking process. Somehow the scientist, by observing that observation is potentially affecting the results of what they're looking at. You know, why in a moment where that is so clearly the case is it being swept under the rug by science and stuff? It wants to hide that dirty secret, which anyone that looked at it seems to know. As you said, if you truly take your science to the end, you're left in a very uncomfortable place. Yes, I think that science is popular, as long as it provides people the illusion

that it will bring certainty and that it will bring rational control, but real science doesn't bring certainty. Real science doesn't tell you that your rational understanding will be capable of explaining the mysteries of life and that it will allow you to, control reality and to reshape the world in such a way that there will be no suffering and

even no dying anymore. No. But real science learns us, all seminal scientists, learned us that our rational understanding is extremely limited. That's what they all teach us. That rational understanding can grasp a little bit, can allow you to understand certain aspects of the world, but very soon if you follow your rationality in a loyal way, that you very soon will arrive at a point at the limit of rationality. And that's what real science learners, and that's where most people are not interested anymore in science. Most people don't want to know that,

because what they want is the illusion that there is someone who knows everything, and that we once will know everything, that this big uncertainty of life, which is such a challenge for every human being, doesn't exist. That's what science, the scientific ideology, that the illusions the scientific ideology feeds, that that one day there will be no uncertainty anymore, that everything can be explained in mathematical terms,

and that we are allowed to go to sleep now. So it failed its ultimately, you know, virgin goal, the idea that to set ourselves free from the dogma of the world's science will set us free, that investigation the science took us so deep that we realized, oh my God, I'm now affecting everything I'm looking at, Therefore, I can't get to a solid foundational principle that's true because depending on your personality and the observer, you're going to affect what you're seeing. And it's almost that they just said, okay, let's not tell the world that. They're looking to us now to have the dog, and that's when it becomes a dogma.

Now it becomes just trust us. We do have the answers to the world. As Tony Fauci said, attacks on me, quite frankly, are attacks on science. There's no question to be had here, literally making himself a mythical fixture in this new dogmatic structure. Yeah, exactly. And that's how science lapses into the opposite of what it originally was, into a belief system that shouldn't be questioned anymore. Right. While science in the beginning was just open-mindedness and, the guarantee that everything could be questioned.

That was the origin of science and now it became a radical dogma. It's really interesting. I had some proof of that. I had a great debate years ago when I was sort of first discussing this. I was on a radio show with a guy who had a science background. And he was railing at the idea that Donald Trump had offered at that time Robert Kennedy Jr. The opportunity to run a vaccine safety commission. That Robert Kennedy Jr. would sort of head a science.

group to start investigating the science behind vaccination. This guy, everyone, he laid out a lot of facts, he knew his science, and I said, let me understand you're incredibly infuriated right now that Robert Kennedy Jr. would run this science body. Is that because you have some belief that because he appears to have a bias based on what he said that that bias will influence the science being done? And he said, exactly my point. I said, then you now know exactly why I have an issue with the science being done at the CDC and the FDA that constantly lay out a mantra to me that vaccines are always safe, always effective, and aren't doing any proper safety studies because they know they'll see what they already believe.

You know, the bias there is my problem with the science. The entire foundational principle of science is supposed to be the scientific method, which is bring your biggest questions, your best questions. We invite all of them, we should be challenging the statements we've made, the theories that we're standing on, the products that we've designed from the greatest minds, anyone that can bring the best challenge. That's what science is supposed to cherish. We've totally let go of that. Yes, I think so.

Yes, indeed. That's true. And one way or another, we all, or our society lost the capacity to really tolerate real science, which always starts from uncertainty and which always returns to uncertainty. Science will never lead to certainty. That's what Heisenberg concluded with his uncertainty principle. He said it's not so much that we are not certain yet, it's that we will never be able to be certain. That's the point.

And as soon as you start to accept that and you start to be humble enough to admit that, to admit that you're rational understanding will never be able to really grasp the essence of life, you also start to understand that our rational knowledge can never be the true basis of our existence as a human being and that a society for instance can never be based on rational understanding. Rational understanding is only the first phase in the process of coming to knowledge. It's the first steps. And Rennie Tom for instance articulated that in a very beautiful way, he said, that part of reality that can be understood in a rational way is very limited and the rest of reality we can only understand by empathically resonating with it.

Empathically. Empatically, intuitively, which is a word I use a lot. Empatically, it's something that reminds me very much of the principles of the samurai tradition, for instance, where they said that the first phase of a learning process, for instance, when you learn sword fighting or the martial arts, that the first phase is always a rational phase. In the first phase of the learning process, of the training process, you learn certain techniques which try to show you in a rational way how you can perform your art. And that's the same for a craft or for sciences. No matter what, the first stage is always a technical rational stage, a stage in the learning process that you can understand in a rational way. But as you practice these techniques and this rational approach to the art or to the craft for a long time, you will slowly

start to develop a certain feel for what you do. You will, a different knowledge will start to develop, something that you cannot express anymore in rational terms, but something that is based on a certain feeling with what you're doing. And it's that feeling that is this more empathic knowledge. It's like a more direct contact with the object that you try to know, a resonating contact, that is the real knowledge. And if you, I experience that very,

very much in my own life. It took me until I was 35 years old before I suddenly started to realize that what we call reality and what we call the facts is not rational. It took me until I was 35 years old when I dive deep into the mathematical basis of systems theory and a theory which shows in an astonishing, paradoxical way that all complex dynamical systems in nature which are most phenomena in nature actually behave irrationally, that they behave irrationally. And I suddenly started to understand that what we call the facts in the reality are not rational, and that my rational understanding would never really be able to grasp or capture the essence of life around me. And it is at that moment, at that moment that you can be humble enough to understand that your human mind

will always be out of control and that it will always fall short to grasp the essence of life around you. It is at that moment I think that you can open up literally, that your mind can open up, that your mind literally that the logical building blocks, which you connected to each other, and which isolated you from the world, that they can slide a little bit away from each other, and that the eternal vibrance in music of life, of nature, of other human beings around you, can go through the holes, touch the strings of your being and make you resonate with life around you.

I think that, at that moment, that's the moment, when we start to get in touch with, when we start to develop a feel for the mystery of life around us. And that's the moment also where we start to become aware of the eternal principles of life. And at all these principles, these ethical principles, these ethical principles of humanity, These principles can be the basis of human living together and not rational understanding. If we believe that rational understanding should be the ultimate basis of human living together, we will inevitably lapse into absurd irrationality. Because it is not the essence.

Rationality doesn't represent the essence of life. And if we make it the essence, we will inevitably end up in absurd irrationality. and more, we will destroy life because the essence of life escapes rationality and inevitably if we reduce life to rationality we kill it, we destroy it. I had a very, one of the things in private and I know my wife's watching right now, but there was a life-changing moment for the two of us, but I'll speak to it from my perspective. We had a troublesome pregnancy where we ended up losing the baby just probably. to delivery. That experience for me brought up the, you know, the initial questions,

do you abort? Are you going to control this situation? I took on that thought and said, I'm not here to decide quality of life. I'm not, I don't want to be a God figure deciding whether or not this is going to be a life of quality. That's not my decision. And I realize, and I've tried to explain to people, and I think I'm understanding it more and talking to you that it was finally as a guy that's a producer. I see the problems ahead in production. I'm going to be moving lots and lots of money in a production on CBS or something. I've got to know the pit balls ahead.

I'm a fixer. I know how to fix everything. I'm always working the situation out. I'm rationalizing. I'm incredibly rational. And suddenly in that moment, I could not fix it. I couldn't fix it in any way. And there was something in finally accepting that there is something,

spectacularly painful and beautiful about life that I will never be able to control it. That I don't have control over these things and I'm going to release. And to me, it was where I grew up, my father was a minister, but I would say in that moment was where I felt the connection to something bigger than me. Something that must have some understanding of what's taking place here, but I do not. And somehow in the release to that that I cannot change, I felt an incredible peace and an incredible power that I think has led me through all this experience that finds me here.

I've never been the same person since. And I feel like it's in that understanding that this isn't rational, there's no way to rationalize what's happened to me. And I'm a victim, right? In that moment, until I released to it, I was a victim. Why is this being done to me? Why us? Why our child? When not somebody else.

But when I realized that there are moments in life that cannot be explained, and that is the phenomenon of it, without the dark places we don't, will we really appreciate the light? And to really embrace this, if you want to call it chaos, is the beauty of life. Is it not? I think so. That's what resonating is, I think. It's giving up control. It's surrendering. It's opening your mind. and allowing something else to make it resonate. It's a kind of surrender, I think. With our rational mind, we constantly try to control the world around us. We try to understand it, to manipulate it, to control it. And as soon as you can give up this idea,

as soon as you can see that it is an illusion and that it will lonely alienate you from life, at that moment I think you can really open and let something else move you, let something else guide you, let something else, something outside of you, something that transcends your own rational capacities, touch you. Yes. I have said in talks, not to get too spiritual on this, but through this journey with this vaccine discussion and the pandemic. I've said many times on stage, I referenced the story from Genesis, Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve are given perfection, a life you have dominion over the earth,

everything, need clear water, animals, flowers, you name it. God says there's only one thing you cannot do, do not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. I've said that didn't make sense when I was a kid. Don't I want to have knowledge of good and evil? Don't I want to have those things? And then I've said, as I watched this, I realize what's taken place here, and I think you very well explained, you already have just now. It was that mechanistic world. Do not believe that you will figure out the mechanisms of life, that you will understand what makes things move, what is good, what is bad. In that journey, you will ultimately find yourself all alone, and you will be cast out. There you will surely die. You are not in that space of acceptance. You are going to go crazy. And that's really

where we're at now. We have, to me, you know, there's this argument that, and to bring it back around, this is a battle between good and darkness, you know, light and darkness. It really is in a way because it's those that have now, you know, been left wanting with the mechanistic structure. The science is going to bring the reason by which all things fall into line, but they won't give up the power they now have, and now they are the ones in control. There's an insanity now. that seems to be in our government systems and certainly our health systems, which are merged and our technology systems, which is more of this mechanistic desire to make the world a utopian place,

that seems to, as it tracks us more and more, is doing exactly what science keeps doing, where it was setting out to set us free, it's imprisoning us. We're becoming slaves to this, and the slave drivers of this insanity seem to be in every position of power in the world right now. I agree. That's also what Hannah Arendt said. Totalitarianism, this idea that the human being can control everything, is the ultimate evil. Exactly I think because of what I said a few minutes ago, namely that it tries to reduce life to rationality and in that movement, in that action,

it cannot else than destroy life and then destroy the core of humanity. If a state system, for instance, believes that it should make all the choices for its citizens, then it inevitably destroys this little bit of space where every human being can make its own choices and where every human being can realize itself as a singular human being. So that's what makes totalitarianism the ultimate dehumanization. And you point out the different figures that we've discussed on this show, Klaus Schwab, Yvall Noah Harari, who, you know,

whether or not I can't tell all the time whether he's just writing about it or if he is completely expressing his own internal fear of what he cannot control, but what he describes as a future. Humans are now hackable animals. You know, the whole idea that humans have, you know, this, they have this soul or spirit and they have free will and nobody knows what's happening inside me. So whatever I choose, whether in the election or whether in the supermarket, this is my free will, that's over. And I think of Bill Gates and these people involved in this, that they see the only way we survive is that we must control humanity to make the appropriate. decisions for themselves. That is the only way we live, right? To survive is to live. And those of us

that are opposed to this idea are saying, that's no way to live. That's not living. If you're tracking under my skin, as you've all know, Harari talks about it. If you're tracking every part of my biometrics and then trying to decide how I'm thinking or how I'm going to vote and controlling how I'm going to vote and controlling the discussions we have and censoring anybody that wants to get me a different perspective or censoring me when I'm sharing something that I may have just, seen my own way, then we've died. We're dead. I mean these people that literally I think say they're fighting for our lives and humanity are killing us. They're killing what life is. Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. Yes indeed. That's the case. That's the strange and one of the

strangest things for thing for me is always that they do so in the name of science. While science itself, all seminal scientists, has exactly concluded that life cannot be controlled in a rational way. Right. All right. So that leads me to probably what I would say is the more controversial part of this book. In Chapter 8, you get in because what I've just talked about, I've talked about you've all know Harari, Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, you know, Tony Fauci.

We're discussing these figures that are imprinting upon the world that I am the science. We are the answer. You will, you know, and many, many people, the majority, at least over the last couple of years, signed on to, as you've said, this mass formation. We found some sort of wholeness in a crazy ritual of locking ourselves down, of vaccinating ourselves with an untested product over and over. And no matter how much it failed, it seemed that just more was the answer. But there seemed to be these figures that keep coming up in this conversation, which leads me to change. chapter eight. In chapter eight, you discuss the conspiracy, this idea that the conspiracy is where we're all sort of leaning, but it's wrong. Let me just pull this out of chapter eight, conspiracy and

ideology. You write, fanatical conspiracy thinking testifies to the almost irresistible tendency of human beings to find someone who can be held responsible in the face of adversity and can thereby be made the object of aggression. This can probably be seen as one manifestation of a more general psychological rule, the more anger people feel, the more intentional malice they perceive. Now, I think that paragraph in a way really captures this chapter, but just to see if I've got this right, you were arguing that this mass formation, really any mass formation is understood, but let's stick in this COVID pandemic thing that we've just gone through, that we want, just like those captured by the mass formation want an answer that is simple and makes sense and

therefore fulfills, you know, this need to have a truth to life, that on the other side, those of us that have questioned that authority and have stood up against it, we are seeking a similarly satisfying yet hollow world understanding or driving force, which is there's a conspiracy that's causing this. There is a small group of people. They're inflicting this ideology upon us that we're all going through. And so to be clear, you believe this mass formation, though driven by many entities and ideas and agendas that are out there, is more chaotic in its functions that bring us there, that it's not some driven, you know, small group of people that wrote this out and planned it and created it. There is an elite.

There is an elite. There is an elite. An elite that relies very much on indoctrination and propaganda. That has all kind of ideological plans. We must be blind if you don't want to see that. These plans exist. They exist before the crisis and they were pushed forward by the elite. There were large scale unprecedented indoctrination and propaganda campaigns.

and so on. I am 100% convinced of that. But I think there is one thing important. We make a mistake, a serious mistake, if we reduce the problem to this elite, if we think that evil, to use that word, is only situated in the elite, that the only problem in the world and that is the elite and that the problem would be solved is that if this elite no longer exists. then we make a serious mistake. For me it's about that. The elite is part of the problem. If we think, for instance, that the problem would be solved.

If we eliminate this elite, if we could destroy this elite in a violent revolution, then that would be the most destructive, strategic choice we can make, the most self-destructive. Self-destructive. Yes, of course. By destroying this small enemy, outside of us, we destroy ourselves. How so? They will destroy us. They will destroy us. Of course, of course, because they will use our violence as a justification to destroy us and we definitely will lose this game. But and even if we

would succeed and that is even more important I think, as long as people continue to think in the same way, as long as people continue to be in the grip of this rationalist mechanist ideology, they will simply create the same elite. Of course, nothing will change. That's so typical for a totalitarianism. In a classical dictatorship, it makes sense to try to destroy the classical dictator because if you succeed in doing so, the system will collapse.

In a totalitarian state, it won't. The elite will simply be replaced simply because the point of gravity of the system is always situated in the masses that are in the grip of a certain ideology. That's something extremely important, I think. So, I believe that the problem with conspiracy thinking, with what I call fanatical conspiracy thinking, the problem is not so much that you are wrong in this sense, that there are no conspiracies. There are conspiracies. Conspiracies have always existed.

But the problem is rather that everything is reduced to a conspiracy and that the problem is reduced to a conspiracy. And in this way, automatically from such an analysis follows the strategic advice. this elite has to be destroyed. And that's naive and self-destructive. I rather would quote Solzhenitsyn and actually code him in that chapter, I think, who said, it would be easy to believe that the problem of totalitarianism, I quote Solzhenichin from his famous book, The Gulag Archipelago, for which he received the Nobel Prize

and which was based on his experiences in the concentration camps in Russia. He said it would be easy to believe, that the problem of totalitarianism is caused by one small evil group. But he said, we all know that the dividing line between good and evil does not run between people. It runs through every human beings. And that's the truth, I think. We have to be honest enough to admit, I think, that to a certain extent we are all part of the problem, we all participated in this, um, this, um, mechanist, rationalist thinking, we all brought our money to the banks, for instance. If there wouldn't be almighty, powerful bankers, if people were not willing to bring their money

to the banks, we all are part of the system, do one more than the other, and the one is more responsible than the other. But to a certain extent, I think it's best to see that we are, to a certain extent we are all part of the problem and that at the same time that the real enemy is never another human being, but that the real enemy is always to be situated at the level of a certain way, a certain view of man in the world, a certain world view in which which believes that our human mind is capable of controlling life and, and, and, and, and, and, you know, which, which believes that our human mind is capable of, and, and reality, this kind of ideology that created at the same time, at the same time, this kind of thinking, this mechanistic ideology, we talked about that I think in our first conversation,

is this ideology that brought a condition in this problematic state where it became extremely vulnerable for mass formation. That's the first thing. On the one hand, this ideology created a certain problematic psychological state in the population which made it vulnerable from mass formation. And at the same time, it is this ideology which created a certain elite, a specific elite, an elite which believed that it was its holy duty to manipulate the population through indoctrination, propaganda, brainwashing, all kinds of sciops, and so on. This new elite emerged throughout the last two. And they believe all for our good, right?

We need something to believe in in order to be whole. Therefore, let us sort of seize that space and hand you something to believe in that makes you whole. Read the founding fathers of modern propaganda such as Trotter, Lipman, Bernice. If you read their works, then you will clearly see that they were reasoning along the following lines. They said, since the beginning of modern democracy, political leaders or not leaders anymore, because they have to be elected. So that means that they have to follow the masses. They have to try to know what the masses want and then they have to give them.

Tell them what they think they need to hear. Yes, and we have to tell them what they need to hear, we have to give them what they want or otherwise we won't be reelected. So that's literally, literally described, for instance, in the work of Bernays, he said, and that he said means that we will fall prey to the destruction and the irrationality of the masses. because the masses are intrinsically irrational and destructive. So, and the politicians cannot control them, meaning that if we don't find other means to control them, we will fall prey to them to the masses. And that's where he came up with his modern theory of propaganda.

He said, we have no other option than to develop an impressive propaganda machinery and to constantly manipulate, deceive the masses, control the masses. So that's what the original philosophy was why propaganda machinery must be developed. And that is, it's this combination of this population, which as a consequence of mechanistic thinking, is brought in a psychological state where it is sensitive for indoctrination propaganda, where it is extremely vulnerable for indoctrination propaganda and for mass formation, and on the other hand, this elite which believes that it is its right and Holy duty to constantly manipulate the bombings is this combination to which Hannah Arendt refers

as the diabolic pact between the masses and the elite, which is the basis of totalitarianism. Han Arendt says the basis of totalitarianism, the essence of totalitarianism is always this diabolic pact between the masses and the elite. So in a way we're inseparable in some space. We're we keep creating you know, our new mass formation. If we get addicted to the idea, and my friend, I have friends, are serious conspiracy theories,

they are totally, they're not happy. It doesn't bring happiness. They can't trust anything around them. And their science, which is the science of conspiracy, leaves them with the same gaping hole that they can't come to an answer that lets them sleep at night,

that there's a purpose to life. And so we just keep repeating this because of a deep inner illness, essentially our original sin, I would say, our need to know when people come up to me and they'll say, Del, how does this end? I mean, you're deeply in this. You seem to have a strategy. How does this all end? How do you see this ending? And I used to try and answer that. And sometimes I would give just the short version of, well,

I think we win. Or if I was feeling, you know, strongly metaphysical, I would say, look, I'm living my life in a space of faith. And really, I am being imbued with a lot of foresight for what we've gotten right, but I've really been taking the appropriate steps into faith, and I feel like I'm being guided. A lot of people don't want to hear that, you know, but in the end, what I've realized the real answer is your need to know how this ends is our problem. That is why we're here. Exactly.

Right? Yes, yes, yes. We are in this predicament because you keep being sold some ending that makes you feel like for a moment, there's a problem. There's a purpose to your life and whoever hands it to you you buy it until it comes up short and we keep going back to the need to know where we're going instead of recognizing this isn't defined There's a beauty live into your curiosity live into your insecurities as you say in this book create into that space create your understanding of what your life is here No, I agree and also I think it makes no sense to to try to predict what will happen and to try to know when all this will be finished and so on and how it will end?

No. We can never really, I think we have to try to understand it, but we should always be aware of the fact that we will never be able to really understand and to predict what will happen and that in this way we just lose our energy. Energy that we should use to focus at the right level, namely the only thing that we really should focus on is the fact that no matter how inhumane the world around us becomes that we ourselves will stick to our ethical principles and if we do so and we will have to reinvent them these ethical principles. We're universal but we will have to reinvent them, re-articulate them, rediscover them, make it really our own principles and if we do that then we will pick the fruits of our positioning. We will go through a fast evolution as a human being and that's the real meaning for me, the real purpose of everything that happens now. In the end, there will be a small group who chooses

to stay loyal to ethical principles, to the principle of humanity in a dehumanizing world. And this small group will be pushed on a path where it will go through a very fast evolution as a human being. That's for me the true meaning of what is now happening. It's actually a process. in which a large organism gives birth to a small organism. Society puts a lot of pressure on the people who do not want to conform, who do not want to go along. The diamond, if you will, under the pressure. Yeah, indeed.

And that's exactly the reason. This pressure is a reason why this small group starts to move, why it is pushed through a tunnel where it would never go through without the pressure of the large group. And in this way, something really truly new will be born. And that's why in the short term I'm realistic. I think it will be very difficult in a short term. I think this system, this technocratic system, this belief that the cynical belief,

that everything should be controlled to the extreme, that there is no other solution for the problems we are facing than more and more technological control and surveillance. I believe that this will be pushed to the limit, but I also am quite confident that there will be a group who refuses to go along with that system, that system and that this group will be vocal enough that it will continue to speak out and that in this way it will make sure that there will always remain a small path open for the group to welcome to not only survive the situation but also to find in this situation

its motivation to go through a mental and a spiritual evolution where it would never go through without the pressure So we're actually So let's just stay right there as we sort of wrap this up Because we're talking in this book about sort of the breakdown of society many social experiments Seven people in a room you know looking at a set of lines you know which lines match up They've set the other six to say the one thing and so the seventh tends to go along with it even though they're looking it goes defies their own reason all of those things But you know as we and so you say you know we break down into basically there's the 30

or 40% that truly, you know, push the agenda, believe in the agenda. There's 40 to 60% in the middle that just go along with wherever the thing's going, though deep down, they don't really feel like it's the right thing to do, but they're not going to fight it. And then there's this, you know, smaller group. Smaller group at the end, somewhere between 10 and 30% that is going to resist, resist where things are going and stay in the ethics and a place of reason that makes, you know, that can be affirmed. And so is it that, are we in a tug of war here? Are we playing a tug of war with this central group?

Are we trying, are we really in a battle with that 30% on the other end to become the 40% that outnumbers them so this group comes our way? Or is that just going to be another mass formation that we've become the formation that they follow? We shouldn't become a mass. I'm sure of that. If the group who doesn't go along with the mass formation becomes a mass itself, it will be destroyed. So my goal on the high wire in here should not be to try and get all the masses to move my direction?

I don't think so. I think it should be just to articulate, to give different voices the possibility to resonate in society, to... To celebrate this little group of individual thinkers that are creating into their space. Yeah, and that's exactly what should define this group that doesn't go along with the masses. This group should be a group that shares one central virtue, namely that it encourages everyone to have its own opinion. And secondly, this group should be formed not because we all stick to the same common ideology or something, no, this group should be formed because

it develops strong social bonds between the individuals. People should love each other rather than this abstract group ideal or this or this collective. So that's what distinguishes a truly humane group from a mass. It is based on on the one hand, it encourages this central principle for every human being that you have the right to articulate your own opinion and at this end that this group is formed because it is based on strong bonds between individuals rather than on the bond between every individual separately and the collective. We're a bond too in ideology.

Yeah. We share some ideology. I mean, I can't tell you, as I listen to it, there's things that I think I've intuitively sensed. I've said this on my show, but everywhere I travel, one of the things that people say to me is Dell, we've got to figure out a way to get all these different groups that are against the vaccination or against the lockdowns. and to come together.

We've got to unite all of us, come up with a central theme that we all share so that we become this united front. And I've been saying the whole time, no. No. I mean, I said, number one, it will never happen. All you will do is create infighting for someone struggling to be the one that's going to write that central theme.

We're all going to follow. And you're going to be, it'll become a dictatorship of some sort. There'll be a battle over who gets to make that statement. And I said, instead, do what you're guided to do. follow your intuition. If you have problem with mercury and vaccines, then that's your issue. No, it's not for it's aluminum.

Then fine, you fight for aluminum. No, it's the aborted field cell lines. Then go with the aborted field cell lines. You know, it's only legislation that's going to get this done. Then go do the legislation. No, no, it's only legal. Then you do it. I mean, every, you know, I keep saying everybody,

go where you're guided to go. Express, you know, I think we're vessels in something much more magnificent, you know, and we're being guided to an individual space that we get to be the, stars of that space right we get to be you know part of more divinity and whatever theology we create or ideology we create in that space right but we accept each other we love each other for our uniqueness and for being different that's

exactly what I wanted to say like what's but what I really like very much in this in this group of people who do not go along with the mainstream narrative is how different they are yeah I see people around me now which I think I would have never talked to you. Never ever, I would have judged you. I would have cast judgment on you because of your, sometimes I'm ashamed to say it. Because of your appearance,

of because of what I think your political preferences are. Now I look at these people. I see how different they are and I realize, but you have one characteristic that for me is so important that I forget all the rest, you refuse to go along with this dehumanizing ideology and you want to lose a lot just to represent a little bit of freedom and a little bit of humanity in life. And that's enough. That's, if I see that, the more they differ from me, the more I love them.

It's strange. And that I think, that is what makes our human, the human being so beautiful that it is is so heterogeneous that there are so many differences between human beings rather than feel threatened by our differences, we should consider them, I think, our greatest treasure. Yeah. Well, and it makes us scary to lead. It's hard to lead a sea of individuals. It's so much easier to lead a group.

I've said this, people would say, why are they doing this to us? Like you're doing it. Most of us are doing it in our own families. You're raising your kids seen but not heard. Just do it because I said so. We're trying to train the individuality and the questioning mind and the, you know, out of our children because it makes our lives easier if our whole family just crosses the street at the same time following dad. Right?

It's much harder when you're going every other direction. You're going to get killed. You're going to be in the street. I'm going to, you know. And so we are grasping for control from the microcosms of our families. to our churches, to our schools in some way to develop something that we all follow. But I have to say, when I really embrace it, even I don't want to hear that my only goal is to be this profound and really enjoy that I'm the smaller group.

I think when a lot of people watch the high wire, there's this dream, someday we're going to be the majority, right? I've said it. I've said as a mantra, we are the majority. You know, more people are now rejecting the vaccines than are accepting them, even those that receive the vaccines. We have sort of shifted into a collective consciousness that is rejecting this. And I think it would be very difficult. You know, we could go on for hours, you know, before we got into this.

He said, I think there's going to be other viruses that are going to just keep hitting these things. But certainly you must recognize that they have really hampered. I call it the boy that cried wolf problem, that there's going to be a really. issue with locking us down and doing this to us again, at least if you're going to keep using viruses as the way to do that. So of course, yeah. But are we still, am I still misguided in thinking when I say that we're a majority into thinking about this?

Is it still a smaller group that I have to recognize and be passionate about? I think it's still a smaller group. I do believe it's still a smaller group, but that doesn't matter. It's not the size of the... the group that will allow us to, to, I think what for me, what I hope for the future is that a new society will emerge which functions according to real, original, ethical principles. That's what I hope. And I think it will be a small group who rediscoveres these principles and who reintroduces them. But first this small group will have to get in touch with these

principles itself because most of us now if I look and if I look at the people who do not go along with the mainstream narrative I think most of them myself included still have to go a long way before we really are in touch with these principles again I think we all still continue to live very much according to the habits and the ideology of the old world of the of the of the mechanist ideology, to be honest. I think we have to go a long way, and I think that if we walk that way, then the small group will really, it will really feel this principle so much that it will be capable of delivering a new model for a society in which human beings can live a life worthy of a human being.

I think the fear is that this larger group right now, the technocratic takeover of the world, the tracking systems. What happens if they start atomizing vaccine? in the air or delivering them through mosquitoes. I mean, I keep saying it's like, in a way, revenge of the nerds, like these people that, you know, I came, I grew up skiing and rock climbing. I risked my own life. I feel like these people are risking all of our lives to express whatever it is they want or their challenge of life as we know it. But do we have to leave that to kill itself? Is it going to just erupt and destroy itself?

And we just need to be focused on remaining clear and getting as many people, I guess, metaphorically onto this arc as are available. If you are a part of this, we are building a new society. We are getting back to the ethics that truly are, you know, a part of nature and a part of our connection to it. And the rest of this, you know, is going to do what it's going to do. and it will destroy itself? That's not our job to destroy it.

Definitely. You will see it. That's what will happen. The large group, the masses, will exhaust themselves. They will destroy themselves. And we don't have to do that. At that level, we have to do nothing.

The only thing we have to make sure is that we, we ourselves, stick to these principles. And the first of these principles is that we have to speak out. If we do that, we will constantly disturb the power of the masses, constantly break, the breakthrough, the hypnosis a little bit, and it will never go so far,

that it chooses for the radical destruction of the people that go against it. And so what will happen is something very simple. The power of the masters slowly will decrease. The system will first become more repressive. It will excommunicate everyone who doesn't go along with it. That's how I feel it. But at the same time, its power will decrease. The human energy will be destroyed in the group.

The power will decrease. and the small group at first sight will lose everything, but its inner power will start to increase. And at a certain moment, the two lines will cross each other, and the small group will become more powerful than the large group, and it will be able to impose its principles, to provide the principles, to reorganize, to take the lead in society and restructured society,

in a really, truly humane society. The resurrection, really, and human. Yeah, something new that is, yeah, indeed. Rises back up. Yeah. From the oppression. Powerful, powerful, fascinating. I know I hope people watching are going to have the conversations.

I know I'm going to have at the dinner table, but Matias, just so, so happy that you were able to join us here. And for those I know, I'm going to just put this out there. There's questions on how you got here. here are you controlled opposition I hate to end this way but how did you get into this country did you get vaccinated no no no I I told on my Facebook page that the gates to America were not so small that I had to leave my principles behind to go through it and I mean that I would never do that I would never do that all right well I'm not going to ask you how that's your own there are other options

there's other options and they are perfectly legal okay Yes, perfect. That's good to know. All right, well, Matthias, thank you so much for your time. Thank you very much. Thank you. I enjoyed the conversation really. Me too.

All right, folks, don't miss out on this experience. This is one, it is one of the most beautiful books I've read. As I've said, I think you can see by the conversation that has sparked in me from reading this book. You're going to talk about it. It's going to make you think about where we're at. These are the conversations that should be happening, that need to be happening, happening. So don't be afraid. Talk to everyone that you know. That's how we make a difference in the world. And when it comes to, you know, sharing books and videos, one of the best things that we've created

here at the Highwire is our Get Vaccinated program. 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-sighted 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 latest in highwire gear. We want you armed with the facts online and on the front lines. Get the facts, lose the fear at the highwire.com. We've got a whole bunch of new videos up there to get vaccinated. So definitely take advantage of that. Get it out to your friends that definitely don't want to sit through an interview like, what I just did with Matthias Desmond. You know, I'm sitting here thinking, did I go too deep?

I mean, was that just too deep in the weeds? And I'll just say this, that I think I've been clear that one of the things on this show is I have questions for people that I want to ask. And after my last interview with Matthias Desmit, I thought, geez, I would really love to go out some night and get some dinner with Matthias Desmit and ask the questions I would like to go and go deeper.

Well, guess what? I don't have that opportunity. If these, you know, people like Matias come through like they did today on to the show, I want to take advantage of it and not just be there to make it entertaining. You just watch what I think this conversation is all about. There's a ton of other things I wanted to cover, but I really followed the nature of where that was going. I hope that you enjoyed that as much as I did, because I think we really got a deep insight into how we're trying to control our world, how we want science and technology to bail us out of our

and give us a reason for being and we're losing ourselves in this, our need to know what we're doing and where we're going. We've just lost the ability to be spontaneous, and I think that was such a brilliant journey, and I'm really glad that Matthias allowed that to happen. Well, you know, if I didn't prove it with this interview this week, I'm going to prove it to you next week, that there is no interview that I am afraid of doing or anywhere that I'm afraid of going. I am a curious person. And so there are times where I'm going to say things or do things, And I sure will not groove with all of you out there in the audience. I'm not trying to do a show where I'm appeasing.

I'm certainly don't appease any sponsors. So we're already gone rogue where I don't have a single sponsor that gets to tell me, Dell, you know, I didn't really like how you covered that or where you went with that. But my guest next week, I have had several people say, Del, don't do it. Del, don't do it. Are you crazy? Don't do it. Do what?

This conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. The firebrand talk show host. Conspiracy spreader Alex Jones. The most controversial man in America. Sandy Hook Massacre, a $150 million defamation case. Love him or hate him. COVID-19 is a host. Thursday, September 15th.

He lays it all on the table. They were creating the monster. They weaponized everything to take me out. You know, it's bad. Really bad. A high wire two-part event. I'm going to fill my guts today. I want to hear it.

Unfiltered, get ready. The real Alex Jones. Thursday, September 15th, 11 a.m. Pacific Time. Only at the highwire. We went places that I don't think anyone's ever gone. I'm so happy that Alex Jones gave me the opportunity. We certainly had moments where we came together and aligned on a lot of things we've talked about. We share certain ideas that come together.

But I definitely went to places that were uncomfortable for him. I told him I would. And I'm not happy about some of the things that have happened. And I let that be clear. If you want to see all of that conversation and what took place when two people that maybe don't see the world, exactly the same, come together, but share our thoughts clearly and completely, then you're not going to want to miss next week's show. Please check it out. Don't be afraid. Don't be afraid of this man. I think we should be listening to everybody. You should be curious to know how everyone thinks.

And, you know, when I think about it, you know, even Joe Rogan said, Alex Jones is one of the most misunderstood human beings on the planet. I would agree with him. And I think we all in this studio understood things about Alex. We did not. know after this interview took place. So definitely check that out. All right. This is, you know, not just a U.S. news program. It's not got some hosts that will just randomly interview anyone, no matter how dangerous it is. We're an international show. And we reach out around the world. So many of you around the world are not only watching, you're donating and making all this possible, which is why we love to support all of you citizen warriors that are out there around the

world making a difference, trying to pave a better way forward, which is why I'm going to talk about this next conference coming up in Australia. First, it was in Bath, and now it's going to Austria the better way. Has announced the most drastic limits to our lives of the UK has. Stay at home. Stay at least two meters away from. The NHS will not be able to cope. Social distancing has become the new normal. The fies and shops are vacant. We'll follow the science.

shut down about half the U.S. economy. Get vaccinated. These are safe and effective products. The disinformation governs for central bank digital currencies. There will be no return to the old normal for the foreseeable future. Well, the Better Way Conference is making its way to Austria next week. Austria has been under, you know, even probably some of the strictest draconian measures we saw with fines for not vaccinating, masking everywhere. And so I think it's really awesome that they're going there to sort of really stand for never letting this happen again.

I'm joined right now by the organizer, Maria Hubmer, Mogg, MD. Maria, first of all, you seem to be everywhere. I saw you in Los Angeles at our rally. I saw you in England in Bath when we were doing the Better Way conference. You were so dedicated. How do you find the energy? Like, what drives you? Honestly, Del, I know that we are here for a reason and I know that we need to take a stand in these times.

And it's so good to know that there are so many people out there where we can join forces and we can build a better way for a better future, especially for our kids. That's awesome. Okay, so tell me about Austria. Now, this one's a little closer to home for you. Austria, we reported on a lot. some of the strictest measures we saw around the world. And now you are bringing, you know, a conference there.

What are the dates to begin with? If people are in Europe, they want to make the trip, where are they going? Tell me all about it. Yeah, so we decided to do a four-day conference. So when you come from abroad, it's not only one day, like I came in for the LA rally for a one-day event, but I think it's even nicer if you have more days to join in.

So it starts on September 15th, it's Thursday, and ends on September 18th. And to give you a little insight on the program, I came up with the idea in the Better Way Conference in Bath, when I saw that so many free journalists made friends with the medical and legal experts that I said, we need to join forces and we need to have somehow more conference days. And so I came up with this idea and I know people ask me,

hey Maria, I can't look through the schedule, what's going on here, media people, experts, Arelli, can you please define what's going on? So to start with the media conference, that's on Thursday 15th and 16th, we said the free journalists from all around the world, they need to have a place where they can speak, where they can tell their journalist friends all around the world what they think is most important by the mid of September to tell their fellow colleagues from all around the world. And we said, oh, no, we need to take an opportunity where they can ask questions to the experts like Robert Malone. He will join online.

Suherit Bhakti, he will be there in person in Vienna. And we will also have a pathology conference. And so the media people that have their own conference will also be able to ask the questions they've always wanted to ask. always wanted to ask to these experts. That's awesome. And so that's Thursday Friday, yeah. Oh, that's excellent. And so then you have a pathology conference,

and did I understand Dr. Ryan Cole is going to be joining you on that? Yeah, so the thing is that he has a late flight because he needs to do a presentation on Thursday night. So he comes to Vienna very late on Friday, but he records a video, a recent findings that he had in the last weeks, and he will report in this video about it. And we will have Professor Burkhard from Germany and also other experts in the field who will show the media people the latest findings. And on Saturday when we start our Better Wake conference day, we will start with the panel where we have Ryan Cole as a pathologist from the USA for the first time meeting his colleague from Germany. And in this panel we will also have Professor Suhagaret Bhakti and his wife, Professor Karina Reyes, and many other experts.

and we will have this Saturday in the meaning of finding a better way, not only in the field of medical and legal ways. We also have a professor for politics there, Professor Ulrique Garot. We also have a professor for economics. It's Professor Richard Werner. And we all have these experts and of course also psychologists talking about what we can do in these demanding times about health challenges and economic challenges. and economic challenges. And it's very important that we really invite vaccinated people to come and join us because I think it's so important that we all, you know, reach our hands out to each other

and find a better way for so many questions that are out there. So awesome that you're doing it, Maria. I love your passion, love that you are bringing all these people together from around the world. I know you're going to be streaming this live so people can just go to the website to get involved if you want to stream it. World Council for Health.org

slash newsroom. And we will be streaming live on the high wire. You're going to be doing a rally there in Austria on Sunday. And so for those of you, if you're on our text or on our mailing list, you will get that link.

And you'll, I mean, you'll know it's happening. We're going to sort of buzz you when it's happening. It'll be right here on the website. Maria, I wish you the best. We're sending out a team to sort of follow you and the great work that you're doing. And, you know, give my best to everybody there. I wish I could be there, but it's going to be a fantastic event and so glad you're doing it.

Thank you so much. Thanks. All right. Take care. All right. Well, look, I mean, this is what it takes, right? It takes people suing to try and stop the censorship. Sometimes we're not the case that gets through somebody else's case gets through. We've had the rallies in Los Angeles. We were able to beat down a lot of the laws and had a lot of success in California. We support these rallies. I went to the one in the conference in Bath, and then in Austria, it's happening. Everywhere you are, this movement is growing.

And there's more and more data showing that we're not even sort of that 15 or 20% that Matthias Desmond often references that sort of small minority. We are really starting to look in the numbers to me to be a solid 30% in growing. And I know, I think Mattias made such a good point about not being obsessed with trying to be the larger whole. We need to be the focused truth tellers, and we carry ourselves, no matter how small that group is, it's that group that is the light and that beacon that brings about the change and the better way, and the better world ahead of us. It's such an important message because we can get outside of ourselves.

We want to know how it ends. We want to have as many people around us as we can possibly get. And so we are afraid to just step out, be unique, be ourselves. Tell the truth. That's what the high wire has been representing from day one. I think you saw it. I'm not afraid to ask the questions that interest me. I'm not doing this for anyone else out there,

but I hope that you see that we are all a part of this. And if my questions are the questions you have, then start asking your friends to come and check out this show too and say, you really ought to see the questions this guy's asking because it's not like anyone else I see doing interviews anywhere else in the news, certainly, and around the world. But to all the other bloggers and vloggers and people out there that are bringing the truth, I want to thank you for being a part of this small team that I truly believe has won the day, has won the battle.

But there are many ahead. And boy, we are sliding to some very, very dangerous options in the future. We've got to think about our children as we make the decisions that we make. We have to recognize our children are watching us, right? Can you imagine a child that says, my dad doesn't wear his mask when he drops me off the school, but he makes me wear mine? What kind of representation is to that child what the world means? They're watching us.

Are we standing up for ourselves? Are we being human? Are we speaking our truth? Are we being fearless? If those are characteristics we want in our children, we need to represent that together now. It doesn't matter how many of us there are. The only thing that matters is it's the truth. And we stand in that affirmatively.

This is the high wire bringing the truth every single week. Thank you for all of you that make this possible. And I'll see you next week.