When Money Intersects Public Health Policy

🖨️ Print post

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Keynote Presentation at Wise Traditions 2021

I’ve been working on the intersection of money with public health policy for forty years, long before I got into the vaccine racket. I was suing Smithfield, Tyson, Bo Pilgrim, Frank Perdue and more big factory farms and factory farm companies than any attorney in the world. I spent a lot of time working with farmers unions in twenty states, traveling all around and eating good food. I’ve learned the connection, the links between the soil and democracy and good health, human dignity, and all the things we ought to be caring about.

I love the fact that the mantra of the Weston A. Price Foundation is about being wise about the traditions that connect us to the twenty thou­sand generations of human beings that were here before there were laptops. That wisdom ultimately connects us to God. The word “wisdom” means a knowledge of God’s will. It means an instinctive knowledge about the dif­ference between right and wrong.

When we separate ourselves from the soil, we ultimately lose our contact with those tradi­tions and with the spiritual dimension of food. Ultimately, we’ll lose touch with our humanity if we cannot reestablish that contact. The separa­tion is not only wrecking our children’s health, poisoning this whole poor generation of kids that we have destroyed through bad food and bad medicine; it has also led to the subversion of our democracy by these evil companies who care for nothing but profit. They’re soulless and have no ambition other than to dominate human­ity to commoditize the water, the landscapes, and our children, and they’re doing that right now, transforming them into profits. We need to fight them with every fiber of our being.

The Vaccine Racket

I want to take a couple of minutes to talk about the vaccines, because we’re about to do this truly evil thing of mandating the Covid vac­cine for children. Even Andrew Pollard, who is the Paul Offit of England and the developer of the AstraZeneca vaccine, who spent a lifetime making, promoting and profiting from vac­cines, who has been the most vocal proponent in Europe, has now resigned from SAGE [WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts]. He said he cannot morally (and I never even knew he knew that word) approve of administering these vaccines to children while high-risk adult populations in developing countries remain completely unprotected.

I’ll tell you why they are doing it, because you ought to understand what is driving them and why they keep doubling down when we know the vaccine doesn’t prevent transmission. We know that it doesn’t prevent you from getting sick. We know that kids do not die from Covid. The Ma­kary study, by a Johns Hopkins researcher and published in The Lancet, tried to find one child in America who was healthy and died from Covid and there aren’t any. I think they found three hundred deaths and all of them had debilitating comorbidities. They could not find a single healthy child who has died from Covid and we’re going to give this vaccine to forty-nine million children?

This is an intervention that they don’t need, that we know has the biggest risk profile of any vaccine that we’ve ever been subjected to in a mass vaccination program. The companies cannot give this vaccine to any American unless they have liability protection.

I sue pharmaceutical companies and other companies for a living. I was on the trial team during the Monsanto lawsuit. The first lawsuit we won was almost three hundred million dollars for Dewayne Johnson, a school groundskeeper who used glyphosate. In the second, we won eighty million dollars for Edwin Hardeman. In the third, we won over two billion dollars. Why did the jury give us over two billion? Because we were able to show that Monsanto knew it was going to harm people and lied about it.

What Pfizer has done makes Monsanto’s conduct look like a Sunday school class. They know that they cannot afford to get in front of a jury and they should not give this vaccine to any human being in this coun­try. There are other countries that don’t have our legal system with jury trials. Almost nobody in the world has this downside risk for liability in front of a jury; that’s really unique to our country. They can give this to Europeans, but they cannot give it here, because they’re going to get sued and it will bankrupt them. When a jury hears the story that I can tell about their conduct, they will bankrupt this company.

Before they got the emergency use authori­zation, Tony Fauci and others arranged for them to get immunity from liability for all emergency use products under the CARES Act and the PREP Act. So no matter how reckless their conduct, no matter how negligent, no matter how grievous your injury, you cannot sue that company.

Once they get the vaccine approved they don’t have liability protection anymore. The shield disappears. That’s why the FDA approved the Comirnaty vaccine, but they will not make it available. They wanted to approve it so that everybody in the country would think, “Oh, Pfizer got its vaccine approved.” What they did was approve only the Comirnaty vaccine.

What’s the difference between the Comir­naty vaccine and the BioNTech vaccine that doesn’t have approval? The label. It’s the exact same product with a different label. They only got the approval for the one with the different label so that they don’t have to make it available in America. You cannot get it in this country,

Unfortunately, now the military and others are being ordered to take the vaccine, because it’s now “approved,” and the one that’s ap­proved, you can’t get. They would probably shoot down an airplane rather than let one of those vials into this country, because if they let people take that vaccine and they get injured, they’re going to have to answer in front of a jury. How do you get approval and a liability shield for a licensed vaccine? There’s only one way to do it. You have to get it recommended for chil­dren. Once the CDC mandates it for children, it also has liability protection for adults. The only way to get a liability shield is by mandating and sacrificing these kids.

Safety Testing

When the FDA approves a vaccine, they are legally required to look at relative risk, how it performs against another product or a placebo, absolute risk, and then the most important metric is called NNV: the number needed to vaccinate to save one life. How many people do you have to give the vaccine to, to save one life? Once the FDA approved this vaccine, it was required to create a risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis. It did a cost-benefit analysis and looked only at relative risk. What they did is illegal, and we’re going to sue them for it.

We don’t know whether we can win this, because the judges are all terrified now. Under normal conditions, this would be an open-and-shut case. During the clinical trial, for the first time in history, a vaccine company did a pre-li­censing, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. That’s a good thing because normally vaccines are the only medical products that do not have to be safety-tested in order to get approval. Not a single one of the sixty-nine doses of sixteen vaccines that are currently recommended for children has ever gone through a pre-licensing safety trial, a placebo-controlled trial. I’ve said that for a decade and Tony Fauci has always said, “He’s lying about that, of course we did it,” so we sued them in 2018. After a year and a half of litigation with ICAN and Del Bigtree, HHS (Department of Health and Human Ser­vices) said, “You’re right, we have never done a placebo-controlled trial of any of the sixty-nine doses of the sixteen vaccines.” Anybody who wants to see that response can go to our website.

So, it was a good thing that Pfizer said, “We’re going to finally do one.” Of course they had to do it, and here’s how. They had twenty-two thousand people in the vaccine group who got their vaccine and twenty-two thousand people in the placebo group who got a placebo. It’s the first time they’ve used a real placebo, instead of something horrendously toxic to make sure that the injury is evened out—that’s called a “faux-cebo” or a “spike placebo.” That’s their gimmick.

This time they used a true, saline placebo. It was supposed to be a three-year trial, and you need these trials to be long, because many of the injuries from vaccines have long diagnostic horizons—you don’t see them right away, they often have long incubation periods. You need to wait a while in order to understand the risk profile and whether the vaccine is going to avert more injuries and deaths than it causes.

So they planned for a three-year trial, but ended the trial after six months, unblinded the study, and gave the vac­cine to the entire placebo group. Why did they do that? They realized the vaccine basically stops working after six months. For an initial two weeks after the vaccine, it has some efficacy and will prevent a certain number of people from getting severe disease or death. But after six months, that advantage disappears, and what we’re seeing now in England is actually a negative impact after six months. In England, they are seeing people who are over forty have a 139.2 percent greater chance of getting severe Covid than people who are unvaccinated. We don’t know whether this is going to hold true across the globe. We don’t know how reliable the British numbers are, but that’s what they say today.

They knew at six months they had to end this study, because if they kept it going, those impacts would become visible and people would real­ize, “Why am I going to take the risk of this medical intervention when it only lasts for six months?” At the end of six months, the researchers tallied up all their wins and losses, injuries and deaths, and they handed those to Pfizer. One of the tables is the “death table” in that document. It’s called an S4, which is reproduced in my new book, The Real Anthony Fauci.

If you look at the table and the footnotes (which show that they were even cheating on that table), what they found was that in the vaccine group twenty people out of twenty-two thousand died of all causes over that six-month period. In the placebo group, only fourteen people died of all causes. If you look at all-cause mortality and you want to make an assessment you would say, “If you take the vaccine, you have a 48 per­cent greater chance of dying over the next six months than if you don’t.” So why in the world would the FDA give them the license knowing that grim statistic?

In the vaccine group of twenty-two thousand, one person died of Covid. In the placebo group, two people died of Covid. They were able to thus make the claim that this vaccine is “100 percent effective”, because two is 100 percent greater than one. That’s what relative risk is and rela­tive risk was the only data point they used to get the license.

The data point that you all thought they were using is called “absolute risk.” You think when you hear “It’s 100 percent effective” that if you take that vaccine you’re 100 percent guaranteed you will not get Covid. That’s not what it means. It means you have to give twenty-two thousand vaccines to save one life from Covid. If you have to give twenty-two thousand vaccines to save one life from Covid, you better make sure that nobody’s going to die from the vaccine. If one person dies, you’ve canceled out all of the benefits from that product. What they found, of course, was that a lot of people died. And most of the excess deaths were from heart attacks. In the vaccine group, four people died of heart attacks and in the placebo group, one person died of a heart attack. That means, if you take the vaccine you have a 300 percent greater chance of dying from a heart attack over the next six months, than somebody who did not. It also means—looking at the math in a different way—for every one life they save from Covid, they are killing four people from heart attacks. That’s the metric for adults.

When you start to look at the children, it’s even worse. They gave the vaccine to eleven hundred kids and roughly eleven hundred kids got a placebo. There was no clinical outcome observed, so there was no difference in either group in terms of who got Covid, who didn’t, and what the severity was. What we know is that they were lying about stuff, because a very brave thirteen-year old girl named Maddie de Garay, who was part of that trial, came forward with her parents, and said that she got the vaccine, had seizures and is now in a wheelchair for the rest of her life eating from a feeding tube.

A clinical trial is supposed to tell you what the risks are for certain outcomes. And so the risk that trial predicts is one in thirteen hundred kids is going to be in a wheelchair for life. This is, in many estimations, literally a fate worse than death. Pfizer reported Maddie de Garay’s injury as a stomachache. That’s why I say that if I ever get them in front of a jury, I’m going to make this company pay for the entire lockdown, because they lied.

Legal Liability

This is why Pfizer cannot afford to go in front of a jury, and that’s without even doing dis­covery. Imagine, when we start doing discovery, what we’re going to find out about them.

When I was on Brett Weinstein’s podcast I said, “According to their study, the risk is one in thirteen hundred kids can be paralyzed for life. If you extrapolate that to the twenty-eight million children who are about to get this vac­cine, it’s thirty to thirty-five thousand kids who end up like that.”

And he said, “Well, you can’t really do that because that could have been an anomaly.”

I said, “Yes, but that is Pfizer’s choice. They’re the ones who said we’re only going to do thirteen hundred kids, and that’s going to be sufficient, and we are willing to live with the results of that trial. We’re going to save money because we are willing to live with this, by not doing all these extra kids, which would take us time and cost us money, we’ll live with whatever the prediction is from those thirteen hundred.” They weren’t willing to live with it and had to lie about it. And now they should be stuck with that number.

And we know from real life that kids are now dying all over the world from myocardi­tis, thrombosis and pericarditis. There was an article in the mainstream British papers that showed fatal heart attacks in Scotland have mysteriously increased by 25 percent since they introduced the vaccine. We’re seeing these epidemics of heart attacks all over the world. It’s a mystery how and why it’s happening. All the mainstream press are saying it’s a mystery. Why are people suddenly having heart attacks?

It’s not that big of a mystery if you read Pfizer’s clinical data, which of course none of them have read. These reporters have been obsessed for a year by telling us how dangerous Covid is based upon very, very little evidence. I’m not saying Covid isn’t dangerous, it is. But the quality of evidence that they are basing pro­jections on, projections you see day after day, is low-quality data. Now we have high-quality data, which are Pfizer’s own data, which show the intervention is actually very dangerous, and nobody’s reporting on it.

That is the problem with allowing pharma­ceutical companies to advertise on television. We’re only one of two countries in the world that allows the pharmaceutical companies to put over nine billion dollars into direct-to-consumer advertising every year. It gives them control of the media. Anderson Cooper has a twelve-million-dollar annual salary and probably ten million dollars of that is coming from Pfizer and the other vaccine makers. He’s not working for the public, he’s not even working for CNN. He is a pharmaceutical industry rep as is Sanjay Gupta and many others.

Fauci Response

Those are things that we should know about the vaccine. I’m just going to talk a little bit about Dr, Fauci’s response. The most dismaying thing from the beginning was the low quality of the data. If you are managing a pandemic, the key job that everybody needs you to do is to have really good quality control on your data and to figure out how to express those data clearly to the public. We started out with these absurd pro­jections from Neil Ferguson in the U.K., which said that in the first year Covid would kill over two million Americans. These projections were all financed by Bill Gates, employing a guy who is a known grifter, a con artist—all he does is exaggerate. That’s what he is paid to do by the pharmaceutical industry.

From the beginning it was puzzling and bewildering. Most of the people in this room understand the control the pharmaceutical industry has and the agency capture and understand or at least suspect why there is so much confusion. We never got a good idea of the infection fatality rate or the case fatality rate and they were monkeying around with a PCR test at forty-five amplifications—when everybody knows that’s going to give you 90 percent false positives. Then they rewrote how the coroners are supposed to do the certificates so that every death—even if you fell from a tree or got hit by a coconut or drowned or died in a motorcycle accident—it was put down as Covid, as long as you had ever tested [posi­tive] for Covid. All of these things were designed to induce fear.

We never saw Tony Fauci behave like a doctor. He never had a Franklin Roosevelt conversation with the American people where he said to us, “The only thing you have to fear is fear itself.” Fear is our enemy.

He didn’t tell us to take vitamin D. We know that vitamin D is the enemy of coronaviruses. We know the coronavirus cannot replicate in the presence of zinc. How do you get zinc into your cells? With hydroxy­chloroquine and ivermectin and other remedies. He didn’t tell us to lose weight, to get plenty of exercise, to stop eating crappy food, to stop con­suming chemical residues, to stop drinking sugar drinks, to stay healthy and to keep our lives low-stress—to spend a lot of time with relatives and young loved ones. He wasn’t telling us any of those things. He didn’t tell us, if you get sick, here are some things that you should do and shouldn’t do to divert this illness, so you never have to go to the hospital.

That’s how we’ll keep people out of hospitals, by treating them with zithromax and antibiotics and anti-inflammatories and steroids and zinc and vitamin D and hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin and the other things that doctors from the very beginning told us would work.

Well, what’s the most important thing he didn’t do? He has all these friendships with the Silicon Valley titans, these social media platforms. What did he use those friendships for? He used them to conspire with those guys to shut down dissent. To deplatform Sally and me and Larry and everybody else who’s sitting at our table. If you are still on Facebook, you’re doing something wrong.

How should he have used those close relationships with his cronies? Here’s what he should have done. He should have told them on day one, “I need you to create a communications grid. I’ll connect us with all eleven million frontline physicians everywhere in the world. And I want to hear from them what they’re doing. what they think works. And I want to hear from Bangladesh, Tanzania, Greenland, Iceland and Argentina. I want to build a protocol that stops people from going to the hospital.”

The Chinese did that, and they killed their pandemic, their pan­demic was two months long. They probably did a lot of things that we wouldn’t do in this country, that we wouldn’t allow here but they did a lot of things that we would want to do. They published a protocol for early treatment by the beginning of April. And what was the leading drug on it? Chloroquine, the sister of hydroxychloroquine. That’s what everybody was getting, not when you got sick but when you got a positive PCR test. You got antibiotics and anti-inflammatory steroids. You got a whole constellation of Chinese herbs that contain vitamin A and all of the other products that Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Pierre Kory and all the frontline doctors who are actually doing their job and healing patients use. The same thing that they discovered the Chinese were doing from day one. We should have been doing that in our country. They ended the pandemic. What did we do?

The other thing that the Chinese did was to quarantine the sick. And they let the healthy out. If you were sick, they rounded you up and they put you in a quarantine hospital, and gave you early treatment right away. We did in this country the exact opposite of what every medical expert in the history of the world would tell you to do. Instead of quarantining the sick, we quarantined the whole population. We knew from the beginning, from Italy, that this disease spreads indoors. So we tell everybody to go indoors. We go to the surfers in Malibu—literally this happened—police were giving them one-thousand-dollar tickets for being out of their homes. These are people surfing out on a wave in the ocean. They’re not hurting anybody else and not spreading disease and definitely not getting disease in the sunshine. And then they went and they corralled those people, and they locked them in their houses.

And then if you get sick, what do they tell you to do? Go home and contaminate all the other people in your house. And there’s no such thing as early treatment. Instead, wait until you get so sick that you cannot breathe. And then come to the hospital. Every one of those hospital visits is a super-spreader event. Because that person is now at the height of vi­ral shedding. And they’re giving it to the Uber driver, to the ambulance driver, to the members of their families, to their helpers, to the people who run the hospital. It was like they intended it—it wasn’t that they made a couple of mistakes. It was everything that you could do exactly the opposite of what you’re supposed to do. That’s what they were doing.

As Peter McCullough has pointed out, none of these guys dictating policy ever treated a Covid patient. Tony Fauci doesn’t treat patients. Robert Redfield doesn’t, Deborah Birx doesn’t. They weren’t consulting people who did, and they weren’t making any effort to talk to doctors and say, “What is working for you?” and respecting, consulting, listening and sharing that information with the rest of the world and developing world-class protocols for treating this disease. They told us to go home, lock yourself up, wait till you have to go to the hospital.

And when you come to the hospital, we have a surprise for you, two things that are guaranteed to kill you—remdesivir and intubation. In November 2019, Fauci had remdesivir in a clinical trial in Africa, treating Ebola patients. Ebola kills half the people who get it so you’re willing to take a big risk to escape that death sentence. The safety board in November stepped in and said you can no longer give this drug because it’s killing more people than Ebola. It’s killing 50 percent of the people that you give it to within twenty-eight days.

And how does it kill you? Exactly the same way Covid does. It causes kidney failure and pulmonary edema. And so doctors who are giving what Tony Fauci told them to give thought, well, this is a deadly disease because as soon as we give these people this life-saving treatment, they’re all dying of Covid. We have the highest confirmed deaths in the world. How does Tony Fauci have a job? We have the highest body count of any country in the world. We were the only country for a year using remdesivir. We have 4.2 percent of the (world) population in this country. We had 14 percent of the Covid deaths. How does he have a job?

Why don’t we hire a health minister of Tan­zania, based upon his track record, or anybody else in the African countries who were single-digit and double-digit per million deaths. We were up around eighteen hundred deaths per million. We had one thousand times more dead people per million than some countries.

Bioweapons

What I show in my book is that this is con­sistent with an entire career of failing upward and of taking his agency and turning it into a sales force for pharmaceutical products. He does not measure his success, and nobody does at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Health and Human Services (HHS). They are not measuring success by how many healthy Americans there are—they measure success by how many vaccinations the children take and how many drugs the children take. He has a budget of 7.6 billion dollars. He has 6 billion from the U.S. taxpayer and 1.6 billion from the military.

Why does he have military money? Here’s why. In 2001, we had an anthrax attack. So, Americans were told that Saddam Hussein had sent the anthrax. And they sent it only to sena­tors who had voted against the Patriot Act. It turned out after we went to war with Iraq and the FBI completed its investigation, that the anthrax didn’t come from Saddam Hussein. It came from one of three U.S. military laboratories.

At that time, there was already a huge movement to begin making bioweapons again. And the anthrax attack was the excuse that they used. Four months before that anthrax attack, there was a simulated pandemic, a smallpox pandemic, that came from a terror attack in Washington. And during the time the anthrax attack happened, the U.S. Senate Committee on Intelligence was meeting to talk about how to respond to an anthrax attack.

So all of these agencies that are linked to the intelligence agencies in the military-industrial complex were gearing up for this for a long time. The problem was they wanted to develop these weapons but we signed a treaty in 1972 saying you can’t make bioweapons anymore. You can’t handle them. You can’t store them. And you clearly can’t use them. So the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies wanted to make bioweap­ons, but there’s a loophole. And the loophole says that as long as it’s a “dual use” product—if you can make the argument you’re not really developing a bioweapon, you’re developing a vaccine—you can legally make it.

But the Pentagon did not want to do it that way, because they didn’t think they could get away with telling such a whopper, and that everybody would see through them. So they began funneling the money to NIH. And they said, “We want you to develop the bioweapons, you’re going to call it ‘gain of function.’”

Tony Fauci began doing this—he got con­trol of the $1.6 billion—and he’s got to spend it on something that has military applications. He gets %1.6 billion a year. In order to reflect his new military responsibilities, they gave him a 68 percent raise. And every year that raise rolls over, and now he is the highest-paid official in the U.S. government. He makes four hundred thirty-four thousand dollars a year. President Biden makes four hundred thousand dollars— he’s the second most highly paid. And the only reason Tony Fauci gets that money is because he’s doing military work, which they call gain of function.

In 2014, when all the little bugs were es­caping, Obama said, “You can’t do it anymore. We’re going to have a moratorium.” Fauci began rerouting his gain of functions through the shady con artist Peter Daszak, who is tied in with the Chinese military. And they began growing these pandemic superbugs in that Chinese lab and teaching the Chinese scientists, scientists who are associated with the military. That lab is run by the Chinese military, the People’s Liberation Army, and they’re very open about it. We say, “oh no, this is gain of function”, but the Chinese published a paper in 2015 and said, “We’re mak­ing weapons, this is weapons research, and we can do great things with these weapons, it’s going to change the face of warfare, because we can freeze-dry them.” The paper tells about the new delivery systems, how to dump these things on cities at night because if you do it when the sun is shining, it will kill the bugs. They were very open about it.

Meanwhile, Tony Fauci told the public that he was doing this to de­velop a vaccine. He was funding studies by Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina, the major guy who was making these. Those studies are not just about doing gain of function and for engineering these superbugs. He developed, with our money, methodologies for hiding the tampering. They call this a “seamless ligation process.” Ralph Baric calls them “no see ’em, gain-of-function bugs.” He taught that trick.

The bat lady who works for the military in China taught them how to hide the tampering, to say, “We make these for the good of mankind, so we can develop a vaccine.” And you may even be able to pass the straight-face test with that.

I don’t see how there is any reason in the world that you can sell us on the idea that there was something good about teaching the Chinese how to hide the tampering. You would want to do the opposite. You would want to make the tamperings always visible, so nobody could release one of these things. That’s not what they were doing.

Event 201

Here’s something that you should know about Peter Daszak. Tony Fauci was giving millions to Peter to do these kinds of studies. The CIA was giving tens of millions to Daszak through USAID. And the Pentagon was also giving tens of millions. They gave one hundred million dollars, together, all three agencies. Tony Fauci was number three.

They were laundering the money through Peter Daszak thinking that they couldn’t get caught because their fingerprints weren’t on these funds. And so you ask yourself, is the CIA a health agency? No, it’s not. It is not a health agency. There are a lot of good people who work for the CIA to protect our security. But then there’s another group of people who are not good people. What they do is overthrow democracies. The count to date is more than seventy-two coup d’états that the CIA has engineered against one-third of the nations on earth.

How many of you know what Event 201 was? So almost all of you know about Event 201 in October 2019, and you can still look it up on YouTube. It was an odd meeting. It was a pandemic simulation. Curi­ously, we now know that the virus began circulating on September 12, 2019, almost certainly in Wuhan, China. And that night at midnight, they went into the lab and confiscated all twenty-two thousand coronavirus samples. They erased Tony Fauci’s name from the public databases and hid all the NIH funding. Then the hospital parking lots, by the next day, were filling up with people, and there was a lot of other chatter at the intelligence agencies, September 12, the day when it happened.

Event 201 occurs a month later. Nobody knows except for the Chinese that this is already circulating. And who is at this meeting in New York when they’re modeling a coronavirus pandemic that originated from a laboratory escape? Who was there? It’s hosted by two people, Bill Gates and Avril Haines, the former deputy director of the CIA. She is now the top spy in our country. She is Joe Biden’s director of the National Security Agency. Also there is George Gao, the head of the Chinese CDC, who had just come from Wuhan. I don’t know if he knows that it is circulating. It’s hard to believe that he doesn’t.

Also at the meeting is a high-level official from the biggest pharmaceutical company in the world, Johnson & Johnson; representatives from the social media companies and from the mainstream media; and some military people on the sidelines. They’re modeling a pandemic, and what is curious about it, is there’s no talk about healing. There’s no talk about medicines. There’s no talk about how you preserve con­stitutional rights during a pandemic. The only thing you’re talking about is how to militarize the response and how to monetize it for phar­maceutical companies.

There were four seminars that day—and the fourth one is all about censorship. George Gao, the head of the Chinese CDC, and a lot of other people are saying, what do we do when people start chattering on the social media platforms saying that’s a lab-generated virus? And they all agree, we have to pressure the social media companies to censor the public from talking about that.

They’re talking about this in October 2019. It’s very disconcerting. But in researching my book, what I found was that this was not a one-off. They have been doing these pandemic simulations almost every year since 2000. And all of them have one thing in common, a very, very heavy presence from the CIA.

Most or many of them involve Tony Fauci or other people from NIH, almost all involved the Population Center at Johns Hopkins, which is funded by Bill Gates. They involve not just a handful of big shots but they involve hundreds of thousands of people. The meetings are classified so they were secret events going on while none of us was paying attention. They were organiz­ing firefighters, frontline workers, local police and cities all over our country, all over Canada, all over Europe simultaneously. They would do it all together. They were teaching people to walk in lockstep. That’s what the group of simu­lations called Operation Lockstep was about. How do you get all the liberal democracies in the world to pivot at once and engineer a coup d’état against constitutional rights and liberal democracy? How do you use pandemics? None of them talk about health. It’s always, how do you use pandemics to clamp down totalitarian controls?

Making Germs the Enemy

I have spent a lot of my adult life studying the CIA, but I didn’t expect to stumble into them while I was writing my book on Fauci. My family has been in a sixty-year fistfight with the CIA which was all about challenging the emergence of the military-industrial complex.

When I was seven years old, Dwight Eisenhower made the most important speech in American history, warning the American people that our democracy was in jeopardy if we allowed the emergence of this new force, which was the military-industrial complex. He said it would consume our democracy. My uncle spent three years fighting the military-industrial complex, and formed a close friendship with Khrushchev.

I’ve written books and articles about their secret relationship. There’s still a phone at my brother’s house, which is where my uncle lived, which was the red phone. Wires are coming out of it now, but they used it to talk to each other without going through their agencies because they were both surrounded by warlocks. My uncle spent three years resisting the pleas that he go into Laos first and then to Vietnam. He never sent combat troops to Vietnam but as soon as he was killed, Johnson sent a quarter million U.S. troops and made it an American war.

My father runs against the military-industrial complex five years later, and he is killed in the process. And immediately after he’s killed, Nixon sent five hundred thousand troops to Vietnam.

And then in 1989, something interesting happened, something un­expected. The Soviet Union collapses, the walls come down, and we are all promised a peace dividend of all that money that we were diverting to the military. Now the crisis is over. And the American people said that they were going to spend it on hospitals and jobs and quality of life and police and firefighters and infrastructure. We were going to make this country the City on the Hill, as it is supposed to be, the lamp to all the nations of the world.

But there were people in the military-industrial complex who heard about the peace dividend and were saying, “Wait a minute, that is coming out of our pockets. These people are trying to take our money.” And in 1993, we had the first World Trade Center attack and all that money that was coming to us came screeching to a halt. And we started down that road to make America a national security state. And then, seven years later, we got 9/11. And then everybody was gearing up during that period, making Islamic terrorism the new Cold War demon.

Islamic terrorism was never a great target because it’s really dif­ficult to persuade the American people that we should divert a third of their GNP to combating a risk that kills fewer Americans annually than lightning strikes. But at that time—and I talked about this in detail in my book—the people within the military-industrial establishment are saying the new enemy and the permanent enemy—the long war—is going to be about germs. And germs are a much better enemy, because they can get in every one of your houses and kill your families.

Humans have a natural terror of germs, it’s part of the reptilian core of our brain. So, three weeks after 9/11, we have the anthrax attacks. And all of this money starts flowing. President Obama declared biosecurity the new speartip of American foreign policy—that all of our foreign policy is about biosecurity—and then Gates and Fauci do their handshake in the year 2000 and say “we’re gonna have a decade of vaccines.” By 2020, they say, everybody, the entire population of the world, is going to be vaccinated. And they do these simulations.

I’ve brought all the old CIA manuals into my house and have read them. And during the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, the CIA was figuring out ways to manipulate big populations as well as individuals. And it showed studies happening at one hundred fifty universities in the United States and Canada, where they were studying manipulation techniques and propaganda war­fare. They were studying techniques including physical torture, like waterboarding and isola­tion, which was the most potent weapon they developed, a lot like the Stockholm Syndrome. You lock people up, and they become grateful to their captors. They become willing to be obedi­ent and compliant if you can make them believe that only obedience to their captors will allow them to survive. They were using LSD and other psychotropic drugs, sensory deprivation chambers and a lot of other techniques.

The Milgram Experiment

One of the studies from that period, which I include in my book, that almost certainly came from the CIA was a study at Yale, which is a favored university of the CIA. It was by social scientist and psychologist Stanley Milgram. Milgram recruited people from every walk of American life: construction workers, students, professors, Black people and White people. He brought them in and he put them in a room. The only other person in the room was a man who was wearing a white lab coat, who told them he was a doctor. They would sit at a table and turn a dial that would, they were told, administer shock to a man whom they couldn’t see who was tied to a chair in the neighboring room. The man in the other room was actually an actor, and the subject could hear his screams, his pleading, his crying, his struggling. And the doctor would periodically tell them: “turn it up, turn it down, turn it up” and it would get higher and higher. At the top of the dial, it said 450 volts, potentially fatal.

Most of the subjects were begging the doctor not to make them do it. Many of them were crying. Yet 67 percent of them turned it up to a fatal shock, and they were people who knew better. But because a doc­tor told them to do it, they did it anyway. You can look up the Milgram experiment on Wikipedia. Don’t believe anything on Wikipedia, but you can believe this. The concluding line of that study is that a voice of authority, particularly medical authorities, will trump the core values and the conscience of 67 percent of the population.

I sometimes feel like we are all part of a massive Milgram experi­ment. We have a doctor up there who’s telling us to dismantle the Bill of Rights, to censor people, to tell on our neighbors, to inject children with things that are going to hurt them and to do things that we know are wrong—to close all the churches but keep the liquor stores open as “essential” business, to ban jury trials and the Seventh Amendment. The entire Bill of Rights has been dismantled. First Amendment, freedom of speech, and then freedom of religion—they closed all the churches for a year. Private property rights—they closed a million businesses with no due process, no just compensation, that’s all constitutional violation. They got rid of jury trials.

Every American is entitled to a trial before a jury of his peers in cases that are controversies exceeding twenty-five dollars. It’s simple. There’s no pandemic exception. It’s all there. And all of those in one year have been obliterated. And we’ve done it, we’ve obliterated it because a doctor told us to do it, and lied to us again and again but it didn’t matter, it was coming from a voice of authority.

The Good News

The good news is 33 percent of the people did not do it. Despite the fear, despite the seduc­tion of that voice of authority, those 33 percent of Americans have retained their capacity for critical thought, and the courage to live by their convictions. The people who are in this room are the 33 percent. You are the people who are not going to do what you’re told.

I’ll close by saying this. This may seem cold to people, but there are a lot worse things than death, a lot worse. Luckily, in this country in 1776 we had an entire generation that believed that it would be better to be dead, to lose all your property, to lose everything you own, so that we could have a Bill of Rights, so that we could have freedom of speech.

That generation gave us something very precious. They gave us our country and in one year, Tony Fauci, his cronies, his intelligence agencies, the pharmaceutical companies and these billionaires from Silicon Valley have en­gineered a shift of almost four trillion dollars from the middle class globally to a handful of robber barons. They’re the same guys who are deplatforming you if you question the policies that have enriched them. It’s so obvious to anybody who looks at it critically, and yet 67 percent of our countrymen are blind because of the hypnosis, the mass hypnosis, that is a product of induced orchestrated panic. We need to wake our brothers and sisters up, even one at a time if we have to.

Here’s the good news: There’s a conversion taking place right now, where a lot of people are waking up, and they’re going out into the street. That conversion always favors our side. Nobody goes from our side to their side. Everybody who converts comes to our side. I have never advised people to quit their job, make a spectacle of themselves. But, now I do. Because this is a hill that we need to die on.

A group of nurses told me they were all about to lose their jobs. We were representing them in a lawsuit. I said, “Are you sure you want to do that?” And they said, “We’ve all agreed this is the hill we’re going to die on.” We need to follow that courage. Now’s the time to fight, we have to go out and talk to our brethren.

I talked to a famous social psychologist. I said, “How do you reach somebody? You know what happens when you talk to these people, they get angry at you, they get ferocious. They are not going to hear it. It is a religious feature of orthodoxies and it’s built into us. How do you reach somebody through the orthodoxy?” He said that it’s formulaic. If you approach somebody who is part of that belief system by challenging their beliefs directly or show­ing them factual evidence, it will only fortify their entrenched belief. The way to confront or convert them is through the Socratic method of asking them questions. Then if they don’t feel threatened from outside, the doubts begin from within and that shatters the fortification.

Let’s go out, ask a lot of questions, commit a lot of civil disobedience, and let’s all be ready to die with our boots on. When you’re in a fist fight you don’t land every blow, but you keep on swinging, and that’s the only way to win.

This article appeared in Wise Traditions in Food, Farming and the Healing Arts, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Winter 2021

🖨️ Print post