Speaker 1: You're listening to a podcast from news Talks B. Follow
Speaker 1: this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 1: It's time for all the attitude, all the opinion, all
Speaker 1: the information, all the debates of now the lighton Smith
Speaker 1: podcast powered by news talks it B.
Speaker 2: Welcome to podcasts two hundred and forty three for June twelve,
Speaker 2: twenty twenty four. There are countless events happening all over
Speaker 2: the planet at a moment, and some might say that
Speaker 2: it always was so, but not always with the same
Speaker 2: level of attention. Individual crises get today big or small headline?
Speaker 2: Who confirms bird flu death in Mexico? As trusts the
Speaker 2: science experts want to test America's forty million cows. Here's another,
Speaker 2: now that someone has dropped dead. Fear of H five
Speaker 2: N two is already starting to ripple all over the globe.
Speaker 2: What about this one? Media is to blame for COVID
Speaker 2: vaccine's wall of infallibility? Or we got sold a dog
Speaker 2: on that particular occasion. The most delusional Paul Krugman headline
Speaker 2: in the history of delusional Paul Krugman headlines. Keeping in
Speaker 2: mind that, of course, Paul Krugman is the economics writer
Speaker 2: for the New York Times, And we pay attention to
Speaker 2: the New York Times later in the podcast, and just
Speaker 2: for the sake of it, because I've got these lying around.
Speaker 2: Here's a couple more the WHO powergrab and enemies of
Speaker 2: food freedom. But the constant debate between big farmer, the
Speaker 2: media and government departments, and the World Economic Forum and
Speaker 2: the World Health Organization, etc. Just might be starting to
Speaker 2: come apart. A few days ago, a former Japanese Minister
Speaker 2: for Internal Affairs apologized in a public speech to the
Speaker 2: citizenry of Japan for COVID nineteen vaccine campaigns. Then, more recently,
Speaker 2: The New York Times admitted that the evidence that COVID
Speaker 2: came from a lab in Wuhan is overwhelming, saying that
Speaker 2: it's undeniable that US federal funding helped to build an
Speaker 2: unprecedented collection of SARS like viruses at the Wuhan Institute,
Speaker 2: as well as contributing to research that enhanced them. But then,
Speaker 2: or more appropriately now, the British Medical Journal has published
Speaker 2: an article excess mortality across countries in the Western World
Speaker 2: since COVID nineteen pandemic, and the UK Daily Telegraph headline
Speaker 2: covid vaccination may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths.
Speaker 2: These are just some of the matters that we'll be
Speaker 2: discussing with the guest on two forty three, Guy Hatchett,
Speaker 2: publisher of The Hatchard Report, a man who's been on
Speaker 2: this podcast on I think two occasions in the past,
Speaker 2: and somebody I've come to respect, and Guy Hatchett is next.
Speaker 2: There are essential fat nutrients that we need in our
Speaker 2: diets as the body cart manufacture them. These are Omega
Speaker 2: three and Amiga six fatty acids. Equisine is a combination
Speaker 2: of fish oil and virgin evening primrose oil, a formula
Speaker 2: that provides an excellent source of Omega three and Omega
Speaker 2: six fatty acids in their naturally existing ratios. The Omega
Speaker 2: six from evening primrose oil assists the Omega three fish
Speaker 2: oil to be more effective. Equisine is a high quality
Speaker 2: fish oil supplement enriched with evening primrose oil that works
Speaker 2: synergistically for comprehensive health support. Sourced from the deep sea
Speaker 2: sardines Anchovisa magrol provide essential Amiga three fatty acids in
Speaker 2: their purest form without any internal organs or toxins. Every
Speaker 2: batch is tested for its purity before it's allowed to
Speaker 2: be sold. Equisine supports cells to be flexible, so important
Speaker 2: to support healthy blood flow and overall cardiovascular health can
Speaker 2: support mood, balance and mental clarity and focus in children,
Speaker 2: all the way to supporting stiff joints, mental focus, brain
Speaker 2: health and healthy eyes as we get older. Equas in
Speaker 2: as a premium high grade fish and evening primrose oil
Speaker 2: to be taken in addition to a healthy diet and
Speaker 2: is only available from pharmacies and health stores. Always read
Speaker 2: the label and users directed and if symptoms persist, seeing
Speaker 2: your healthcare professional. Farmer Broker Auckland Layton Smith. The damn
Speaker 2: wall has finally broken. In the US and Australia. The
Speaker 2: chapter of silence on reporting COVID nineteen vaccine injuries appears
Speaker 2: to have slammed shut now. The article is from Adam Crichton,
Speaker 2: who was the Washington correspondent for the Australian. He goes
Speaker 2: on throughout the pandemic, criticism of masks or lockdowns was
Speaker 2: permissible if frowned upon, but the vac the scenes attained
Speaker 2: an almost exalted status that ensured any critics, no matter
Speaker 2: the quality of their evidence, were unfairly disparaged as anti
Speaker 2: vaxes cookers, or simply ignored. Why this was so remains
Speaker 2: hard to explain, but some fault must lie with a
Speaker 2: too credulous, incurious mainstream media naive to the political and
Speaker 2: financial forces that pushed governments to assume the more sensible
Speaker 2: part of voluntary COVID nineteen vaccination at a very outset.
Speaker 2: Compelling entire populations to take a scientifically novel vaccine produced
Speaker 2: on a political timetable against the disease that for the
Speaker 2: bulk of people was a bad cold, was a highly
Speaker 2: questionable policy, arguably trashing traditional medical ethics about informed consent. Yet,
Speaker 2: even as it became clear through twenty one and twenty
Speaker 2: two that the expert's pushing vaccine mandates had been wrong
Speaker 2: over and over again, safe and effective, Safe and effective
Speaker 2: remained the mantra. Governments and experts insisted vaccines stopped transmission
Speaker 2: when clearly they didn't, even though Pfizer later admitted it
Speaker 2: hadn't even studied that question. All of this was wrought
Speaker 2: upon us by the government of the day, including one
Speaker 2: Ashley Bloomfield, who is about to be put under the
Speaker 2: microscope for the rest of this podcast now the man
Speaker 2: who started the Hatchet Report that has been online for
Speaker 2: the last few years. Guy Hatchett, it's great to have
Speaker 2: you back on the podcast. Thank you so much for
Speaker 2: your time. Great to be here. Laden. You've been very active.
Speaker 2: Most recently you've been responsible for helping establish something called GLOBE,
Speaker 2: the Campaign for Global Outlawing Biotechnology experimentation, and you've written
Speaker 2: the International Genetic Charter. Give us a brief on that.
Speaker 3: Well, the thing is that the international health regulations, which
Speaker 3: are being formulated by the World Health Organization, will see
Speaker 3: control of our health service to the World Health Organization,
Speaker 3: and they will open the door to mass vaccination's mass
Speaker 3: treatment of people with novel medical procedures. And it's all
Speaker 3: very well to say, well, we don't want this, and
Speaker 3: there are good reasons for that, but we also have
Speaker 3: to say what we do want. What kind of controls
Speaker 3: would we like to see in place that the disaster
Speaker 3: that was the pandemic doesn't happen to us again. And
Speaker 3: the International Genetic Charter is very simple document. Actually, it's
Speaker 3: very short to read, just a couple of minutes of
Speaker 3: your time, and it lays out the right to refuse
Speaker 3: any medical intervention which penetrates the cell membrane and could
Speaker 3: thereby alter the genetic structure or function of a cell
Speaker 3: or multiple cells, including the right to be fully informed
Speaker 3: if such as the case. So basically, during the pandemic,
Speaker 3: for the first time, with the covid vaccines, mRNA covid vaccines,
Speaker 3: afrozenical vaccines and so on, the medical interventions actually got
Speaker 3: into the part of the cell that controls the entire
Speaker 3: immunity and function of the physiology and altered it. And
Speaker 3: it did sell on a scale that was sufficient to
Speaker 3: affect many aspects of human health. And that was, you know,
Speaker 3: we crossed the rubicon. We need to have the right
Speaker 3: to refuse that. And this is not a it's kind
Speaker 3: of an intellectual or a philosophical or a moral sort
Speaker 3: of requirement that we're trying to tout here. It's actually
Speaker 3: physiological life begins with one cell and then it multiplies
Speaker 3: and we end up with thirty seven trillion cells.
Speaker 2: Extraordinary, isn't it When you look at those figures for
Speaker 2: the first time, second, third, or fifth time, even one
Speaker 2: cell into trillions of.
Speaker 4: Them, and in each cell, in each one of those
Speaker 4: trillions of cells, every day, there are seventy thousand repair
Speaker 4: jobs undertaken to ensure the integrity of that genetic material,
Speaker 4: to ensure it continues to function as designed.
Speaker 3: That's a colossal number of repairs that are undertaken very automatically.
Speaker 3: So our physiology is actually designed to protect the genetic
Speaker 3: integrity of the cells, and so any medicine that sets
Speaker 3: out to change that is going is swimming against the
Speaker 3: physiological so to speak. We shouldn't be mandated to undertake
Speaker 3: such a procedure. And that is the essence of the charter.
Speaker 3: And it has a few more clauses. The right to
Speaker 3: full disclosure labeling of any food with genetically modified content
Speaker 3: or food derived from animals who've been subject to genetic modification.
Speaker 3: The right to know if there are biosynthetic substitutes in
Speaker 3: our food for natural ingredients, the right to have seed
Speaker 3: and food uncontaminated by genetically modified ingredients. And actually the
Speaker 3: right to protect the full meaning of the word natural.
Speaker 3: That's what's getting bustardized now in the food system is
Speaker 3: the word natural is slapped on food that is not
Speaker 3: natural at all, doesn't come from a plant, doesn't come
Speaker 3: from an animal, comes from a lab.
Speaker 2: Well, hold on hold on a thing. How can how
Speaker 2: can I mean the authority seem to be very very
Speaker 2: certain in their demand for accurate reporting when it comes
Speaker 2: to such matters from organizations, producers, it, growers, etc. How
Speaker 2: can they get away them with using the word natural when,
Speaker 2: as you say, it's not because.
Speaker 3: There's no legislation governing it. Basically, I mean, if you
Speaker 3: pick up some chocolate and it says natural vanilla flavor,
Speaker 3: that's not coming from a vanilla plant. It's coming from
Speaker 3: a biotech lab. And that's an innovation that's happened in
Speaker 3: the last few years. In twenty seventeen, the government actually
Speaker 3: agreed to the use of three thousand synthetic ingredients in foods,
Speaker 3: and by doing that they sort of opened a flood door,
Speaker 3: not just the three thousand named ingredients, but all kinds
Speaker 3: of other ingredients which are now being put in food.
Speaker 3: Garantine doesn't come from carrots and so on, and it's
Speaker 3: a very longlist. The point here is that what goes
Speaker 3: on in our body is very very precise. There are
Speaker 3: lock and key mechanisms, There are vibratory modes of molecules,
Speaker 3: there are shapes of molecules, all of which are important
Speaker 3: electrical properties and molecules, all of which are very very
Speaker 3: important in the operation of our physiology. And this is
Speaker 3: a matter of comment in all the media these days.
Speaker 3: Ultra processed foods contain materials that are completely different than
Speaker 3: anything we've been eating in our evolutionary history.
Speaker 2: All right, let me extend my questioning a little further.
Speaker 2: There is a constant battle between government authority and the
Speaker 2: world of natural supplements, or the world of supplements, shall
Speaker 2: we say, And the supplement world is not infrequently for
Speaker 2: its future against the people who would shut it down.
Speaker 2: How can they do that on one hand, while doing
Speaker 2: while carrying out activity that you've are just covered. On
Speaker 2: the other It is sorry, is it? Because this subject
Speaker 2: matter falls into the same sort of category as numerous
Speaker 2: other matters now, where the public in general doesn't really
Speaker 2: have a clue. That's right.
Speaker 3: And that's where we come to the collective rights of
Speaker 3: the International Genetic Charter, the right not to be subject
Speaker 3: to advertising, information, or propaganda about biotechnology which exaggerates or
Speaker 3: misrepresents any possible benefits or omits, to discuss the known
Speaker 3: and suspected risks that has been the feature of the pandemic.
Speaker 3: That and you see this in articles all the time.
Speaker 3: I mean yesterday, I mean almost every paper carried articles
Speaker 3: about how geneticists have finally worked out how to cure
Speaker 3: irritable bowel syndrome Celiact disease. And if you read the
Speaker 3: scientific paper that they're kind of referring to, there is
Speaker 3: nothing yet on the horizon that is going to cure
Speaker 3: Celiac disease. The reason there's nothing on the horizon is
Speaker 3: of the side effects of what they're trying to develop.
Speaker 3: The side effects are so serious that they can't say
Speaker 3: when or if they'll be able to help the disease.
Speaker 2: What they have found is.
Speaker 3: That there's a single gene that is associated with this
Speaker 3: particular disease, but they haven't worked out how they can
Speaker 3: alter that situation without damaging multiple other functions in the
Speaker 3: human physiology. And to be subjected to articles throughout the
Speaker 3: press saying goodbye Celiac disease that the geneticists have solved
Speaker 3: their problem when they haven't is misrepresentation. And this comes
Speaker 3: out of a publicity machine within Big Farmer that is
Speaker 3: promoting all kinds of activities, investments and potential medicines, experimentation
Speaker 3: on populations, and so on. We have to be protected
Speaker 3: from that. We are protected from a car salesman who's
Speaker 3: misrepresenting his product, but we are not protected from food
Speaker 3: manufacturers and medical intervention sellers big farmer in other words,
Speaker 3: misrepresenting their products. If you buy a dead car it's
Speaker 3: gotsordust and it's geevox, you can go to an authority
Speaker 3: and they can sort it out. You can get your
Speaker 3: money back, and the man maybe band from selling cars.
Speaker 3: But then if you introduce a medicine that kills multiple people,
Speaker 3: you know, getting some kind of justice out of that
Speaker 3: very very hard.
Speaker 2: Indeed, right the piece that I read read from it
Speaker 2: at the beginning, I don't believe I mentioned when it
Speaker 2: was when it was published, because when I read I
Speaker 2: read it this morning, I didn't notice the date, and
Speaker 2: I started reading and I thought, wow, this is very
Speaker 2: good and it's about time the journalists started writing this
Speaker 2: sort of material, because it's time they all woke up.
Speaker 2: The fact is that it was April of last year
Speaker 2: when it was published, and I wondered how it got
Speaker 2: by me because I'm a subscriber to The Australian. I
Speaker 2: wondered how it got by me. But nevertheless, there it
Speaker 2: was written over a year ago, and it's only now
Speaker 2: that the rest of the world seems to be well.
Speaker 3: What happened on Monday On Monday, the third of June
Speaker 3: was that the prestigious British Medical Journal published an article
Speaker 3: Excess mortality across countries in the Western World since the
Speaker 3: COVID nineteen pandemic our world in data estimates of January
Speaker 3: twenty twenty to December twenty two and in that article
Speaker 3: the British Medical Journal at which the British Medical Journal
Speaker 3: published basically connected the excess deaths to the vaccination program,
Speaker 3: and that in itself is not unique. There have been
Speaker 3: a number of articles which have questioned the safety in
Speaker 3: scientific journals vaccine. But what was unique was that the
Speaker 3: UK Daily Telegraph, that authoritative newspaper headlined after looking through
Speaker 3: the article and analyzing it interviewing experts, COVID vaccination may
Speaker 3: have helped fuel rise in excess deaths. Experts call for
Speaker 3: more research into side effects and possible links to mortality rates.
Speaker 3: Now that the figures in the British Medical Journal article
Speaker 3: point to three point five million excess deaths during the pandemic,
Speaker 3: and they point to the fact that this is very
Speaker 3: very basic science that the deaths were more closely linked
Speaker 3: to the introduction of vaccines and the continuation of vaccines
Speaker 3: than they were linked to the incidence of COVID nineteen
Speaker 3: infection itself, and that has opened the floodgates, the fact
Speaker 3: that the Telegraph is prepared to publish an article as
Speaker 3: clear as that.
Speaker 2: And you mentioned the New York Times.
Speaker 3: New York Times also, yeah, same week, the New York
Speaker 3: Times admitted that the evidence that COVID came from a
Speaker 3: lab in Wuhan is overwhelming, and that's well worth reading
Speaker 3: a quote from it. It is undeniable that US federal
Speaker 3: funding helped build an unprecedented collection of SARS like viruses
Speaker 3: at the Wuhan Institute, as well as contributing to research
Speaker 3: that enhanced them. And they point to the fact that
Speaker 3: key people working in the lab came down with strange
Speaker 3: illness in autumn twenty nineteen. They pointed out that there
Speaker 3: is no evidence connecting SARS COVID with any particular animal,
Speaker 3: but there is evidence connecting it with the lab and
Speaker 3: so on. It was a very very detailed article and
Speaker 3: really laying out written by a biochemist that really and
Speaker 3: what was a game changing about this. Well, for four years,
Speaker 3: the New York Times has been an unrepentant promoter of
Speaker 3: of the theory that COVID came from animals, And the
Speaker 3: fact that they would publish such an article is a
Speaker 3: sign that things have changed.
Speaker 2: Well, patently, that's true. The Washington Post is going through
Speaker 2: some some house cleaning at the moment, and there was
Speaker 2: a there was a headline oder yesterday with regard to
Speaker 2: somebody as some some senior person addressing the staff, uh,
Speaker 2: probably the CEO, and saying is saying, let's be blunt,
Speaker 2: no one's reading the crap you're writing. It's going to
Speaker 2: it's going to have a big effect on the Washington Post,
Speaker 2: which is which has long been capable of publishing nonsense.
Speaker 2: Now the New York Times is even worse. And I
Speaker 2: just want to do a bit of history here. You
Speaker 2: go back to Stalin's Russia, then go to Hitler's Germany,
Speaker 2: where The New York Times published lies about what was
Speaker 2: going on in both of those countries at the very
Speaker 2: crucial time when the world should have known. They went
Speaker 2: out of their way to hide the Holocaust for a
Speaker 2: long long time. They've done other things too, like they've
Speaker 2: been involved in Cuba, and they make no apology for it,
Speaker 2: except they did actually with one of those, and it
Speaker 2: was the I think it was the start in one
Speaker 2: whether they ended up apologizing for, but it was only
Speaker 2: only a matter of about ten years ago that they
Speaker 2: got round to doing it. The point I'm making is
Speaker 2: that they actually have a track record of misleading the public.
Speaker 2: And what bothers me and has for a long time,
Speaker 2: is that we publish in this country articles from those
Speaker 2: journalists and newspapers which are incredibly wrong at times and
Speaker 2: cover up for all sorts of misdemeanors. Plus but I
Speaker 2: want to quote this from your from your piece the
Speaker 2: long essential read news. HEALN media is not alone in
Speaker 2: their lack of in depth analysis. The UK Daily Mail
Speaker 2: says sleep after a tipple of alcohol while airborne, can
Speaker 2: be fatal and fumes why eating one chip is like
Speaker 2: smoking a cigarette. Also blames low fiber diets for a
Speaker 2: sudden surge in colon cancers. The New York Post agrees
Speaker 2: as it reports cholarectol cancer is rising rapidly among young adults.
Speaker 2: It also reports that a staggering sixty one percent of
Speaker 2: US adults will have cardiovascular disease by twenty to fifty
Speaker 2: if current accelerating trends continue. And by way of explanation,
Speaker 2: it offers becoming a father might be bad for your heart. Comments, Well,
Speaker 2: look at that one.
Speaker 3: A staggering sixty one percent of US adults will have
Speaker 3: cardiovascular disease by twenty to fifty. That gives you an
Speaker 3: idea of the depth of the prop that is unfolding
Speaker 3: in our health system. Is people are not healthy, but
Speaker 3: no one is investigating, and they're coming up journalists, they're
Speaker 3: coming up with these spurious explanations. They're not explanations. If
Speaker 3: something suddenly changes, you can't refer to things that people
Speaker 3: are doing and have been doing for centuries, like eating
Speaker 3: chips or fathering children and so on. You have to
Speaker 3: look at something new. That's basic science. And the fact
Speaker 3: is that excess deaths suddenly accelerated in a number of
Speaker 3: categories neurological illness, cancer, and cardiovascular disease. And they accelerated
Speaker 3: starting in twenty twenty one. Not twenty twenty. Twenty twenty
Speaker 3: was when we got COVID. Nineteen twenty twenty one was
Speaker 3: when we got the COVID vaccine. And that's what the
Speaker 3: BMJ was pointing out papers have to pick up on
Speaker 3: this this article in the UK Daily Telegraph. Our papers
Speaker 3: often print articles from the UK Daily Telegraph. Why can't
Speaker 3: they print this one saying that excess deaths are linked
Speaker 3: to the vaccine. This is a big issue here in
Speaker 3: New Zealand because we have a small media pool and
Speaker 3: it's growing smaller, and we have just come through a
Speaker 3: period where the government has really been educating or deceiving
Speaker 3: people into believing that the government always tells the truth
Speaker 3: and they shouldn't look elsewhere. This is a big issue
Speaker 3: in this country. That information has been basically withheld and
Speaker 3: we need to move on from that.
Speaker 2: Okay, okay. That opens the door for me to raise
Speaker 2: the subject of Bluefield and his contribution to the scenario
Speaker 2: that we went through under the Addurn regime and his
Speaker 2: position now at the WHO, and I wonder your sorts
Speaker 2: on his suitability for being in the position that he's in.
Speaker 3: He instituted them arguably the most coercive vaccine mandates of
Speaker 3: any country in the world, and he oversaw them with
Speaker 3: an iron fist and simultaneously exemptions while not being granted
Speaker 3: to the general public, some of whom were very sick
Speaker 3: after having a one vaccine were granted in their thousands
Speaker 3: to Ministry of Health staff. Now that's extraordinary that even today,
Speaker 3: after all the evidence that is coming out, he is
Speaker 3: still calling for almost persecution of anti vaxxers. The head
Speaker 3: of the World Health Organization whose name I can't pronounce
Speaker 3: is are both saying the real problem is anti vaxers.
Speaker 3: They're still saying it, and that's a sort of to
Speaker 3: my mind, considering the evidence that has come out. Now,
Speaker 3: that's a sort of fanaticism. It's not related to the evidence,
Speaker 3: and that's I think very dangerous. It speaks of a
Speaker 3: polarization in society that has been associated with the pandemic,
Speaker 3: and polarized societies are very unstable. I think you just
Speaker 3: have to go back to the evidence, and you have
Speaker 3: to go back to the fundamental principles of the science. Here,
Speaker 3: the fundamental principles of risk management and safety, of assessment
Speaker 3: of what went on and what happened, How did it
Speaker 3: happen that supposedly signed and aerodyte people suddenly became proponents
Speaker 3: of something that wasn't working and was doing harm. And
Speaker 3: fundamentally what was swallowed was the idea that these vaccines
Speaker 3: could not have a wide range of effects, so there
Speaker 3: was a very narrow list of possible effects of the vaccine,
Speaker 3: and the science the people at medsafe looked for that
Speaker 3: very narrow list of possible effects, which did include eventually myocarditis.
Speaker 3: It included things like Bell's palsy, things that were known
Speaker 3: to have happened with previous vaccines. They didn't look at cancers,
Speaker 3: they didn't look at neurological disease, they didn't initially look
Speaker 3: at heart disease, they didn't look at strokes because they
Speaker 3: basically felt that this couldn't it couldn't happen. I'm sure
Speaker 3: it's going to be saying. It was a sort of
Speaker 3: a faith thing. And now people are looking at these
Speaker 3: much wider range of effects, excess deaths and so on,
Speaker 3: the writings on the wall. But people have become so
Speaker 3: stuck in their ideas that they can't change gear. And
Speaker 3: that is the level of thinking that is at the
Speaker 3: top level of the World Health organization.
Speaker 2: Now, Yeah, Ted Ross gabriasis, if you want yes, if
Speaker 2: you want to you want to practice, if you want
Speaker 2: to practice it under the heading of Ted Ross must
Speaker 2: face reality. It would be easier to ignore the World
Speaker 2: Health's Assemblies deliberations in Geneva this week. This is May
Speaker 2: twenty eight, but the opening address of the Director General
Speaker 2: ted Ross Gabriesis deserves a response. Bostht. The WHO and
Speaker 2: its director are completely divorcing themselves from reality, illustrating how
Speaker 2: dangerous and unfit for purpose the WHO has become. There
Speaker 2: is clearly no way that any vote should proceed on
Speaker 2: anything of importance that the WHO may be required to
Speaker 2: implement in the coming week of the WHA deliberations, ted
Speaker 2: Ross's emphasis was on pandemics and the faltering agreements intended
Speaker 2: to address their risk, the New Pandemic Agreement and the
Speaker 2: amendments to the International Health Regulation the IHR. While these
Speaker 2: are watered down and the Pandemic Agreement may not even
Speaker 2: get a vote, continued justification for centering greater coordination and
Speaker 2: power at the WHO speaks volumes about the problem we face.
Speaker 2: Then I'll bring it up to date with June four
Speaker 2: from our friend David Bell. Last week, amid fanfare from
Speaker 2: both advocates and opponents of centralization of future pandemic management,
Speaker 2: the world continued its unfortunate stumble back to old fashioned
Speaker 2: public health fascism. The World Health's Assembly, the WHA, adopted
Speaker 2: the package of amendments to the two thousand and five
Speaker 2: International Health Regulations, apparently just hours after a final text
Speaker 2: had been agreed by ITSIHR working group. David Bell wrote
Speaker 2: the first quote that I had. I've just realized the
Speaker 2: amendments were watered down from previous proposals under which countries
Speaker 2: would undertake to place areas of their citizens health and
Speaker 2: human rights under the direction of a single individual in Geneva. Nonetheless,
Speaker 2: they lay vital groundwork for the further subversion of public
Speaker 2: health toward a recurrent but lucrative cycle of fear mongering, suppression,
Speaker 2: and coercion. Now it goes on for five pages, but
Speaker 2: David Bell is extremely good at his task. Having worked
Speaker 2: with the WHO for a number of years, he knows
Speaker 2: that inside out, and that's the approach that he takes.
Speaker 2: And I would imagine that you would agree with that
Speaker 2: in every which way.
Speaker 3: Absolutely, it's a centralization of healthcare in the hands of
Speaker 3: someone in a distant country. It's extraordinary. Where is personalized medicineiness,
Speaker 3: Where is the consultation with someone who can help you
Speaker 3: when you're ill. This is dictatorship in the health system,
Speaker 3: and look, how does this work? I again this week.
Speaker 3: Lots of article last week actually about a zempi because
Speaker 3: zempig is that sort of so called miracle weight weight
Speaker 3: loss drug, and its active ingredient is called some eglotide.
Speaker 3: And at a conference in the UK, one of the
Speaker 3: speakers said the maglid tide should be put in the
Speaker 3: water supply. This is the kind of thinking that you
Speaker 3: get once you put someone in charge of everybody's well.
Speaker 2: Wasn't that supposed to be humorous or of something?
Speaker 3: Well, it wasn't. It wasn't humorous because subsequent speakers started
Speaker 3: to talk about enforcing the use of a zenpic in
Speaker 3: the or otherwise there are other versions of it, Wegavie
Speaker 3: and so on, butied and coercing people to take it,
Speaker 3: and talking about how being overweight was so unhealthy. It
Speaker 3: was being overweight as associated with Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, mental illness,
Speaker 3: cardiovascular disease, cancer, and you name it. So therefore we
Speaker 3: should just enforce the use of something that takes away
Speaker 3: your appetite, that actually interacts with your brain. How does
Speaker 3: some egnotide work and interacts with your brain to alter
Speaker 3: your appetite. So this is a kind of discussion that
Speaker 3: is going on now in terms of public health, and
Speaker 3: the problem with it is, of course the side effects
Speaker 3: which we I've discussed at at great length, kidney damage
Speaker 3: and again coming off semeglotide very problematic. Once you're on it,
Speaker 3: you're on it, and if you come off it, then
Speaker 3: you've got a whole range of problems that emerge in physiology.
Speaker 3: Why are people talking like this that when really there
Speaker 3: are very simple solutions to being overweight. There are dietary
Speaker 3: and exercise solutions that really do work that haven't got
Speaker 3: any side effects.
Speaker 2: I can only say to you that, having spent a
Speaker 2: long time in talk radio, the number of times that
Speaker 2: the subject came up for one reason or another was
Speaker 2: countless over the decades. And I'll give you an example,
Speaker 2: the suggestion that heavier people should pay more for an
Speaker 2: aeroplane ticket, they should be checked in like baggage. Some
Speaker 2: people took decide that it's not their fault that they're fat,
Speaker 2: whereas other people, of course were very condemnatory the fact
Speaker 2: that you're not. It's not your fault that your fat is,
Speaker 2: as I understand it, an acceptable reason for being overweight
Speaker 2: in some circumstances. Don't ask me to explain. It's just
Speaker 2: something I picked up along the way. But you're quite
Speaker 2: right that if you've got if you've got a weight problem,
Speaker 2: there is a way of addressing it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And it's a patch or covers an awful lot
Speaker 3: of conditions. People are overweight for an awful lot of reasons.
Speaker 3: But at its route, it's fairly easy to control. Naturally,
Speaker 3: it shouldn't We shouldn't move on to a sort of
Speaker 3: nineteen eighty four society where the government is mandating all
Speaker 3: sorts of procedures on the population. It brings me to
Speaker 3: another point. Actually, there was a very interesting paper in
Speaker 3: the journal Transplantology entitled Personality Changes associated with Organ Transplants,
Speaker 3: which was published about a month ago.
Speaker 2: And it's kind of.
Speaker 3: Well known that when people have a heart transplant that
Speaker 3: they can suffer personality changes. And this study didn't just
Speaker 3: look at heart, it looks at all organs, all organ transplants.
Speaker 3: And in the study it found that eighty seven percent
Speaker 3: of the subjects experience marked unusual changes that challenge their behavior,
Speaker 3: sense of identity, and personal preferences following the transplant, and
Speaker 3: that when investigated more closely. They found that the kind
Speaker 3: of personality changes that the people experienced were related to
Speaker 3: the people who were doning usually deceased of course, people
Speaker 3: who were doning the organs. And this was a very
Speaker 3: unexpected result. People have sort of accepted the heart, you know,
Speaker 3: maybe people's heart has changed, their behavior has changed. But
Speaker 3: how does that happen? And while there were three, there
Speaker 3: are three sort of explanations. One is psychological centered around
Speaker 3: magical thinking, the belief that certain words, thoughts, emotions, or
Speaker 3: ritual behaviors imprint themselves on the world around us, but
Speaker 3: it's rather vague. The other one was that there were
Speaker 3: electric electromagnetic field ideas about transplant trait transfer, but they
Speaker 3: related more to the heart, which does have a big
Speaker 3: electrical feel. The third type of nation involves the possible
Speaker 3: storage of memories in cells, including their epigenetic DNAAR and
Speaker 3: A or protein components, and it was it was this
Speaker 3: hypothesis that fits the facts of this study. It suggests
Speaker 3: that all living cells contain memory, meaning that history and
Speaker 3: hence future actions can be passed on from a donor
Speaker 3: to the transplant issue via this to the transplant recipient
Speaker 3: via this tissue that they get.
Speaker 2: So what does this mean?
Speaker 3: What it points to is a huge deficiency in our
Speaker 3: knowledge of how genetics works. So far biotechnology biology has
Speaker 3: really tried to discard consciousness from the discussion and from
Speaker 3: the science. But this points to a very tight intimate
Speaker 3: relationship between consciousness, memory, and cellular genetic activity. This is
Speaker 3: a bombshell finding because if you are, if you are
Speaker 3: as as is happening embarking on a whole new range
Speaker 3: of so called genetic medication, how are you going to
Speaker 3: affect people's consciousness? And that's really a huge red flag.
Speaker 3: The implication is obvious biotech interventions that cross the cell
Speaker 3: membrane and insert cellular genetic material like gene therapies, DNA
Speaker 3: and our mRNA vaccines, gain of function, viral material, etc.
Speaker 3: Are even more risky than it has been imagined by
Speaker 3: anyone to date. They could be editing what makes us human.
Speaker 3: This is, you know, incredible. I've written an article about
Speaker 3: it which has gone very widely. And when you look
Speaker 3: at the COVID pandemic or the mRNA vaccine, they actually
Speaker 3: start to influence the physiology on a scale that's commensurate
Speaker 3: with organ size. For example, It's estimated there are as
Speaker 3: many as ten billion COVID varyons present during peak COVID infection,
Speaker 3: and each COVID shot contains trillions of the m RNA molecules,
Speaker 3: which changed the genetic operation of billions of cells. Well,
Speaker 3: a human liver contains around two hundred and forty billion
Speaker 3: cells and a kidney far fewer. So COVID infection and
Speaker 3: mRNA vaccine technology are just in the right ballpark to
Speaker 3: influence our psychological and behavioral profile. That's a huge red
Speaker 3: flag area that we don't know anything about. The people
Speaker 3: haven't studied. And then here where we're faced with a
Speaker 3: pandemic that certainly has affected this the social consciousness of
Speaker 3: the world. There's been widespread polarization of ideas. There have
Speaker 3: been the proliferation of extreme ideas. Have we been changing
Speaker 3: the way people think? I want to New York Times
Speaker 3: thinks we might have been.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I would have run something past you. Just as
Speaker 2: a matter of interest, What if we discovered what if
Speaker 2: it was discovered that every one of us, within our
Speaker 2: genetic system carries the history of our world, our ancestors.
Speaker 2: I don't know quite how to frame it, but going
Speaker 2: right back to I mean, my mother traced the family
Speaker 2: family back to trying to think who it was now,
Speaker 2: but somebody very famous in England, some military person in
Speaker 2: England centuries ago. What if if those genes have affected
Speaker 2: or have carried forth through the generations, and that I
Speaker 2: or you or whoever all of us have them, have
Speaker 2: the memories embedded in our system, we just don't know
Speaker 2: how to find them.
Speaker 3: Well, certainly the memories of the illnesses that are ancests
Speaker 3: has suffered are embedded in our genes.
Speaker 2: That we do know.
Speaker 3: That the diet, there's an ardguy read recently your grandparents
Speaker 3: diet could still be affecting you and your kid's health
Speaker 3: because that's the whole field of epigenetics. So genes definitely,
Speaker 3: and this is now just ordinary science. Genes definitely store
Speaker 3: all the information about past diseases and so on. But
Speaker 3: is it more than that? Yes, And that's that's the
Speaker 3: question that you know, people have not asked.
Speaker 2: Now. It's ridiculous.
Speaker 3: In you know, my original field of study, theoretical physics.
Speaker 3: At the turn of the of the last century, you
Speaker 3: physics had to admit consciousness into its fundamental theories. The
Speaker 3: observer is an integral part of the universe. How is
Speaker 3: it that biology has excluded consciousness? Whereas you know, if
Speaker 3: there's one thing that defines a living system, it is consciousness.
Speaker 3: How have we left that out and relegated it in
Speaker 3: the sense to the field of psychology. It should be
Speaker 3: there in biology. And this is something that really I've
Speaker 3: talked a lot about and written a lot about, is
Speaker 3: that intimate relationship between biology and consciousness, between mind and body.
Speaker 3: And as we become more invasive in our medical interventions,
Speaker 3: we have potentially more damaging effects on the psychology. And
Speaker 3: again it's a part of mainstream publishing that almost all
Speaker 3: medications do affect consciousness in some way or another. If
Speaker 3: you're going to get into that level of genetic organization,
Speaker 3: which then you're going to affect the psychology, and how
Speaker 3: does that work? As we started out with this interview,
Speaker 3: the body protects the uniformity of genetic intervention. If we're
Speaker 3: going to change that uniformity of genetic information, what are
Speaker 3: we changing. We don't know, because we don't know exactly
Speaker 3: how higher human emotions and values emerge from or are
Speaker 3: supported by our genetics. These are questions that no one
Speaker 3: has answered, and this opens up This is the world
Speaker 3: that we're discovering now with this mass vaccination, we're starting
Speaker 3: to discover has it changed the world that we live in?
Speaker 3: And I think you talk to almost anyone and they'll
Speaker 3: tell you the pandemic changed the world that we lived in.
Speaker 2: Really quite extraordinary. I've seen no reference to anything like
Speaker 2: that elsewhere. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist, especially in some
Speaker 2: of the journals. But now that you raise it, I
Speaker 2: guess there is certainly room for speculation.
Speaker 3: Yeah, there's room for speculation, and there's room for a
Speaker 3: search too, and there's room to open doors that have
Speaker 3: remained firmly closed for no good reason.
Speaker 2: Well, that takes me back to the media. The media
Speaker 2: has failed in its job over a number of you,
Speaker 2: over a couple of decades, at the very least in
Speaker 2: refusing to entertain any any ideas apart from whatever the
Speaker 2: particular mandated ideas might be at a given time. And
Speaker 2: we've had more than more than one of them.
Speaker 3: So easy to poke fun at the at the media,
Speaker 3: but very difficult to get them to change their.
Speaker 2: What do we do late? It's an interesting Well. I
Speaker 2: just think that there is quite a deal of revelation
Speaker 2: taking place at the moment. With regard to various various
Speaker 2: things that are important in all our lives worldwide, this
Speaker 2: is this is one of them. The handling of the
Speaker 2: of the pandemic was atrocious, and I think we well,
Speaker 2: I was going to say, I think we all know
Speaker 2: that now, but we don't because there are people who
Speaker 2: don't want to even confront it. There's the climate matter.
Speaker 2: There are other things, and there are wars, and the wars.
Speaker 2: The wars might be a very good example at this
Speaker 2: point of time, for instance, this is a slightly different
Speaker 2: different perspective. How long is the is war been going on?
Speaker 2: Thousands of years? Exactly? Exactly? How much do we know
Speaker 2: about those thousands of years? The majority of people haven't
Speaker 2: got a clue, And kids who are going through school
Speaker 2: now have no clue whatsoever, So they take to the
Speaker 2: streets because they're so stupidly ignorant. And whose fault is that, Well,
Speaker 2: you can only say that that's the fault of adults,
Speaker 2: because they before them haven't followed any enlightening path. But
Speaker 2: there are other things. The Ukrainian War, they've been going
Speaker 2: what is it four years? Four years they've been fighting this.
Speaker 3: War again, it's an endless war because you go back
Speaker 3: to the Second World War and the Germans and the
Speaker 3: Russians fought over Karkiff in the Second World War, but
Speaker 3: absolutely vicious fighting went on in exactly the same place
Speaker 3: that's going on today. These wars a result of stress.
Speaker 3: When stress builds up, then it erupts into conflict. So
Speaker 3: very high levels of stress are followed by polarization, and
Speaker 3: war follows on after polarization. And there are historically we're
Speaker 3: talking here about past events being stored in the physiology. Well,
Speaker 3: certainly these events are stored in some kind of sense
Speaker 3: within cultural groups and just continue on. And that's why
Speaker 3: I've been a big fan of meditation, because meditation releases stress.
Speaker 3: It's very important that we have ways to release stress
Speaker 3: in society. There's otherwise it's going to break out in war.
Speaker 3: It's not acceptable war.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 3: I know people are talking about talking about nuclear war
Speaker 3: as if it's somehow something that can be survived.
Speaker 2: It can't.
Speaker 3: So level stress are very important that they are controlled
Speaker 3: in ways that are helpful and nourishing.
Speaker 2: Now this the article, the long essential read. The dam
Speaker 2: is breaking, the biotech bubble is Bursting is something that
Speaker 2: I would encourage everybody to read. That's not all, of course,
Speaker 2: because there is the there is the other matter of
Speaker 2: the International Genetic Charter, of course, and both of them
Speaker 2: are important. But would I be wrong in saying that
Speaker 2: long essential read the dam is breaking is the one
Speaker 2: that's dominant. Yeah, No, I think that's that's fine, all right?
Speaker 2: What a quote from it. Eight years before the COVID
Speaker 2: nineteen pandemic, scientists knew about the risk of an accidental
Speaker 2: or deliberate release of a new version of SARS covid ie,
Speaker 2: and they also knew that the disease had an un
Speaker 2: usual feature vaccines made the symptoms worse. Yet, somehow, biotechnologists
Speaker 2: in both the West and the East decided to initiate
Speaker 2: gain of function research, which developed more virulent types of
Speaker 2: coronavirus upon its escape from a lab. They forced the
Speaker 2: widespread use of a range of novel biotech COVID vaccines
Speaker 2: on the public, following minimal and obviously inadequate safety testing,
Speaker 2: as though we were a bunch of rats to be
Speaker 2: experimented on while mad people tried to play god. Given
Speaker 2: what was already known to science, none of this makes
Speaker 2: any sense unless there was a much darker motivation or
Speaker 2: plural motivations somewhere in play you want to expand on it.
Speaker 3: I think what has happened is that there was a
Speaker 3: belief that somehow genes and gene research was going to
Speaker 3: fix everything that was wrong with the human race, and
Speaker 3: the people who developed gene editing, Chris Burr and so on,
Speaker 3: really started to talk in almost kind of religious terms
Speaker 3: about the new era of mankind. How they managed to
Speaker 3: do that if they look through the preceding publication, I mean,
Speaker 3: like this particular paper that you've just referred to. It
Speaker 3: was published in twenty twelve, Immunization with SARS coronavirus vaccines
Speaker 3: leads to pulmonary immunopathology on challenge with the SARS virus.
Speaker 3: They were ignoring what it should not have been ignored.
Speaker 3: They were ignoring the failure of gene therapy trials, the
Speaker 3: fact that people were dying in gene therapy trials and
Speaker 3: still are. They were ignoring obvious risks, but they were
Speaker 3: putting out this so of quas a religious philosophy, that
Speaker 3: this is the era when we'll live long, will live healthy,
Speaker 3: and we'll have genes that where everything is fixed. And
Speaker 3: there was no basis to make such claims they should
Speaker 3: have looked at the science and realized there were problems.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's frightening. Actually this paper in twenty twelve,
Speaker 3: which clearly spells out the fact that there will probably
Speaker 3: be another coronavirus epidemic and we should be careful because
Speaker 3: vaccines are going to make it worse. It spelled out
Speaker 3: in black and white. Sort of frightening that we then
Speaker 3: suddenly entered into an era where, according to the New
Speaker 3: York Times investigation in Wuhan, they literally developed using gain
Speaker 3: and function, thousands of versions of coronavirus that were stored
Speaker 3: in a B two level lab. B two level is
Speaker 3: a very low level of security in the lab of biosecurity.
Speaker 3: It should have been be four level. Well, it shouldn't
Speaker 3: have happened at all. It was madness, but it happened
Speaker 3: in a lab with a low level of biosecurity. Unbelievable
Speaker 3: that that would happen, and unbelievable that the perpetrators, the
Speaker 3: people who were helping and funding and designing it in
Speaker 3: both China and the West, people like FACCI and DAZAC
Speaker 3: and so on, that they would then try to hide
Speaker 3: what they'd done, that they would then do everything to
Speaker 3: obfuscate the issue and make people believe it had come
Speaker 3: from animals where they knew very well what had been
Speaker 3: going on in that lab.
Speaker 2: Would you agree or argue otherwise that how she should
Speaker 2: be behind both. There are.
Speaker 3: Millions of biotechnologists around the world doing risky research. Right
Speaker 3: you could put one or two of them behind bars
Speaker 3: the work pertas of the worst of vendors. But there
Speaker 3: are millions of people around the world every day these
Speaker 3: days doing risky research on serious illnesses, and the biosecurity
Speaker 3: is just not there, and that is why there is
Speaker 3: a need for an international Genetic Charter to protect us
Speaker 3: from this madness that has overtaken the entire world. There
Speaker 3: are thousands of labs all over the world and they're
Speaker 3: in all kinds of countries. They get almost every country now,
Speaker 3: including New Zealand fields. It's very important to have research
Speaker 3: labs doing research on very serious illnesses, and mistakes are
Speaker 3: absolutely inevitable. Again, you look at the published research that
Speaker 3: there's a lot of research on how safe these labs are.
Speaker 3: They're not safe. Escapes are normal. Fortunately, most escape material
Speaker 3: sort of gets eaten up in the environment, but occasionally
Speaker 3: it doesn't and now we're multiplying what's going on. So
Speaker 3: the solution is not to pick one villain here, but
Speaker 3: it's to look at a system and regulate it properly.
Speaker 2: There's nothing I can find to be critical of in
Speaker 2: what you've said, apart from the last sentence about picking
Speaker 2: on one. You've got to start somewhere, and it is
Speaker 2: now patently obvious. Well, I guess you'd say, I guess
Speaker 2: you could say it's been proven that fault she lied
Speaker 2: and lied and lied over the activities that he was
Speaker 2: involved in, what they were up to and tried to
Speaker 2: cover up up. To me, there's only one answer to that,
Speaker 2: and that's some that that charges and a child term.
Speaker 3: I may come to that, but you know, I've got
Speaker 3: to realize that America has a trillion dollar biotechnology and
Speaker 3: industry that it has that the Biden administration is putting
Speaker 3: at the center of its economic strategy going into the
Speaker 3: next decade. Are they going to put one of the
Speaker 3: architects of this up on trial?
Speaker 2: But Tauci and Tauci and and others were doing illegal things.
Speaker 3: Yeah they were, absolutely they were. But you know, look
Speaker 3: at politics today. Isn't the essence of politics to lie
Speaker 3: as much as you can get away with. And I'm
Speaker 3: afraid this has come into science now. I'm only trying
Speaker 3: to be what, just trying to say that it's will
Speaker 3: it happen and express some outrage that there is no
Speaker 3: accountability here in a vast enterprise. Where are the parallels
Speaker 3: to this kind of enterprise. I'm afraid we're going to
Speaker 3: have to use go back to things that you said,
Speaker 3: you know, Stalinis, Russia, or or Hitler's Germany, where vast
Speaker 3: enterprises where millions of people are complicit. And that's the
Speaker 3: situation that we're in, only it's not confined to one country.
Speaker 3: It's it's global. We're in a globalist world and we
Speaker 3: have to work out how to proceed from here. And
Speaker 3: I have ideas about that, but that's another it's probably
Speaker 3: another podcast.
Speaker 2: Oh well, I'll make note of that. There is something
Speaker 2: I would have raise with you. Just finally. It's to
Speaker 2: do with science, But it's a different matter. Who confirms
Speaker 2: bird flu death in Mexico? As trust the science experts
Speaker 2: want to test America's forty million cows. Somebody told me
Speaker 2: the other day that as far as the bird flu
Speaker 2: is concerned, the only way it can get to humans
Speaker 2: is via fecal matter, and advised me to make sure
Speaker 2: that we washed all the eggs before we cracked them. Now,
Speaker 2: I don't know what you think of that, but I'm
Speaker 2: asking you.
Speaker 3: Well, this has come out of a directive from Dr
Speaker 3: Jeremy Farah, the Chief Scientists of the World Health Organization,
Speaker 3: and he has recently said that bird flu, which is
Speaker 3: H five and one avian influenza virus, had an extremely
Speaker 3: high more rate among the several hundred people known to
Speaker 3: have been infected with it to date. Now that's what
Speaker 3: he said. What he didn't say was that these several
Speaker 3: hundred people have been infected over a twenty seven year
Speaker 3: period in twenty three countries. That's less than one person
Speaker 3: per year per country. And it's been going on for
Speaker 3: twenty seven years that we've known about bird flow. Now,
Speaker 3: during that whole time, even up to today, no human
Speaker 3: to human H five N one transmission has yet been recorded.
Speaker 3: In other words, you catch bird flu from animals, and
Speaker 3: if you want to wash your eggs before you eat them,
Speaker 3: that's fine, But the number of people catching bird flu
Speaker 3: is very, very very small. Indeed, and then the suggestion
Speaker 3: that we got from doctor Michael Baker that because of
Speaker 3: this announcement by the World Health Organization we should all
Speaker 3: go back to wearing masks is insane, insane because there's
Speaker 3: no indication that it's airborne infection at all due to
Speaker 3: actual contact. And you know, there's a recent study on
Speaker 3: mask wearing that this is what it found is that
Speaker 3: by wearing these masks, you were inhaling volatile organic compounds
Speaker 3: xylene acrolene, per, polyflored alkali phalate, lead, Cabbian copper, and
Speaker 3: so on, all kinds of things that you're regularly inhaling.
Speaker 3: If you're going to wear a mask regularly for a
Speaker 3: disease that actually you can't catch from the air, this
Speaker 3: is the kind of sort of panicked response that we
Speaker 3: don't need. We just don't need this sort of panicked thinking.
Speaker 3: And why is this even coming out? I mean, look,
Speaker 3: it was a moment's work when I saw first started
Speaker 3: seeing the articles that suddenly appeared in our papers. There
Speaker 3: was a moment's work to look up the scientific studies
Speaker 3: and the actual data. I mean, newspaper writers should be
Speaker 3: capable of doing this kind of research. They can't just
Speaker 3: have some sort of release from the World Health Organization
Speaker 3: land on their desk and they reprint its content without
Speaker 3: really thinking about it. What they can well, they do, yes,
Speaker 3: But it's no wonder you referred earlier on to the
Speaker 3: Washington Post, the editor or the owner getting it annoyed
Speaker 3: because the articles that they were printing were trash. Well,
Speaker 3: I think the same implies here.
Speaker 2: One day, maybe there'll be a title awakening. So finally,
Speaker 2: the finally, finally, the articles that we've referred to the
Speaker 2: International Genetic Charter and your long essential readers, you call
Speaker 2: it the dam is breaking. Where can those people who
Speaker 2: want and I hope everybody does, where can I find them?
Speaker 3: You can go to the hatch Yard Report dot com.
Speaker 3: Just so just hatch yd Report dot com and right
Speaker 3: there on the front page there there's an article there
Speaker 3: that's the latest article. Plus there's a banner to find
Speaker 3: out more about the International Genetic Charter. If you want
Speaker 3: more in depth writing on dangers of genetic engineering where
Speaker 3: we look at the articles with a very sort of
Speaker 3: tight focus on what exactly is going on with biotechnology
Speaker 3: and genetic engineering in medicine, then you can glow to
Speaker 3: Globe dot global and so you'll need the h T T.
Speaker 2: No, you don't. No, you don't need it.
Speaker 3: Well if it, Yeah, it depends on what your history
Speaker 3: is if you on your browser, So you may need
Speaker 3: to put in the https colon forward slash forward slash
Speaker 3: Globe dot global, and once you've gone there once, you'll
Speaker 3: never need to put that other thing in again.
Speaker 2: Okay. I I've only looked at it once and I
Speaker 2: just I just put in Globe dot Global.
Speaker 3: Okay, good, Well it may it may be because a
Speaker 3: lot of people are now going there that and you'll
Speaker 3: see there you can sign up to the International Genetic
Speaker 3: Charter and you can look at it terms very simple. Look,
Speaker 3: it's only a couple of minutes reading, and you can
Speaker 3: then sign your John Hancock to it.
Speaker 2: All right, then I repeat that I encourage I encourage
Speaker 2: everybody to do it. Otherwise you're denying yourself some I
Speaker 2: think important information. So I do have one last question.
Speaker 2: I promise you've been writing the hat Shot Report publishing
Speaker 2: it for how long? Oh it's about three years now,
Speaker 2: it seems like longer. How come you have escaped prosecution
Speaker 2: or persecution?
Speaker 3: Well, I did got I did have a couple of
Speaker 3: articles right at the beginning, but I gave as good
Speaker 3: as I got, and I think I all of my
Speaker 3: articles I reference published science in mainstream scientific journals, So
Speaker 3: I'm not stepping outside of mainstream science. I'm writing in
Speaker 3: a rational way, and I'm quite open to questions and debates.
Speaker 3: But people are you know how much debate do we
Speaker 3: see in the media.
Speaker 2: Almost none? Yeah, quite. You haven't stepped outside the bounds
Speaker 2: of appropriate science, but you have overstepped the mark, or
Speaker 2: stepped outside the bounds of the man dated views of
Speaker 2: the last few years.
Speaker 3: Absolutely, And our website comes under continual attack. We had
Speaker 3: a huge attack when we released the International Genetic Charter.
Speaker 3: Our websites came under a huge attack. There are people
Speaker 3: with money and resources who don't want anyone to find
Speaker 3: out much about biotechnology, whether it's safe or not.
Speaker 2: So what prevented that attack from being successful?
Speaker 3: Well, one of them was successful, But it's easily fixable.
Speaker 3: We have, you know, we have to put a lot
Speaker 3: of systems in place two protect what we're publishing. And
Speaker 3: I think most people who are publishing these days where
Speaker 3: there's some level of conscious controversy about vaccines and COVID vaccines, biotechnology,
Speaker 3: vaccines and biotechnology, I've got probably had to put in
Speaker 3: similar levels of protection.
Speaker 2: Well, I stay with and maintain my attitude is simply
Speaker 2: one of individual freedom, individual choice, and anybody who tries
Speaker 2: to introduce the forcing, the mandating of anything when it
Speaker 2: comes to the invasion of your of your body, I'm
Speaker 2: opposed to it totally. Absolutely, it's worthy of it's actually
Speaker 2: worthy of war. Yeah, it's been great, thank you, and
Speaker 2: I might follow up on that other matter that you raise.
Speaker 2: Looking forward to it, all right, thanks so much, thank you,
Speaker 2: Layton Smith. Now from the fabulous range of products that
Speaker 2: really work, which means that you don't from wet and forget.
Speaker 2: Let's have a look at some indoor products like pet
Speaker 2: pong gon. If you got pets and they're giving a
Speaker 2: grief inside, then this is for you. There is a
Speaker 2: hand sanitizer too, and particularly I want to mention the
Speaker 2: wet and forget indoor disinfect and cleaner. There are so
Speaker 2: many bullet points to this that I'm not going to
Speaker 2: try and include them all. But it kills ninety nine
Speaker 2: point nine percent of bacteria and viruses, inhibits the growth
Speaker 2: of mold and bildew, no bleach or irritating fumes. It's
Speaker 2: easy spray and white formula cleans, disinfects, and deode arises
Speaker 2: in one labor saving step. Eliminates dirt and soil, cuts
Speaker 2: through tough grease and grime and destroys mold odors at
Speaker 2: the source. And it doesn't just mask odors, it eliminates them.
Speaker 2: Have a look at Wet and Forget online for the
Speaker 2: Wet and Forget Indoor disinfect and Cleaner. You can order
Speaker 2: it online at Wetinfiget dot co dot Nz. You can
Speaker 2: call them on eight hundred and three zero three thousand,
Speaker 2: or of course you can call into any one of
Speaker 2: their twenty one standalone stores nationwide. But don't forget the
Speaker 2: Wet and Forget Indoor Disinfectant Cleaner. Now went to the
Speaker 2: mail room for two hundred and forty three and missus producer,
Speaker 2: you will lighton. I'm okay, why don't you lead?
Speaker 5: Alistair says another wonderful interview with Oliver Hartwich from the
Speaker 5: New Zealand Institute, outlining the challenges and perhaps opportunities we
Speaker 5: have following the demise of the destructive sixth Labor Government.
Speaker 5: One thing that stuck in my mind is the date
Speaker 5: of twenty thirty eight for bringing the government books back
Speaker 5: to the halcyon days of two thousand and nineteen's abject
Speaker 5: profligacy two thousand and thirty eight indicates to me that
Speaker 5: this sixth National Government has already conceded defeat on the economy.
Speaker 5: No government since the Holy Oak National Government, which was
Speaker 5: nineteen sixty to seventy two, has ever lasted more than
Speaker 5: three terms. That means the best this coalition can hope
Speaker 5: for is to survive till twenty thirty two, and based
Speaker 5: on this budget, they will be lucky to last that long,
Speaker 5: given it seems they're happy to just manage the decline.
Speaker 5: On the upside, I suppose maybe by then things will
Speaker 5: be bad enough we can ask Ruth Richardson for forgiveness
Speaker 5: and a return to Parliament.
Speaker 2: Indeed, so he's a long one from Canada, obviously paying
Speaker 2: by the word Laighton. Oliver Hartwitch's interview was excellent, a
Speaker 2: real treat at two thirty am, cheers got.
Speaker 6: Better things to do it too thirty am.
Speaker 2: That's thank you, Rod.
Speaker 5: Later and I timed Dr Oliver Hartwich. It took him
Speaker 5: to four minutes to list everything that was broken in
Speaker 5: New Zealand education. With that he qualified a statement that
Speaker 5: indeed everything in our education is broken. In June twenty
Speaker 5: twenty one, University of Auckland's pro vice chancellor of Maori
Speaker 5: wrote an ophed entitled in Digenized University so Mariy can
Speaker 5: be Maori. This is exactly the kind of crap that
Speaker 5: has poisoned our education system. Thankfully, the same university's professor
Speaker 5: Elizabeth Rahta counted the stupidity with her own ophead last
Speaker 5: year entitled in Digitization threatens the University's very foundations. I'm
Speaker 5: glad Labour and Green's managed to inject critical race theory
Speaker 5: into our education. I'm glad LGBT activists managed to push
Speaker 5: sex change surgeries for kids against pair wishes. I'm glad
Speaker 5: that the Democrats successfully committed perjury against Donald Trump. I'm
Speaker 5: glad that the left always goes too far, and in
Speaker 5: going too far, people wake up. If the EU elections
Speaker 5: is any indication the conservative giant within us is finally stirring,
Speaker 5: and I have a dream that one day we will
Speaker 5: have people like Dr Oliver Hartwich and Professor Elizabeth Rater
Speaker 5: running our ministry of education.
Speaker 2: That's actually very good, but there's one aspect to it
Speaker 2: of it that didn't sit comfortably with me, and that
Speaker 2: was this. I'm glad that the left always goes too far,
Speaker 2: and in going too far, people wake up. Here's the
Speaker 2: problem with that. Why are they going too far left
Speaker 2: in the first place? Why are they getting away with it?
Speaker 2: Why have the people gone to sleep and not learned
Speaker 2: from past experience? I mean, it just it frustrates me
Speaker 2: enormously because that's exactly what happens, well, write the other
Speaker 2: because they offer them money essentially, and then when they
Speaker 2: realize that it's all bug it up, they race back
Speaker 2: to the common sense approach and we have to go
Speaker 2: through the procedure all over again. Because you only look
Speaker 2: at Chloe what's an ound Schwarbrick, and you'll see exactly
Speaker 2: what I'm talking about. Layton, May I please inquire to
Speaker 2: the nature of the mentioned local tax in place of
Speaker 2: rates tax and by what function would it be collected.
Speaker 2: There has been a number of proposals postulated in the
Speaker 2: past re revenue streams, including GST type tax to replace rates,
Speaker 2: although some seem to think that it should be as
Speaker 2: well as where does this one fitted? Among others? Has
Speaker 2: the work been done to estimate how much a local
Speaker 2: tax would need to be set at without making it
Speaker 2: an excuse to simply fleece us all. Further, bearing in
Speaker 2: mind that some places are much more than the likes
Speaker 2: of Auckland or christ Church. Well, my response to that
Speaker 2: is there's been a lot of suggestions made in the
Speaker 2: past that you just have to dig them out and
Speaker 2: then try and find a better one, I suppose. But
Speaker 2: as for the comparison of size of places, that would
Speaker 2: be simply reflected in the amount of money that was
Speaker 2: collected in each, But no mention of how aspects of
Speaker 2: the Swiss model or other could be practically modified to
Speaker 2: work in New Zealand, the most critical of which is
Speaker 2: how in the world would the politicians be relieved of
Speaker 2: their power monopoly over the New Zealand people also checks
Speaker 2: and balances on both sides to ensure that right things
Speaker 2: happen and I guess bad things don't. Our track record
Speaker 2: has brought us to where we are today under the
Speaker 2: embrace of the current chosen model at political parties endowed
Speaker 2: by it. The proposed models presented to the public to
Speaker 2: choose from at the time were all broken models designed
Speaker 2: to disempower the people. None gave the people authority over
Speaker 2: their representatives. While in office we bear the fruits of
Speaker 2: our labors. Is put a capital L on labors because
Speaker 2: what you can work out?
Speaker 6: Why Leyden?
Speaker 2: Sorry? Can I just add? There no mention of how
Speaker 2: the aspects of the Swiss model or other could be
Speaker 2: practically modified to work in New Zealand. You've only got
Speaker 2: to get your hands on the book one hundred Days,
Speaker 2: which is about exactly that, to see that there's been
Speaker 2: plenty of work done and they would be relatively easy
Speaker 2: to apply.
Speaker 5: Laydon Patrick says. One of your correspondents mentioned that they
Speaker 5: would prefer a decentralized ID system based on a theoryum
Speaker 5: rather than the centralized real me system, the argument being
Speaker 5: that it would give each individual sovereignty over their own
Speaker 5: data and who they wanted to share it with.
Speaker 6: The issue here.
Speaker 5: Is that whether the system becomes effectively mandatory or not
Speaker 5: doesn't depend on the law. It only depends on market acceptance.
Speaker 5: Whether it is centralized in law or decentralized and optional.
Speaker 5: It will be made effectively mandatory when compliance exceeds eighty percent.
Speaker 5: At that point they can safely start denying services to
Speaker 5: any stragglers.
Speaker 6: To force compliance.
Speaker 5: The COVID experience shows us that fifty percent of the
Speaker 5: population will happily give away all their rights for anything
Speaker 5: they have told us a good cause, and another forty
Speaker 5: percent will give them all away for a free box
Speaker 5: of KFC. For this reason, the powers that we have
Speaker 5: no problem with a private, decentralized ID system instead of
Speaker 5: a centralized one. It will be better for them in
Speaker 5: many ways, as they can rightly argue that the sheep
Speaker 5: walked into their own pens and nobody forced them.
Speaker 2: From Patrick Patrick. I sent your letter to the source
Speaker 2: of your issue, and that was John Elcock, of course,
Speaker 2: and John replied with a very long letter which you
Speaker 2: have a copy of. But he also copied me in
Speaker 2: and this is just a taste. He says, thanks very
Speaker 2: much for your email. And it's certainly an interesting point.
Speaker 2: I personally already have a real me identity. As for
Speaker 2: dealing with the New Zealand government, it certainly does make
Speaker 2: things a lot more convenient. I'm also aware that the
Speaker 2: Department of Internal Affairs has spent a great deal of time,
Speaker 2: money and energy investing in this system, having spoken directly
Speaker 2: with the people responsible at conferences and when I've called
Speaker 2: him in the lift. Now this is, like I said,
Speaker 2: very long and if I can, I'll slip it in
Speaker 2: the whole thing. At the very end of today's podcast.
Speaker 5: Leyton Brett says, I think you might find this article
Speaker 5: interesting regarding landmark legal ruling finds that COVID tests are
Speaker 5: not fit for purpose, and he sends you a link.
Speaker 5: Nothing was reported in our media regarding this landmark case.
Speaker 5: I enjoyed your podcast with Muriel Newman. She couldn't understand
Speaker 5: what was driving the Marie sovereignty movement recently in Canada.
Speaker 5: Justin Trudeau just handed over twenty percent of Canada to
Speaker 5: the Indigenous people, which has a total population of twenty
Speaker 5: seven to forty thousand, and he sends you an SBS link,
Speaker 5: the largest land transfer in Canada's history. This transfer gave
Speaker 5: full mineral and resource rights. The Indigenous peoples don't have
Speaker 5: the infrastructure or experience to manage us land mass, so
Speaker 5: an NGO is appointed by the UN which will manage
Speaker 5: this land on their behalf. The UN drafted the Rights
Speaker 5: of Indigenous People Agreement to essentially secure land, using the
Speaker 5: ignorant Indigenous peoples to secure it for themselves, managing the
Speaker 5: resources and well through their NGOs. I think this is
Speaker 5: where three waters might have been headed in New Zealand
Speaker 5: under the ar Durn government.
Speaker 6: What do you.
Speaker 5: Think your podcast is essential listening. I'm looking forward to
Speaker 5: Leyton's interviews and insights around the looming US election. We
Speaker 5: won't get the real story from our mainstream media. Thank you,
Speaker 5: says Brett, and.
Speaker 2: Take care and Bred. The question is when is the
Speaker 2: right time to start doing those interviews en mass almost
Speaker 2: for the US election. It's an interesting conundrum just at
Speaker 2: the moment, so writes Vincent, our old mate Dan Andrews
Speaker 2: across the Tasman he, being the Premiere of Victoria X,
Speaker 2: received a gong for his selfless quote unquote handling of
Speaker 2: the COVID in Victoria. A astonishing for a premier who
Speaker 2: never finished his term to be awarded a King's Honor award.
Speaker 2: Remind you of anybody on this side of the ditch.
Speaker 2: Absolutely sickening for those awards to be sullied in such
Speaker 2: a manner and deemed utterly worthless. A pity for those
Speaker 2: who are recognized for actual, worthy reasons. Vincent, I was
Speaker 2: more disgusted than you, and I know that because nobody
Speaker 2: could have been more disgusted than me. That excuse for
Speaker 2: a politician deserve nothing but to kick up the backside
Speaker 2: and a good hard one. And if I say any more,
Speaker 2: I'll offend somebody.
Speaker 6: Laton.
Speaker 5: Finally from me, Vincent says, yes it's Wednesday. I look
Speaker 5: forward to your podcast each week. Absolutely a highlight. I
Speaker 5: loved Oliver's suggestion in today's installment about how councils could
Speaker 5: be funded by a local income tax as opposed to
Speaker 5: the current rate system. I've often thought that New Zealand
Speaker 5: would benefit from its population being spread around rather than
Speaker 5: everybody being squished into Auckland. If councils had to compete
Speaker 5: for income, they would aim to attract business and enterprise
Speaker 5: to their own region, thereby benefiting the citizens to which
Speaker 5: they are answerable. Such a common sense approach, sadly is
Speaker 5: unlikely to see the light of day because it's too sensible.
Speaker 6: Have a great rest of your week. And that's from Vincent.
Speaker 2: Now, is isact the same Vincent as I just read? Prom
Speaker 2: Yes it is? How did he get to in the
Speaker 2: two and one? What was the date on that? Just
Speaker 2: as a matter who interest? June five and June ten? Okay,
Speaker 2: fair enough? Finally from Chris in Canberra Repodcast two forty two.
Speaker 2: I was interested in the comment by David Sachs that
Speaker 2: the central issue in the twenty twenty four presidential election
Speaker 2: in November is whether Americans will stand for the US
Speaker 2: becoming a banana republic. I reckon that Johann was at
Speaker 2: Johann I've never known a leak. Nailed it in the
Speaker 2: Weekend Australian of the first of June. See the cartoon below.
Speaker 2: See it's a skyline buildings and the tallest building is
Speaker 2: a banana sticking up out of the back of the
Speaker 2: rest of them. Furthermore, the letter that you read at
Speaker 2: the end of the podcast about the Lost generation brought
Speaker 2: to mind an item on Channel seven on the fourth
Speaker 2: of June, which reported that a twelve year old boy,
Speaker 2: who police claim is a serial violent crit all, was
Speaker 2: facing court. He has been charged and released seventy three
Speaker 2: times on over two hundred crimes over fifteen months, and
Speaker 2: as broken bail conditions repeatedly. This time bail was denied.
Speaker 2: A former detective says he fears we are losing an
Speaker 2: entire generation of youth. Here is the link to the
Speaker 2: footage if you wish to look at it. It goes
Speaker 2: for nearly two minutes, Chris, I really appreciate you sending that,
Speaker 2: and I did look at it, and you described it perfectly,
Speaker 2: so I didn't really need to. But nevertheless, I took
Speaker 2: a shot with my camera. I took a shot of
Speaker 2: the places where he has committed these crimes. You ready,
Speaker 2: If you don't know Sydney, doesn't matter because it tells
Speaker 2: its own story. But if you do know Sydney, then
Speaker 2: you'll have some idea of the zone that this kid
Speaker 2: has been operating in Mount Druett, Marsden Park, Plumpton, Emerton,
Speaker 2: Saint Mary's Sydney, which means the city, Wentworth Park, Paramatta, Redven,
Speaker 2: Pendall Hill, Gireween Blacktown, Bondi Junction. And we know what
Speaker 2: took place in Bondi Junction recently. Ed's never heard of it.
Speaker 2: Castle Hill, West Pymble and Ross Hill. Now West Pemble
Speaker 2: is the closest to where I grew up on the
Speaker 2: North Shore. The rest of them are spread north, southeast
Speaker 2: and west. This kid's been hopping on trains and going
Speaker 2: everywhere to Committee's crimes. Here's the question. He's now behind bars,
Speaker 2: But what do you do with him? What do you
Speaker 2: do with him? Because you can't tell me that we
Speaker 2: don't have kids of similar ages who have been doing
Speaker 2: the same sort of thing over here, maybe not quite
Speaker 2: as bad, who knows, but certainly who need some serious attention,
Speaker 2: missus producer, I thank you, thank you. Later, I shall
Speaker 2: now spend the next two hours editing to get all
Speaker 2: your coffs and things out.
Speaker 5: Yes, I'm sorry about that. I think I've got a
Speaker 5: bit of a chest infection, but so forgive me. If
Speaker 5: I was scrambling through.
Speaker 2: That just be something to feel in the rest of
Speaker 2: the morning.
Speaker 6: That's cursed.
Speaker 2: During the course of the interview, I made reference to
Speaker 2: the New York Times and its historical record of lying
Speaker 2: to its readers and the rest of the world for
Speaker 2: that matter, and I thought it might be appropriate to
Speaker 2: justify that with a a little bit of quoting from
Speaker 2: Mike Levin's book Unfreedom of the Press. He makes reference
Speaker 2: to much of this. After covering off a little bit
Speaker 2: of history, he says, however, unbelievably, for the New York
Speaker 2: Times and other newspapers, the effective cover up of the
Speaker 2: Holocaust was not the first time they knowingly censored the
Speaker 2: horrors of genocide while it was occurring from approximately nineteen
Speaker 2: thirty two to thirty three, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin starved
Speaker 2: the people of Ukraine, resulting in the mass genocide of
Speaker 2: millions of Ukrainians. Bruce Bartlett, writing in Human Events, explained
Speaker 2: that the Hollidamore or Great Famine of nineteen thirty two
Speaker 2: and thirty three was the culmination of a long struggle
Speaker 2: between the Soviet state, non Russian nationalities like the Ukrainians,
Speaker 2: and historically independent minded farmers who had been forced into
Speaker 2: or onto collective farms. It also resulted from Stalin's need
Speaker 2: for foreign exchange to buy Western machinery to aid industrialization.
Speaker 2: In late nineteen thirty two, wrote Bartlet, Stalin decreed that
Speaker 2: all grains should be confiscated and anyone interfering with this
Speaker 2: action should be considered an enemy of the state. Throughout
Speaker 2: the countryside in Ukraine and other grain growing areas, starvation
Speaker 2: set in. Stalin sent troops to prevent farmers from leaving
Speaker 2: the land, where increasingly there was nothing to eat. In
Speaker 2: response to please for food aid, Stalin called the famine
Speaker 2: one of the minor inconveniences of our system. Close quote
Speaker 2: a Manchester Guardian reporter Malcolm Muggridge traveled to Ukraine to
Speaker 2: see for himself what was taking place. In her book
Speaker 2: Stalind's Apologist, Sally Taylor recounts that in a series of
Speaker 2: articles published in The Guardian at the end of March
Speaker 2: nineteen thirty three, Muggridge confirmed the existence of widespread famine.
Speaker 2: In his eye witness account, the peasant population, he wrote,
Speaker 2: was starving quote I mean starving in its absolute sense,
Speaker 2: not undernourished, but having four weeks next to nothing to eat.
Speaker 2: It was true, Muggridge wrote, the famine is an organized occupation,
Speaker 2: worse active war. Thus, even from other new sources such
Speaker 2: as The Manchester Guardian the New York Times had to
Speaker 2: know the truth about the famine that was taking place
Speaker 2: in Ukraine. Even more, as Hoover Institution historian and scholar
Speaker 2: Robert Conquest wrote in his book The Harvest of Sorrow,
Speaker 2: let us insist on the fact that the truth was
Speaker 2: indeed widely available in the West. In spite of everything,
Speaker 2: full or adequate reports appeared in the Manchester Guardian, the
Speaker 2: Daily Telegraph, lumatan Lea Figero did, a bunch of other
Speaker 2: newspapers from European countries, and scores of other Western papers.
Speaker 2: In the United States, wide circulation newspapers printed very full
Speaker 2: first hand accounts by Ukrainian, American and other visitors, though
Speaker 2: these were mostly discounted, as often appearing in right wing
Speaker 2: journals and the Christian Science Monitor. The New York Herald
Speaker 2: Tribune and the New York Jewish for Words gave broad coverage. However,
Speaker 2: The Times longtime man in Moscow, Walter Duranti, a propagandist
Speaker 2: and apologist for the nineteen seventeen Communist revolution in Russia
Speaker 2: and later Stalin and his murderous regime. He reported otherwise. Indeed,
Speaker 2: The Times was proud of their man in Moscow. In
Speaker 2: nineteen thirty two, Guranti was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for
Speaker 2: a series of articles in The Times that covered up
Speaker 2: Stalinism's atrocities, and from nineteen thirty two to nineteen thirty
Speaker 2: three Duranti wrote news columns for The Times, not only
Speaker 2: denying the fact of the catastrophic famine taking place in Ukraine,
Speaker 2: but censoring Stalin's role in the genocide of multiple millions
Speaker 2: of Ukrainians. Then we come to the next paragraph and
Speaker 2: covers the star if you like of a movie that
Speaker 2: came out in twenty nineteen mister Jones. Another Guardian reporter,
Speaker 2: Gareth Jones, also filed news also filed news stories about
Speaker 2: the famine Ukraine. Like Muggridge, Jones had gone to the
Speaker 2: areas where white spread starvation was occurring, traveling some forty
Speaker 2: miles into the midst of it, and was also horrified
Speaker 2: by what he witnessed and was told, which he reported
Speaker 2: in detail. But Duranti then took aim at Jones's credibility
Speaker 2: and used his powerful perch at The New York Times
Speaker 2: to publicly demean him and the accuracy of his reporting
Speaker 2: in the newspages of the Times. On March thirteen, nineteen
Speaker 2: thirty two, Guranti wrote a piece in The Times titled
Speaker 2: Russians Hungry but not Starving, in which he, among other things,
Speaker 2: dismissed Jones's first hand accounts and counted him with disinformation. Quote.
Speaker 2: Since I talked to mister Jones, I have made exhaustive
Speaker 2: inquiries about this alleged Taman situation. I have inquired in
Speaker 2: Soviet commissariats and in foreign embassies with their network of consoles,
Speaker 2: and have tabulated information from Britain's working as specialists and
Speaker 2: from my personal connections Russian and foreign. All of this
Speaker 2: seems to me to be more trustworthy the information that
Speaker 2: I could get by a brief trip through any one area.
Speaker 2: In other words, he's apologizing, sort of making excuses for
Speaker 2: not having gone and experienced himself. The Soviet Union is
Speaker 2: too big to permit a hasty study, and it is
Speaker 2: the foreign correspondence job to present a whole picture, not
Speaker 2: part of it. Duranti then exclaimed, and here are the facts.
Speaker 2: There is a serious shortage of food throughout the country,
Speaker 2: with occasional cases of well managed states or collective farms.
Speaker 2: The big cities and the army are adequately supplied with food.
Speaker 2: There is no actual starvation or deaths from starvation, but
Speaker 2: there is widespread mortality from diseases due to malnutrition. In
Speaker 2: short conditions are definitely bad in certain sections the Ukraine,
Speaker 2: North Caucuses and Lower Lower Vulgar. The rest of the
Speaker 2: country is on short rations, but nothing worse. These conditions
Speaker 2: are bad, but there is no famine. Of course, this
Speaker 2: was a flat out lie. Do I need to go
Speaker 2: any further, Probably not, but let me The famine peaked
Speaker 2: in the summer of nineteen thirty three, unbelievably. On September seventeen,
Speaker 2: nineteen thirty three, Durante was added again in another report
Speaker 2: from Russia. Duranti assured the Times readers that all was
Speaker 2: well in Ukraine and that suggestions to the contrary were nonsense.
Speaker 2: The writer has just completed a two hundred mile auto
Speaker 2: trip through the heart of Ukraine and can say positively
Speaker 2: that the harvest is splendid at all. Talk of famine
Speaker 2: is ridiculous everywhere one goes and with everyone with whom
Speaker 2: one talks, from commonists and officials to local peasants. It's
Speaker 2: the same story. Now we will be all right. Now
Speaker 2: we are assured for the winter. Now we have more
Speaker 2: grain that can easily be harvested. But Gurante knew the
Speaker 2: ugly truth, as Professor Lubami Maire Luchuk of the Royal
Speaker 2: Military College of Canada has written. On September twenty sixth,
Speaker 2: nineteen thirty three, at the British Embassy in Moscow, Durante
Speaker 2: privately confided to William Strang that as many as ten
Speaker 2: million people had died directly or indirectly of famine conditions
Speaker 2: in the USSR during the past year. Meanwhile, publicly Duranti
Speaker 2: orchestrated a vicious ostracizing of those journalists who risked much
Speaker 2: by reporting on the brutalities of forced collectivisation and the
Speaker 2: ensuing demographic catastrophe muggerage among them. Even as fertile Ukraine,
Speaker 2: once the bread basket of Europe, became a modern day
Speaker 2: gold Gotha, a place of skulls. Duranti plowed the truth
Speaker 2: under occasionally pressed on the human cost of the Soviet experiment.
Speaker 2: He did, however, evolve a dismissive dodge, canting, you can't
Speaker 2: make an omelet without breaking eggs. Indeed, wrote Conquest, he
Speaker 2: had personally told Eujane Lymes he was a United Press
Speaker 2: Moscow correspondent, and others that he estimated the famine victims
Speaker 2: at around seven million. What the American public got was
Speaker 2: not the straight stuff, but the false reporting. Its influence
Speaker 2: was enormous and long lasting. Well. The New York Times
Speaker 2: did apologize for it in an editorial a few years ago.
Speaker 2: I still have a copy of that somewhere, and I
Speaker 2: think I've probably read it on radio, to be honest.
Speaker 2: But nevertheless, it wasn't the first, and it won't be
Speaker 2: the last time that the New York Times can be
Speaker 2: held or should be held accountable for misleading its readership
Speaker 2: and much of the rest of the world. Now, just
Speaker 2: to repeat, the extract I read was from Unfreedom of
Speaker 2: the Press by Mack Livin, and there are six copies
Speaker 2: of it in the Auckland Library system. Can't speak for
Speaker 2: anywhere else. And the movie Mister Jones, I've seen it
Speaker 2: probably I think in twenty twenty, and i'd like to
Speaker 2: see it again after reading that extract and watching the
Speaker 2: trailer for it a short while ago. But I can't
Speaker 2: tell you where it might be streaming at the moment,
Speaker 2: but you might like to do have a look, Layton Smith.
Speaker 2: Now I'm regretfully going to park the long letter that
Speaker 2: John Elcock wrote to Patrick, and I've put it aside
Speaker 2: for another time because I had something planned for this
Speaker 2: part of the podcast, which is the conclusion Bird flu
Speaker 2: Fear and Perverse Incentives by David Bell and published June eleven,
Speaker 2: New Zealand Time. A fifty nine year old man unfortunately died,
Speaker 2: and I should say I'm going to read the first
Speaker 2: the first section and the final section because it's six
Speaker 2: pages long, and encourage everybody to read the whole thing
Speaker 2: for themselves. Details at the back. A fifty nine year
Speaker 2: old unfortunately died in Mexico in late April, having been
Speaker 2: bed bound for weeks and suffering from type two diabetes
Speaker 2: and chronic renal failure. He was at high risk from
Speaker 2: respiratory virus infection. It became newsworthy, and the World Health
Speaker 2: Organization thousands of miles Distant even released a media's statement
Speaker 2: because recent advances in genetic sequencing allowed the presence of
Speaker 2: type A, that is, H five N two influenza virus,
Speaker 2: a type of bird flu to be reported in a
Speaker 2: single clinical sample. A month later, refuting the Who's Distant
Speaker 2: bureaucrats attributing mortality to the virus, Mexico's health secretary is
Speaker 2: reported as noting that it was chronic illness that caused
Speaker 2: the death. Irrespective of cause, deaths are a tragedy for
Speaker 2: family and friends. This one made global news purely because
Speaker 2: of advances in diagnostic technology. The WHO, the media, and
Speaker 2: a growing pandemic in industry had been waiting for this
Speaker 2: inevitable event. Testing and screening as it's critical to perhaps
Speaker 2: the largest business scheme in human history. Note that the
Speaker 2: largest possible largest business scheme in human history. There are
Speaker 2: hundreds of billions on the table and the will and
Speaker 2: means to take it. We all need to understand why
Speaker 2: and what is supposed to happen next. So to the
Speaker 2: back end and the last couple of paragraphs. Unless wider
Speaker 2: society regains control of the agenda, the farmer industry and
Speaker 2: its investors are set to make a killing through bird flu.
Speaker 2: It will be at least as big as COVID. It
Speaker 2: will also serve an important role in further building the
Speaker 2: pandemic industry, justifying the finalization of the postponed WHO Pandemic
Speaker 2: Agreement treaty. It is a vital cog in the great reset.
Speaker 2: Outbreaks do occur, and we shall monitor and prepare for them. However,
Speaker 2: we have allowed the development of a system where outbreaks
Speaker 2: are almost all that matter. Perceptions of risk and resultant
Speaker 2: funding have become grossly disproportionate to reality. The perverse incentives
Speaker 2: driving this are obvious, as are the harms. The world
Speaker 2: will be increasingly unequal and impoverished and sick building on
Speaker 2: the outcomes of the COVID response, Fear promotes profit better
Speaker 2: than calmness and content. It is on us to remain
Speaker 2: calm and continually educate ourselves regarding context. No one will
Speaker 2: sell these to us. Now. You can find the article
Speaker 2: the Brownstone Institute site Brownstone dot org bird flu, spell, flu, fear,
Speaker 2: and perverse incentives, and it runs through all sorts of
Speaker 2: aspects of this particular situation, and I want to seriously
Speaker 2: encourage every one of you to look it up and
Speaker 2: read it. That will take us out for podcasts two
Speaker 2: hundred and forty three. If you'd care to write to us,
Speaker 2: hope you do Latent at newstalksb dot co dot NZD
Speaker 2: or Carolyn Carolyn with a Y at newstalksb dot co
Speaker 2: dot nseid. We shall return shortly with the podcast number
Speaker 2: two hundred and forty four and it's going to be
Speaker 2: a ripper. Until then, as always, thank you for listening
Speaker 2: and we shall talk soon.
Speaker 1: Thank you for more from NEWSTALKSEDB. Listen live on air
Speaker 1: or online, and keep our shows with you wherever you
Speaker 1: go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio