Hearts of Oak Podcast

International COVID Summit 4 - The War Room Interviews

International COVID Summit 4 - The War Room Interviews 
Dr Robert Malone - Dr Ryan Cole - Christian Terhes MEP - Dr Stephen Hatfill - Jason Christoff - Dr Sorin Muncaciu MEP - Nick Hudson
International COVID Summit 4Palace of The Parliament Bucharest Romania November 18-20th 2023
Hearts Of Oak                      https://heartsofoak.org/ 
Steve Bannon's War Room  https://warroom.org/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and on X https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20

David Vance & Peter Mcilvenna - Hold the Line: Challenge the Narrative

Andrew Bridgen MP and Carl Benjamin have both suffered from their willingness to stand up for what they believe in and for speaking truths.  Which is why they are the perfect guests for the first ever David Vance/Hearts of Oak event. David joins us to discuss what lay behind the reasoning and planning for this event on the 12th December, why Andrew and Carl are so important in getting the message out and why we need to move from an online conversation to in person events. This will be the first of many and Mr Vance explains why we have started in London and what our future plans are.
Hold the Line - Challenge the Narrative LIVE IN LONDON 12/12/23 https://www.tickettailor.com/events/davidpeterevents/1067181
An Evening of Conversation, Discussion and Q&A featuring Andrew Bridgen MP and Carl Benjamin
Hosted by David Vance and Peter Mcilvenna - Sponsored by Quantum Hypno www.quantumhypno.co.uk
Andrew Bridgen MP has courageously sought to hold Government to account for the disturbing adverse reactions to Covid vaccines that it assured people were safe and effective. On the night we will discuss his experiences, frustrations and his hopes to get justice for the vaccine injured and bereaved. 
Carl Benjamin of Sargon of Akkad fame is one of our most original and distinguished thinkers. Carl has established the successful Lotus Eaters platform and describes himself as an Englishman, Postmodern traditionalist, and a sensible centrist. Free Speech is under attack and Carl will discuss how he sees the future working out for our ability to speak freely.
Interview recorded 22.11.23
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more... https://heartsofoak.org/connect/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... https://heartsofoak.org/shop/

Richard Vobes - Should We Be Disruptive?

Show Notes and Transcript
Richard Vobes spent years as The Bald Explorer, for a decade he travelled throughout England and uploaded his experiences on his popular YouTube channel to show English culture and history. A year ago he changed tack and begun to comment on the encroaching tyranny we are all facing and this is now his primary focus.He joins Hearts of Oak to discuss 'Should we be Disruptive?' This is the name of one of his YouTube playlists and is the question many of us are now asking ourselves. We find ourselves in a post party political, post legal system, post police society, when trust in our institutions collapses, what should our response be?  Richard gives his views on where these leave us, sows some seeds of positivity and gives his thoughts on how we move forward.
Richard Vobes, also known as The Bald Explorer is a film maker and amateur historian with a very popular YouTube channel. He has noticed that the world is an odd place at the moment and everything you thought you knew is clearly not right.Richard uses his channel to express concerns over the way things are in the world. Particularly that which affects us here in England.He ponders the mysteries, questions the narrative and tries to get to the truth, hoping to uncover some of the secrets.Richard proclaims he is not an expert, but just uses a little critical thinking, some common sense added with a touch of the whimsical.
Connect with Richard...YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/@RichardVobesWEBSITE:  https://richardvobes.com/
Interview recorded 15.11.23
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more... https://heartsofoak.org/connect/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
Transcript
(Hearts of Oak)
Richard Vobes. It is wonderful to have you with us. Thanks so much for your time today.
Richard Vobes
Oh, it's my pleasure. Absolute pleasure. Thank you very much, Peter, for asking me. 
Not at all. It's great to have you on.And I've actually seen you recently, and maybe for the viewers, people can find you.Mainly, I think your focus is on your YouTube channel, is @RichardVobes, there on the screen and the links are in the description and we're going to look at one of your, I think one of your set of videos was 'Should we be Disruptive?' and that opens up a whole range of issues, that playlist you've done, but for the viewers and listeners, a lot of our US based viewers and listeners may not have come across you, you go under many different titles, English Couple, The Bald Explorer, and where you explore British history.Traveling all over and looking at what it is to be English and understand that.You started that back in 2011, I think, so 13 years ago.But over the last year, you've moved and you did a video on it to highlight that you are moving into more opinion pieces and to give your thoughts on, I guess, the tyranny which we all face.And a range of your videos all about common law, which we'll maybe touch on as something which I really have stayed away from, talk about privacy, King Charles to attend COP28, why are so many airline pilots dying, the fear monster is dying, time to take back control.I mean, a lot of the issues and areas that we certainly address here at Hearts of Oak.But maybe, first of all, to start with, that was a big change and a big change in focus from actually exploring British history, looking at England, and actually you've changed your focus and that change of focus has come with a massive change in reach as well and increase maybe we can start there before we get into 'Should we be Disruptive' and so tell us about that change and what triggered it and what that has meant.Well as you said, and thank you again for bringing me on to your program, my original focus was looking at the country I live in, the country I love, which is England, and heritage, landscape, nature, and all those sort of things.Initially, I was quite interested in the fact that England was kind of being written out of history.We were Great Britain, but there was Scotland and there was Wales.But if you were English, it became a difficult thing for some reason.And I wanted to reclaim the flag and say, what's wrong with proud of being English?Not for any overly national interest, just to say, look at the beautiful buildings, look at the wonderful geology and the landscape, and of course, the nature.But as I was making my videos, I became more and more aware that actually we were building over and destroying this wonderful land with lots of new builds whose architecture was quite bland and quite mean and smaller and smaller and it was all about money and we'd sort of lost I think a lot of our heritage and the things that people had fought for in the wars and then of course that made me very much aware that the government was pushing ideas down that nobody really wanted.And if I started to talk about some of these one world government policies that were influencing our government and then being pushed on us, I couldn't find very many people who'd sort of asked for them other than those that were arguing for the global warming to be debated more.But it was always on one side.So I found my audience just didn't want to talk about, if I mentioned, you know, is, questioned, is global warming a thing as it's been portrayed, man-made global warming.People would either suddenly go, I'm not interested in your channel, just like that, because I was questioning it, and they would whiz off, and same with friends, and then because we went through Brexit, did you want to be in the EU or out of the EU, and that became such a polarized thing, you couldn't say, well actually that's quite good about the EU and that's quite good about not being in the EU. It was either in or out.And of course the referendum forced you to make a decision if you wanted to take part in it.And I had my ideas because I'm old enough to remember before we were in it and thought well actually you know we did have an empire, not that I'm arguing for that necessarily, but we are able to stand on our own two feet and we don't need to keep acquiescing to the something that fits other countries that may not fit us.But again it was one of those things that you could not question or if you fell on the wrong side of the narrative you were always deemed to be stupid and so I just accepted that I was obviously stupid for my beliefs.Then of course we went through the the period of three years ago when people were locked in their houses because something was floating about in the air that we couldn't see and was on every surface and was liable to kill left, right and centre.And if you spoke again against that, the strange effect of the general public of not wanting to address it or changing or questioning the narrative, even though eminent scientists were saying, hang on, we've got this Great Barrington Declaration that says, should we do this approach, maybe there's another science.And then we continually got the notion that no no, the science is fixed or we're following the science and of course now all of that is up for question but some of us were questioning it early on but were shut down because of that.And so we came to last year, about a year ago, this month actually in which I was watching GB News and Neil Oliver was asking about the fuel crisis that we'd seen to be coming into because there was a war going on which nobody talks about at the moment because there's another war going on.So people have sort of got distracted somewhere else.But anyway we're talking about the fuel crisis and he said well people are suffering, what would happen if nobody paid their bill? And I thought, what a clever idea, you know, people power, because I've always thought grassroots is the key, really, to a lot of things.So I made a video saying, is he right?And suddenly, and that was so different from what I was doing, but where I would get, say, I don't know, 2,000 to 3,000 views on a video.If I was lucky, over a week, I got 100,000 views over a matter of days.And I followed it up with a couple of others on a similar vein.And suddenly I was then in the opinion market and going down the rabbit holes and regurgitating my thoughts on this.And the audience were just coming in swathes.And very soon I'd hit the 100,000 mark and we're something like 180,000 subscribers now.Which validated that there is an audience who desperately want to discuss this, talk about it, think about it, and they already knew the problems.And some people were coming in, because people were saying, you know, Richard, you're a bit like the Alan Titchmarsh of the conspiracy theorists, because you're sort of Mr.Nice Guy, but you're dropping in the fact that the nasty people want to depopulate us.And so it became something that people could share with people who were perhaps not awakened to those ideas, which was great.And it was, I never planned any of this.So, yeah, so that was the sudden growth. And here am I, pretty much a year later, going, wow, what a journey.
I love it when things happen you don't plan it. Same here, my background in politics we mentioned the wonderful Liz Phillips and of course working with her in politics and then moving over and and I've loved part of the media side of engaging with people that we will probably have very similar views on many issues yet you focus on YouTube, we focus on alternate platforms, you're more UK based in England where we're a lot of European, international and it's lovely how those connect together.But if I can ask you, the whole issue of being disruptive and it's something which I think we've all thought about over the tyranny which we have faced under COVID in the last three years and there are a number of areas but I think the political pantomime we have seen in the last few days and I think we see Westminster, the national politics set up to actually have consensus and just keep it going, don't rock the boat, don't come in with massive alternative views and you just step by step ticks over and it's fun when you see someone actually calling the government out like what has happened, not that I believe we'll see any change.How do you see that kind of national politics? Are we purely post-party politics?Did you engage in politics? Do you engage less now? I mean how do you see that kind of national political side happening?Well, going back, as you say, did I engage in politics?I mean, you know, growing up, you're aware my parents always voted conservative.I think because of my interest in landscape, nature and heritage, and living on the south coast here in a fairly affluent town, it felt perfectly normal to vote conservative.I thought, and I've never been terribly political in the past, I always assumed that the Conservatives were about conserving things, as in the name, and keeping traditions and customs and all of that.And of course in recent times I've seen that that's not what they're about at all.And so that's questioned now when I've gone into the voting booth and thought, well, what am I actually voting for?But then I look at the other party and you think of the Labour Party as the only opposition that's likely to make a big difference and get in.And we've seen how that's been changed from what it originally was.And my sister is very much a labour person, she works in the NHS, so she's very much in believing the rights of people and of workers and those sort of things.And I've been self-employed, so of course I've been self-employed most of my life, So I believed in a small capitalist society in which independent sole traders, small family-run businesses can thrive.And I'm totally against these very large corporations that seem to dominate the landscape in every town and across the world and knocking out the small independents.So it's very difficult to find a home now, I think, if you are an independent, self-employed person because none of the parties represent me.Then, of course, you've got, as I have gone through this last year's journey, of realizing, that as individuals, as sovereign people, we are living under corporations, that we live now in corporate Britain here and that the government isn't even an assembly.It isn't what you think it is. It is this for-profit corporation and when you look at both parties, none of them represent the two sides, shall we say, of a country anymore.They seem to be, you've either got tyranny or increased tyranny it seems to me and depending on where you want to put. So and the other thing is, When we vote, we're voting for a pre-selected bunch of nutters, it seems to me, rather than electing our own people who we could vote for.And it seems if you're sovereign, you should be electing people in your area, not those that have been put up and says, well, I'm going to be your candidate and you've got no choice.And I think the whole system is wrong. and now I just feel, and I suppose I've come to this because of the huge awakening, that the whole parliament system itself, the whole two-tier system and the MPs, and everything, is over.And it's none of the above and we need a completely new way of governing or managing, I suppose, administrating the country rather than this this government that's decided that it is sovereign and not the people that they are our masters and that we somehow are their servants and I can't square that anymore and and you know using things like common law or natural law, just the logic of that seems to harmonize with me.So man comes first, man is on the planet, and he looks about and he goes, well, if we don't organize ourselves, we may not get stuff done.It would be better if we could organize it ourselves.So let's arrange for a bunch of people to sort of run something like a parliament.But it means that man's organized that, so man must come first.The creator is in charge, not the created, But it does seem now that the creation is coming back and saying, well, actually, the monster is now in charge, and I think that that is over.And the more we realize that we, the people, have the power, hence being disruptive to them, and claiming back our responsibilities, what we ought to do, because otherwise we are going down, as we've all seen, a very dark passage in the history of humanity.
The whole common law is intriguing and I've had many conversations with Liz on this and I am extremely sceptical of it.You know what it's like, whenever you do a lot of interviews, a lot of topics, there are only so many things you can actually delve into and understand.I'm down enough rabbit holes without necessarily going down another and that's something I've left to the side.But kind of I see that we are fighting within the system and I don't think that we can use the legal system on our side or the political system on our side.And this whole concept of common law that actually we can remove ourselves from that system and I'm still trying to work through that.And it's not that I completely disagree with it, it's that I haven't had the time to delve into it.So maybe touch on that and why is that a solution and part of the disruptive model?Well, I think, well let me first of all explain, I'm, you know, I've only been doing this a year and as like you, you know, you touch on so many subjects but common law keeps coming up or natural law, God's law, so many variations of it, the freeman of the land thing, the law of admiralty, there's so much to it and I interviewed a group, the common law group, in Herefordshire only yesterday in the video.Or the day before it went out yesterday, and I asked them plainly, you know, can you give me a definition of common law that I can hand to the viewers? And they said it's common sense.It is ultimately, when it comes down to it, is common, ruling by common sense in a way.What makes logical sense to you and I, if we're all, for example, if we're all born equal, i.e.We come into this world with nothing, what gives anybody else the right to be above us and to say you will be my slave unless we agree to it?And now, in life, we do agree that we will acquiesce to certain things because it makes sense to.So for example having rules of the road, so here in in England we drive on the left and it seems sensible that if everybody drives on the left we're not going to bump into each other as we drive up and down the roads because the coming traffic will also be driving on our right but to them it's the left if you see what I mean and of course you have that in different in different countries.So some rules just make perfect sense that we can agree to rather than just saying we'll drive any old where whatever we like because we're all just sovereign individuals.So clearly we need a set of rules that make sense but it's where we have the rules get tied up into these things called acts and legislation.The legal and you've got legalese, you've got the people who are administering this, taking two oaths to a private bar guild association, a guild of your judges, your clerks of the court, your solicitors and barristers, who are effectively, again, part of a corporate world that are there to make money.And of course, the history of all of this goes right back to Roman times, to the Vatican, part of canon law, in which they needed a flat, I'm going to put it like this, they needed a flat earth, but not the flat earth as in flat earth theory about the planet, but putting people on paper so that they can be administered.So, we as living people with blood in us and brains and flesh and all of that, the corporations can't deal with us.They need to have a fiction version of us, which is why we have capitalized names.And they deal with this. And we sort of act as the agent for these fictionalized names. So the Richard Vobes that you see on a bit of paper isn't really me, it's just a representation of me.They can deal with us on paper and it's all done on paper.I mean everything is done on paper. We always have to either agree to something or we rebut something with parking fines and poll tax, council tax and all of that, when you go into the courts.And acts are, you know, it's theatre.That's why it's called an act. It's not law.Law is more to do with things that are immutable. You know, the law of gravity, you can't change the law of gravity.Common sense, in a way, is common to most people.Don't hurt someone, don't murder somebody, because you're damaging them, you're hurting them, you wouldn't want it to happen to you.So, I think we can live by a number of very simple policies, if I can use that word, or laws would be better, rather than having a whole load of legislation that most of us don't know what are.And we only have to look at the solicitors when you go into their rooms, and they've got all these books of case studies and laws and this and that.And how is man ever supposed to memorize all of this and try and stay on the right side?You can't. But you can say, if you do no harm, do no damage.That's something very easy. and if you have a problem...We could go back to the system that common law used to have and have members of our community, our peers, 12 juries, to sort of make the decision whether we've been behaving properly or even if the law itself is sensible because some laws that get made might not be sensible.You know, some of the legislation we've got, if you accidentally drive into a bus lane at night time and there's no traffic and a camera takes a photograph of you.Where's the crime really? Where's the victim? No one's been hurt.And yet you'll get a ticket for whatever it is, 50 quid, 100 quid, and then a whole load of things if you don't pay.And yet all you've done is you've travelled a conveyance on tarmac in a painted box that someone's painted and you've been penalised when there's no vehicle.You know, so some of it is just ridiculous and you're 12 just men and women sitting around ought to be able to say, well, actually, you know, that's a stupid rule. If it's three o'clock at night, there's no other traffic.Where's the damage? Where's the pain? Why are we stressing people?But we have that system. And of course, now we have cameras everywhere and we have these rules coming in, which are stopping people from traveling one side of their town to another.And people are taking the biometrics in the supermarkets.And we have this advent of the CBDCs, the Central Bank Digital Currencies, programmable money, that somebody else could make the decision whether you have the right to buy something or not.Well, this is absolute tyranny and again, this is not humane.It's just anti-human policies.So I think a much simpler system can be worked and sensible people with common sense could work that out.We've, looking at politics, we've seen fewer and fewer people engaging in the process and I think when I grew up I would have been more of the Australian, you know, you should make it mandatory, everyone should participate, but then when you look at the candidates and you realise actually one, it doesn't make any difference and two, there's no one there that actually believes or stands up for anything, which I think is right in society.I mean, where does that go? Because you look over in France, you've got the yellow vest, you've got actually on the streets, and it's part of French culture to push back, to remove yourself from the labour market, to fight back.We kind of have a more shrug of the shoulders.And when I look at the political, I think, how low does that dissent in terms of not engaging in the political system, and how bad does that have to be until something changes?And it's simply just not voting. Is that enough disruption to the system to bring any change?
Well I think one of the problems is that we have, and I think it is intentional, we have been, dumbed down, we've lost interest in our local environment.We used to have radio stations, local radio stations, not regional radio stations, that talked about the things that went on in our environment.We used to have local papers.And slowly and slowly, I mean, the internet sort of killed a lot of that because podcasts and other things came along, of course.And we've just taken our eye off the ball so that at a local level, the councils can start to bring in measures.We've lost that sense of going to a council meeting and thinking of the town as our town or our village, whatever, and saying actually, no, I don't want that.You know, every now and again, I'll see a lamppost with a notice that they have to put out to say, oh, we're going to make these changes to this road or we're going, you know, these people have got a, they want to put an extension on which will block out the sun of your house.But most people aren't reading them.People have lost that sense of the importance of being active in their community.And we've all been distracted with all this technology and the games that people can play and the, you know, the Netflix series is, and more and more the government said, well, we'll do that for you.We'll do that for you. You don't have to worry about that, we'll do it.And I feel that we're in this process now, or this moment in time now, where we've really got to wake up and say, and take back the responsibility for things again, and not continually say, oh, the government should do this for us, or the council should be doing that.You see some litter on the ground, you should pick it up.We should just get back into that mode of this is our road, this is our street, this is our neighbours, these are our people. We've lost all of that.We used to have youth clubs that kids would go and do things together.Now they're stuck behind their phones.Again, I think that this is, not only is it progression of technology, but I think it's also hugely manipulated that we are not engaged in the way we saw during the pandemic that a lot of the pubs were closing, but they were closing before that you know the price of of beer and the amount of tax that people are having to pay on basically socializing and being in each other's company in which you would sort of put the world to rights you may not do anything because might have been too blatted to actually do it.But the general interest in your town, and of course we've seen a lot of migration in which we have people from different places and people also have worked now.They're moving around the country for their different work.So then, and jobs aren't lasting as they were.People change jobs every two or three years instead of being in a job for life.Now, I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing.It's just all these different things seem to have made people no longer put roots down in a place and think of it as their place.You know, you think about the old days when your door was always open, your mum could just pop in, a neighbour would go, oh, come, have you got any sugar?All this sort of, all this neighbourly stuff. Now, you know, we're very guarded.We don't know who our neighbours are anymore. We've got those dreadful, well, I haven't, but people have those dreadful doorbells with cameras on so you can see who people are.Probably sensible to know who people are coming to the door because there might be bailiffs and you may not want to engage with them. But that's taking, you know, all this technology is then taking data from you.And we see the surveillance technologies going up and all of this and 5G.But people just are not...We have slowly and slowly, we have become more isolated from each other and we're not doing what we used to do.And I think that's the biggest problem. and it's great to see that more and more grassroots initiatives are coming up trying to bring people back together again because it is people power that will push back against the tyranny.
And when you talked about that individualism, I wonder will that get worse with the push against the surveillance system we've seen with that move and I know you've done a video on this recently about privacy and we're trying to regain your privacy, fighting for that.And we realized that actually we are the commodity, that we are being sold, our information, us, and that is valuable these days.And kind of, how does that fit in? Because you're right, we don't really know those around us, our neighbours.We've got that kind of a level of privacy, but on the other side, actually because of the online world and what's creeping in, we have zero privacy and you think it's possible to regain that and that is part of the disruptive mechanism of regaining control over our own lives.Yeah, well, I mean it is down to us at the end of the day, it is down to us to realize what's going on and I think some people, probably not enough but some people are beginning to become aware that, and the interesting thing about this of course is, I mean I people asked me to do talks at events and in village halls and things and you turn up.And it's usually people in the 50s plus.It's people who have one leg in the analogue world.And of course, they've now got a leg in the digital world. But they can see the benefits of the old days.The younger people who have been brought up, and my children in their late 20s and early 30s, and I can see how, even though I have my thoughts, they push back against my conspiracy nonsense.They think that I'm a raving loony.But they've embraced totally the digital separation world.And so it seems to me that it is down to this generation of slightly older people, to encourage the rest to get together and do things.I interviewed a young chap who was 30, 28 actually.And he said to me, and this was a real eye-opener for me, I'm 60, he said I really envy your age group because you guys can talk to anybody in the street, at a bus stop, you have a conversation with people, you know, behind the, at the till in shops or whatever, you just have, you know, you're not worried about it.And I said well don't you?And he said no, young people do not talk to, unless they know each other.He said even going into the gym where you see the familiar faces, it's just all right, watch out, how you doing?It's you know it's that because they, they've forgotten how conversation goes, of just starting a conversation with without wanting any more out of it you know.And I said, but, you know, we'll go down and I'll say, oh, that's a nice hat you've got on there. Or isn't it dreadful weather?Or do you want to borrow my umbrella? Or cor blimey, let me carry your bag.You know, those sort of, just that's how I was brought up.But it does seem that young people aren't able to do that. And that, to me, was a huge eye opener.And I thought, my God, this is worse than I thought.Because if people can't, if younger people, where the next generation are unable to communicate on a very just simplistic level of, hi, how are you doing?Let me help you with that type thing, or have you heard, or, you know, I mean, when I was young, of course, you went to school and you'd been watching, I don't know, the same programs on the television.Did you see the $6 million man yesterday? Oh yeah, that was great, Steve Austin and his, but now, of course, you've got no references to start conversations with because everybody's playing different games, watching different programs, and they're not joining together to say, oh, did you watch that latest thing from Richard Vobes or whatever, unless they're of a certain age group in a certain bracket.And that, I think, is a sad thing that we've lost conversation.And I think it's that, it's having that disgruntled complaining that we do best, you know, cor blimey, you've seen what's, you know, they've just had David Cameron's come back.Oh my God, next they'll be getting Blair back. Oh no, he won't be, he's going to be head of the WEF.And it's those sort of things that you want to get people having that communication.
You made a comment earlier about, you know, those notices you see on the lampposts, there's going to be a huge block.I know the latest one I have, sadly living in London is it's only going to be a 34 story block.That's going to be just across the way and it keeps getting higher.And I find people complaining and actually the development that we have is the third time it's been submitted.And they basically know that if they just keep submitting it with 10 centimetres difference, eventually they'll get their way.And I think you did a video on a local council, Biggleswick think it was, about having a change and is that possible, people engaging at the local level, is that an example of what can happen or is the kind of the uni-party system still got control of the local council side?Well I think people generally are a bit like water and that they'll always find the path of least resistance.So if you can demonstrate a life that is better for them, on the whole, they'll all go along with it. So.My video about Biggleswick, which is a fictitious place, it's not a real place.Although it's growing in people's ideas, in reality, is the notion that the people of a town just decided that the anti-human policies coming from the council that they never asked for, should not happen and if they go to the council and simply say, we don't want it and the council say, well you're having it, that the people who pay their council tax allegedly to the council ought to be the ones that make the ultimate decision and if they can't make the ultimate decision because that council won't do it then it strikes me that they should then set up a parallel council, pay the money to that parallel council, make the first council obsolete and nothing to do with them.Because if you can convince your town, if it's a small town of, I don't know, 100,000 people, and 80,000 of those are pretty much on your side.And they said, well, actually, yeah, we'll fund it and we'll do it all properly.We'll do the minutes, we'll have the meetings, we'll do elections.And we'll do the things we want and those things we don't want.If we don't want a 20 mile an hour speed limit everywhere, yes, outside the school might be a sensible solution, but it might not be sensible for everywhere.And if we don't want cameras and if we don't want supermarkets coming in, muscling and getting rid of the independent companies that have our family run and have been here for years and part of our culture and generation and people who've worked there, and then they're putting in cameras and photographs.If we don't want that, this is our town.And I think that's what people have got to begin to realize, that they do have the power, we all have the power collectively, and if we can organize ourselves and if we can break away from that spell of looking at the screens and letting other people have wonderful lives, and sort of, you know, the people on the screen have all this lovely life that they're having, we could ditch that and actually have the lovely lives by saying to the council, you're irrelevant.If you won't do what we will do, we can still have our bins collected, we can still have the lights put on.We may want to not have those slightly worrying blue LED lights that you keep putting up.We may not want the 5G, for example, because, to be honest, do we really need to download movies in six seconds?Is there a nefarious use that they're also being put? What about the radiation?We should think about that a bit more. After all, we're advancing with this technology.We don't know what the effect is in 20, 50 years it will have on us.Maybe we should just slow down a little bit here.I think people power could do that. And I don't see how the 20 or 30 people who sit around the tables and think they're very important with their pensions and their portfolios in front of them, what they could do to it.I mean, admittedly, the government might be a bit upset, but if you've got 100,000, people saying, it's our town, these are our buildings, we've paid for these public buildings, and let's face it, the councils themselves are all going bankrupt at the moment, they're all in debt by hundreds of millions, I think people could do a far better job.
Absolutely, I think it's important and it is a call for action for people to re-engage.I think we have trusted those in charge for too much for too long. It is time to re-engage.Richard, I love, it's great chatting with you.One of the things I love about the whole media space, having people on who you actually haven't met and meet for the first time and have on.I think what you're doing in your channel actually does provide hope because you realize people may be less concerned about the green belt, but 15 minute cities actually are a concern.And you realize when you connect with people on issues that actually they realize does impact them and they want to speak up, and it is vital that the public are educated and empowered.I think what you're doing on your channel does exactly that.So thank you so much for coming on and giving us your time today.
Oh, it's it's my absolute pleasure. and I think we do need optimistic channels out there because there's so many people telling us the problem.Now is the time to look for the solutions in an optimistic way.So I appreciate the chance to come on and have an optimistic grumble.
Not at all. Always good. And thank you so much to the viewers.Make sure, and if you're not following Richard, then make sure and follow him @RichardVobes there on YouTube and take advantage of the information he is putting out. So Richard, once again thank you so much.Thank you so much Peter, really enjoyed it.

Dwight Schultz - Its Alright to be Dwight: #005

Welcome to 'Its Alright to be Dwight'A podcast with the television, film and voice actor Dwight Schultz, exclusive to Hearts of Oak.This episode Dwight takes aim at Government Betrayals, Stolen Elections, Societal Issues, Pope Bergoglio, Paedophiles, Cover Ups, The Destruction of Society and Radical Ideologies.
A respected performer on Broadway, Dwight Schultz found everlasting fame by playing the certifiable "Howling Mad" Murdock on the action series "The A-Team" (1983-86).A living, breathing cartoon with a seemingly endless selection of voices and accents at his command, Murdock provided the air power for the A-Team's clandestine adventures, provided that his compatriots could break him out of the mental hospital where he resided.One of the show's most popular and memorable figures, Murdock ensured Schultz steady work on television and on the big screen playing Reginald Barclay in "Star Trek: The Next Generation"An accomplished voice actor, Dwight can be heard in numerous hit computer games and in countless animated shows. To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more... https://heartsofoak.org/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
Please subscribe, like and share!

Brigitte Gabriel - Making Sense of the War in Israel

Show Notes and Transcript
For 6 weeks we have witnessed conflict in The Middle East. Israel have responded to the October 7th terror attack with force. Brigitte Gabriel joins us to help make sense of this war in Israel. As the Founder of ACT for America, Brigitte has been a well known American voice of truth for 2 decades, an upbringing in Lebanon gives her a unique perspective on The Middle East and on regional tensions. Who exactly are Hamas? What part does religion play in this war? Can Israel win both the military and publicity battle? Brigitte answers all of these questions and more.ACT for America: ACT NOW - TAKE ACTION https://www.actforamerica.org/ 
Brigitte Gabriel is a leading commentator on politics, culture, and national security. As a legal immigrant to America born in Lebanon, Ms. Gabriel survived war in the Middle East living in an 8x10 underground bomb shelter from the age of 10 until 17 years old.She lectures nationally and internationally, and her expertise is sought after by world and business leaders.Ms. Gabriel moved to Israel in 1984 and became a news anchor for “World News,” an evening Arabic news broadcast for Middle East Television seen throughout Israel, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon. Her work is of international scope has brought her in contact with world figures such as Margaret Thatcher, George H. Bush, Queen Nour El Hussein, Itzhak Rabine, and Shimon Perez.Ms. Gabriel immigrated to the United States in 1989 and founded a television production and advertising company. Her clients included ABC, NBC, CBS, Discovery, TLC, History Channel, CNN, the Oprah Winfrey show, 20/20, World News Tonight, and Good Morning America just to name a few.She has addressed the United Nations, Australian Prime Minister, members of The British Parliament/House of Commons, members of the United States Congress, The Pentagon, The Joint Forces Staff College, The US Special Operations Command, The US Asymmetric Warfare group, the FBI, and many others.In addition, Gabriel is a regular guest analyst on Fox News Channel, Newsmax, OAN, and many American and international media outlets worldwide.Ms. Gabriel is the Founder and Chairman of ACT for America, the largest national security grassroots organization in the U.S. with over one million members.She speaks Arabic, French, English, and Hebrew.
Connect with Brigitte....WEBSITE:            https://www.actforamerica.org/                             https://brigittegabriel.com/X:                          https://twitter.com/ACTBrigitte?s=20&t=nsIfzJ-aNH20EjHE2tq25g                             https://twitter.com/ACTforAmerica?s=20&t=nsIfzJ-aNH20EjHE2tq25gINSTAGRAM:       https://www.instagram.com/brigitte_gabriel/?hl=en
'Rise: In Defense of Judeo-Christian Values and Freedom' Available in hardcover, e-book or audio-bookhttps://amzn.eu/d/bLhqPWQ
Interview recorded 13.11.23
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more... https://heartsofoak.org/connect/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
Transcript
(Hearts of Oak)
Brigitte Gabriel. It is wonderful to have you back with us. Thank you so much for your time today.
(Brigitte Gabriel)
I'm so delighted to be back with you, Peter. 
So good, and I wish we were talking about a different subject rather than what is happening at the moment in the Middle East and Israel.But first, the viewers can find you @ACTBrigitte and they can also get you on your website brigittegabriel .com, just dot com at the end.And just in case our viewers haven't come across Brigitte before she's been with us before but she is national security analyst, New York Times best -selling author and chairman of Act for America and her latest bestseller is Rise in Defense of Judeo -Christian Values and Freedom.I want to get your thoughts on, I mean there's Hamas, there's Islam, there's the Israeli response, there's Benjamin Netanyahu's political legacy, intelligence failures, international political and media response, danger of spreading, etc, etc. There's so many pieces to this.Let's see what we can unpack in the next 45 minutes.Maybe start at the I mean, October the 7th, the worst attack, I think, in modern day Israel, over a thousand citizens murdered by Hamas on that day.What were your thoughts, I guess, whenever you first saw that breaking?What were your initial thoughts?Disbelief. If I can describe it in one word, disbelief.Watching Jewish people run for their lives, being chased by Hamas terrorists, watching Hamas holding girls, running with them, the girl on the motorcycle, kids running, Hamas parading women, girls, and trucks and Jeeps.I mean, it was disbelief that this could actually happen in Israel to Israelis on Israeli territory.The first question on my mind was, what happened to security?I mean, Israel is known for the intelligence. The intelligence failure was the first and biggest question that popped up in my mind. How could this be?The intelligence failure, how did it happen?I think a lot of people worldwide were in utter shock that this happened in Israel, that Hamas, was able to pull something like this. I mean, look, you and I know people.We have followed the Palestinian problem. We have followed Palestinian news.Nobody in Gaza can pull this off. This is not brains that put this together in Gaza.So, immediately, we knew that, you know, as a terrorism analyst who's been following this for years, I knew that Iran was behind it.I mean, being born and raised in Lebanon, following the progression of Hezbollah in Lebanon, growing, becoming an army, becoming a major army, a structure, discipline, training, all provided by Iran, funding provided by Iran.I knew that Iran was going to be behind the Hamas massacre.So these are all the questions that immediately came to my mind.But again, the word disbelief is what me and many other people across the globe probably felt at that moment.Yeah, there's so many questions, and you're right. One of the reasons I really wanted you on, Brigitte, because you're having grown up in Lebanon, understanding the regional side, understanding the religious context, and now obviously living in America and seeing it from a U .S.perspective. So you bring a fascinating myriad of thoughts to this issue and you're right.My first question was how has this happened?How did the Israeli government, the intelligence services, Mossad known throughout the world for how lethal they are, for how well they conduct, for, you don't know what's going to happen until it happens and then this happens.And my thoughts were actually, if I was an Israeli citizen, I would feel fairly unsafe because that trust in those institutions seems to have gone.Is that a kind of a fair assessment?
I think what led to this, this is a great lead into what led to this, because this is what happens when you take your eye off the ball.This is what happens when you start bickering with each other, forgetting that, and this applies to Israel and America, by the way, because we are experiencing the same type of division in America.But in Israel, for the last year, the Jewish people in Israel, the Israelis have felt such division. The country was so totally divided at each other's throat.They forgot that they are actually persecuted by everybody around them.Everybody around them wants their annihilation.And the Jewish people and the Israeli people in Israel forgot that you need to always be united when it comes to your security.I think their hatred towards Bibi Netanyahu, their hatred towards different aspects of government, the right versus the left, the left versus the right, the religious bloc versus everybody else.I think that division and remember I mean I heard even reservists were refusing to show up even to the reserve in the last year in Israel.So there was many problems leading to this.And this goes to show you that we are fighting an enemy who is determined to wipe Israel off the map.Just because Israel was distracted and the Israelis were distracted, bickering with each other over the court system, over the voting system, over the right versus the religious, versus the liberal, versus the left, and everybody's fighting amongst each other, Hamas did not lose sight of its goal.The Palestinians have never wavered in their hatred towards Israel.And no matter how much they bicker with each other, the Palestinians, they are united on one thing and one thing alone, and that is the killing of all the Jews and driving them into the sea.So what happened on October 7th was a wake -up call for Israelis.I think every Israeli that was living in Israel on that day, including those Jews who were visiting from all over the world, Because remember, you know, this was a holiday, Simchat Torah.Everybody was visiting with their families. They were celebrating the holiday in Israel.This is a time when everybody visits Israel.And I think this was a wake -up call for the Jews worldwide to realize anti -Semitism is real.It's not just little pockets here and there. Oh, maybe it's on the rise.I think what happened on October 7th showed all the Jews worldwide, including Israelis, that the people worldwide hate you, they are on the streets demonstrating all over the globe.Sydney, Australia, New York, Canada, whatever country, France, England, whatever country around the world, they are demonstrating against you.And this is why the Jewish people worldwide need to be united on one thing, and that is their security and preservation of their life, their faith, their state, their unity, no matter what happens, no matter how much they bicker with each other on other things, they should never take their eyes off of the security of the State of Israel.
You're right, because no other country has to fight for their survival and be prepared at every, every single day.Can I ask about the response? So the response from the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been full fury, and rightly so.What is your kind of assessment as you look at that military response?Because it's a dangerous situation going into Gaza.And I think in the past, Israel have failed to deal with this.So, I mean, as you look at the military situation, how do you see that?I think good for them for showing up in force.I think this time Israel knows this is an existential threat.This is not just words like it used to be in the past.Look, Israel has never been in this situation before.I mean never Israel, before Israel when it was attacked it dealt with countries, you know, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, they were countries recognized on the world stage, right now Israel is dealing with Hamas which is a group of militia funded by Iran on the southern border and the northern border They're dealing with Hezbollah, which is not a country.It's a terrorist organization operating within a country. They have actually taken control of Lebanon, but Hezbollah is not a country and Hamas is not a country. But they are both funded by Iran, which is an Islamist country. Devoted for the wiping, for wiping Israel off the map and so good for Netanyahu for showing full force. Look, I am pro Netanyahu.because Netanyahu understands this threat.I'm not pro person per se whether in America or in Israel. So the people come and go, it doesn't matter who's serving in whatever position right now, they come and go.I started my organization Act for America in the United States, President George Bush was in power.Bush came and left, Obama came to power. Obama came and left, President Trump came to power.Got framed and left, President Biden is in power. In one year, we will no longer have President Biden in power and somebody else is going to come.So I do not look at the person in power.I look at the policies that they support and Netanyahu from the beginning all along throughout all his political career. He is a national security hawk. He is somebody that the enemies of Israel fear because they know they cannot push Netanyahu. They cannot manipulate Netanyahu. They cannot intimidate Netanyahu, the same way people throughout the world knew that leaders, corrupt leaders that they could notintimidate or or put fear into the heart of President Donald J.Trump in the United States.They did not know what he would do if he was attacked. And the same thing with Netanyahu.So I do support Netanyahu's full force going into Gaza. Good for him to doing that.And I hope that they will not have a ceasefire.Yes, there's a lot of destruction. Look, it's collateral damage.You know, Israel did not ask for this. The Palestinians asked for this.Remember, Peter, Israel left Gaza in 2005, and they took out every single Jewish person out of Gaza.I mean, remember the fights in Gush Katif when even the Jewish people did not want to leave and the Israeli IDF turned against its own people, kicking and screaming, dragging them out, taking them, evacuating Gaza in order to turn Gaza to the Palestinians.Israel not only took the Jewish people who were alive out of Gaza, Israel went in and dug the bodies out of the Jewish cemeteries of the people who were buried in Gaza because they knew what the Palestinians are going to do to the cemeteries.You and I know what they do. They have no respect for anything.So by the end of 2005, there were no Jewish people alive or dead in Gaza.Gaza could have been an oasis. Gaza could have been Singapore.The Palestinians had an opportunity after opportunity to build Gaza to become Singapore, to build Gaza to become a commercial centre.They have received billions of dollars from the world, but they did not do that.Instead, Hamas invested in building tunnels, billions of dollars that went into the Palestinian authority that Hamas siphoned.Their leaders got rich, they built tunnels instead of investing in their own people, and now they are paying the price.And that's exactly why you are seeing the level of destruction in Gaza, because Israel is not only trying to destroy the building above ground, the majority of the threat, the main threat is what's underground.And in order for you to destroy the tunnels underground, Israel has to use the force that it is using and we are seeing the level of destruction that we are seeing.And Israel has to see this through, ignoring all calls for ceasefire from anywhere else in the world.No one else in the world is calling for ceasefire, Peter.Lives in Sderot. Live in Jerusalem.They don't. So, they need to allow the people who live in these areas, who are under the attacks of Hamas, to be able to defend themselves.Of course you hear some from the international community saying those poor Palestinians living in Gaza, they're pawns of the Israelis, they are suffering under the Israelis, they have nothing, they live in a open prison and yet when you look at the international community, you're right the money that's gone in but also what has happened, I think, is a fault of the west, because the west have seen the people there living under Hamas and haven't thought of doing a thing about it.So, I mean, how do you see that? Because there are people there, but that narrative that, oh, it's all the Israelis' fault, and yet you're right.Those living there have had, certainly the government have had, every opportunity to build something special and prosperous.Look, Peter, everybody that's about, oh, the poor Palestinians, you know, Hamas is bad, but it's the poor Palestinians who are paying the price.Who do you think Hamas is? Hamas did not fly in through the breeze and latch on some tree or latch on some hospital.Hamas are the Palestinians in Gaza. They are a part of the Palestinians in Gaza.They are elected by the people in Gaza.You know, I speak in my first book titled Because They Hate.I talk about when Hamas did the first election in Gaza.Remember, Israel pulled out. They left everything to the Palestinians.So the Palestinians had their own election, their first election.One of the lady that was elected, her name was Om Nidal. She became known as the the Om Al Muqawama, the mother of the resistance.And the reason why she ran, the platform she ran on is because she has video.She sent three of her sons to die as suicide bombers.She actually, part of her campaign was showing videos of her standing next to her sons putting their suicide belt on. Sending them to Israel to blow themselves up and they did blow themselves up and they did die and they did kill Israelis. So she ran on the platform.I already gave three sons. I have another seven to give. That's why she was elected as a member of the government in Hamas.And that's just the first example in 2006.Who do people think Hamas is? Hamas are the Palestinians living in Gaza.And that's exactly why, you know, they teach Hamas controls the ministry of education.Hamas controls the ministry of health. Hamas controls the ministry of defence.Hamas control the ministry of communication.They control everything in Gaza. And who do you think works in these people?What do you think, Hamas are like five people that just parachuted into Gaza?They are all the Palestinians living in Gaza.This is the reality that the world has a very difficult problem time accepting.And here's another thing about the poor Palestinians. Where are the Palestinian voices that when the Hamas terrorists went into Israel on October 7th and kidnapped, okay, we do not want to get into the details about massacring the babies, cutting off the heads, raping women.Burning babies in ovens, etc., etc.Let's talk about the women and the children that they kidnapped and took back to Gaza. Where are the Palestinian voices saying you can't kidnap a six -month -old baby from his mom?You can't kidnap a two -year -old little girl. You can't rape women.We are mothers. We are wives. We are grandmothers We are women, you know, you can fight man to man, but you cannot rape women.You cannot kidnap children Where are the voices of the Palestinians mothers nowhere to be found as a matter of fact?What we saw was basically the girls that Hamas took as hostage, raped, and dragged as dead after they killed in the streets of Gaza, that girl was being kicked, shoved, dismantled, instead of the people saying, no, we don't do this to dead people, especially naked Jewish women being paraded down the streets.Instead, they cheered them on with such glee, with such pride.Even the Palestinians in Gaza who were part of the Hamas massacre on October 7th.I mean, who can forget the guy calling his father, Father, put my mother on the phone.You're going to be so proud. I killed with my own hands 10 Israelis.I just couldn't wait to tell you so you can be proud of me.Who are these people? These are the people of Gaza.These are the Palestinians in Gaza. This is a reflection of a decayed society from the inside.Their end goal is destruction. They celebrate murder and cutting people off and kidnapping people and raping people. They celebrate it as a joyful act.Not even the Nazis rejoiced like that.While the Nazis wanted to kill their enemies, they did not send their own children to die and then celebrated their death just to kill their enemies.The Nazis did not do that.The Nazis knew they were doing something wrong. That's why they did it in secret.That's why they shot people in the back so they don't have to look them in the eye when they kill them. It's totally different with the Palestinians.So for all the people who are crying about the poor Palestinians in Gaza, oh, the poor Palestinians paying the price, the Palestinians in Gaza are Hamas.You make your bed, you lay in it.
Yeah, and it's shocking when you see that celebration of evil, the celebration of murder, the joy.It's moronic, really. Yeah. But also, when you were speaking, I was thinking, actually, there are probably many people in Gaza who know where these people are being held, these hostages, and yet there's no rush to free them or to release them.And the international community talks about a ceasefire, but release the hostages, then by all means we can have some kind of conversation, but the call of the international community is for a ceasefire.It's actually not for the release of the hostages at all. And that's really surprised me.
Right, they want the ceasefire basically for the Palestinians and Israel should not have a ceasefire. Look, last time when Israel got into a war with Gaza and they had a ceasefire, Hamas kidnapped a soldier.To this day, he has not returned back to his family.That's what they do when there's a ceasefire. The international community who is calling on a ceasefire, for what?So Palestinians can escape, so they can leave.If the Palestinians can leave in four hours, which is now the pause that they're talking about, don't you think Hamas fighters can escape as well?And Israel knows this, the reality on the ground.You know, very different than the young American nitwits demonstrating on the streets, the college kids who do not know their own history in the United States, let alone the history of overseas and the Palestinian -Israeli conflict.And that's exactly why they take to the streets, they are demonstrating for the ceasefire.The ceasefire will hurt only Israel. And actually, instead of preventing bloodshed, it may prevent bloodshed in the short term. Long term, it's going to create even more bloodshed because it's going to empower Hamas.Hamas is going to dance a victory lap, hey, look, we forced the Israelis to cease fire.We are successful against our enemies. We are getting our demands.We get to keep the hostages. We don't have to give anybody back.And we get to have a ceasefire.And meanwhile, Hamas is going to use the ceasefire to move locations, to give a rest to their soldiers, to whatever it is, take a nap, move their ammunition, it all benefits Hamas, not Israel.And right now Israel needs to take care of Hamas, period.
When you look over at the West Bank, you kind of see how, although it's supposedly the same Palestinian people group, and yet they don't have the same desire to murder or kill.There is that tension, of course, but actually it's amazing when you see two groups that call themselves the same, and yet one is hell bent on murder, and the other actually complains, but actually accepts that they are living beside a neighbour who they have issues with, but they get on with life.One side can get on with life, the other side can't, and that kind of contrast of the same supposed people group is quite intriguing.Well, here's the intriguing part. The people in Fatah and the Palestinians in the West Bank are looked at as a sell-out to Israel.They're not trusted by Hamas and the people in Gaza.And actually what's so interesting, Peter, is in the last six weeks. There is such infighting. This is what the media is not talking about.I think they are up now to 200 people killed in the West Bank, Palestinians on each other because the Palestinian people want the Fatah leaders to join Hamas the Palestinian people in the West Bank are now saying to each other, if you have a rifle, because you know a lot of them have rifles that they shoot at weddings and celebration. They're saying if you have a rifle you need to either use it or give it to Hamas. So don't fool yourself by thinking, oh, the Palestinian people in the West Bank are much nicer.The only reason they're much nicer is because they're not funded by Iran.They don't have a way to communicate with Iran to go kill the Jews.But rest assured, right now, they are empowered. They are inspired.They are excited. They are mobilized.They are thinking, how can we become like Hamas? How can we make a name for ourselves like Hamas?As the heroes, the brave, the Islamic fighters, instead of the cowards, the weak, the sell off to Israel.This is the talk on the Arab streets right now.And this is the talk on the Arab street, not just within the Palestinian territories, but throughout the Arabic world on the streets.Don't kid yourself. The Arabic streets are cheering Hamas because they all hate the Jews. It's not about the Palestinians.It's about hating Israel and hating the Jews. And I think a little history lesson here is very important. Remember, Peter.When the PLO was founded in 1964. When the PLO was founded in 1964, the Palestinian Liberation Organization, it was founded to wipe Israel off the map.At that time, Gaza was in the hand of Egypt with an Egyptian flag flying over Gaza, and the West Bank was in the hands of Jordan.A Jordanian flag was flying over al -Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.So when Yasser Arafat started the PLO, the Palestinian Liberation Organization.He was not liberating Gaza or the West Bank. Those were Jordan and Egypt.So what was he liberating?He was liberating back to the line of 48, Israel proper.They did not want an Israeli state to exist in the Middle East.But most people do not know their history.Most people ignore history. The history is boring. It's not interesting, but you know, somehow it's fashionable today in any country in the West. Not just in our country, not to teach history.History is boring, so they ignore it. But that's the reality on the ground.They want to wipe Israel off the map.Fatah is no better than Hamas. Fatah is just weaker than Hamas.Meanwhile, the leaders of both organizations, the leaders of Fatah and the leaders of Hamas, are all mega millionaires, multi, multi, multi millionaires, from all the aid that has gone to the Palestinian Territory.They siphoned it off to their pocket and it didn't go to the poor people who needed it.It went to their pockets with all their banks in Switzerland and in Paris and in London and everywhere else.They are all rich so they have a vested interest in keeping the charade going.You touched on that hatred of Israel and I mean I very much see this and the media don't talk about it in the religious context, in the hatred that Islam has of the Jewish people and that eternal enmity or hatred has been there for 1,300 years plus.Of course, no one wants to talk about that because then you've got another issue that you have to deal with.If this is just land, then you can discuss that and carve a bit here, carve a bit there.But I mean, that conversation needs to be had and that's why I think actually you do have a stalemate because you've got the history of hatred and the only thing that seems to make the Islamic nations happy would be wiping Israel off the face of the earth.Exactly. Jew hatred in context of Islam.This is the subject that nobody wants to talk about because it's very uncomfortable.You know, two things people do not want to talk about, politics and religion.And when you're talking about the religion of Islam, you are talking about politics and religion mixed in one.Islam is a political movement cloaked in religion.So let's talk about Islam. You know, we all heard about the yellow star and you know, and people think that was a German invention. The yellow star was an Islamic invention in the ninth century, in Iraq by Khalifa al-Mutawakkil, the second Khalifa of Iraq who invented the yellow star to identify the Jews as they walk down the street because Jews under Islam are considered nahas.
Nahas is an Arabic world that describes Filth, bodily waste, dogs, those are considered nahas.Jews are in the same category.So the Khalifa al -Mutawakkil invented the yellow star to identify the Jews when they walked down the street.So when they were walking down the street, if a Muslim man was coming, the Jew had to cross to the other side of the street as not to dirty the Muslim man who was of higher status, clean who was walking this way.That's why they invented the yellow star.Germany, Hitler copied the yellow star because Germany was working with the Mufti Hussain in Jerusalem, who flew to Germany, worked with Hitler, shared with them what the Islamists did to defeat the Jews.And that's how Germany came up with the yellow star and used it.And as a matter of fact, Hitler had a Muslim division headed by Mufti al -Husseini of Jerusalem who was advising Hitler on how to deal with the Jews.Wow, but expand because obviously Hamas, even in the name, is what Islamic resistance movement, it is purely Islam.And you can't, no matter how much the international community wants to get away from that they can't.And of course that is the fear that that religious context pulls other nations in.That is obviously the big fear.
Well, look, other nations know this stuff. Don't you think Jordan knows this stuff? Don't you think Saudi Arabia knows this stuff?Why do you think in Saudi Arabia, people like you and me cannot visit Al -Harabayn, cannot visit Al -Kaaba, cannot visit the Medina?Why do you think that is? Because we are considered filth.We're not allowed because we are Christians and Jews. We are not allowed to enter those cities.Not even Donald Trump went there when he visited Saudi Arabia.Nobody can go there unless you're a Muslim.So it's not that they don't know that stuff. It's we on our side who are pretending this stuff does not exist because we are uncomfortable discussing it because it makes us uncomfortable discussing it.Nobody wants to talk about it because nobody wants to create ripples. It's time.This is why we talk about why Islam needs reforming and why these moderate leaders need to stand up and speak up.But the moderate leaders only stand up and speak up out of fear of Israel and out of respect for Israel.Sadat signed the peace treaty with Israel, not because he loved the Jews so much, but because after the 67 war and the 73 war, they realized they cannot beat the Jews.And if you cannot beat the Jews, okay, you have to live with them.We might as well live in peace. He realized, I'm not gonna spend the rest of my days fighting with Israel.And that's why Sadat said, let's sign a peace treaty.Jordan did the same thing. Jordan followed, not because they loved Israel so much, Because they realized look we have been involved with war with Israel and 57 and 67 and 73. We're not gonna be able to win against them.They are there to stay we might as well have peace. Notice today after all the problems. This is where you are seeing now more writers in the Arabic press. Writing whether in Egypt and Jordan if we would have known Israel could be defeated. Maybe we shouldn't have signed the peace treaty with Israel. People, you know, I know Israelis want to be tolerated. They talk about tolerance all the time.Oh, tolerance, tolerance is a major thing in the Jewish language.I would much rather be respected than tolerated because people tolerate you only for so long as long as they have to tolerate you.But when they respect you, tolerance becomes a side effect of respect because they're not going to want to mess with you. And so this is why, you know, this is an issue that more people need to be talking about.And this is why we need to stand with Israel. We need to support Israel.Israel is truly the front line on this war against Western civilization.Israel is the pinnacle. It's the tip of the spear. We need to realize that Iran, which calls Israel the great Satan.Remember, Israel is the little Satan.We are the big Satan. We are the end goal.Israel is just in the way in the Middle East. Iran wants to establish hegemony, and Israel is just an eyesore in its shoulder.Tell me, because those countries around, and you obviously have an understanding growing up in Lebanon, you look at Lebanon and Syria being countries in chaos, obviously Hezbollah based up there in the north in Lebanon, but then you've got also on the other side the kind of the economic side that Israel have normalized ties with countries, trade links, and the relationships with Egypt and Jordan are probably better than they have been in the past.And then of course, you've got Iran being the outlier that anything can happen there, literally.How does that kind of fit in that closeness with some countries and not wanting tension because realizing that money talks and other countries that are in a mess and therefore anything can spring up and spark things further?
Well, peace leads to economic prosperity.Right now, the reason why they are making money with Israel in Jordan and in Egypt and in Qatar and in those areas that signed, like Dubai, and those areas that were involved in the Abraham Accord as well that Trump was trying to put together and bring together.Peace brings prosperity along with it. And when you don't have peace, you don't have the prosperity.And right now, even though we're talking about prosperity and economic cooperation, how many Israelis do you think right now would dare walk in Egypt wearing their yellow star? Any street in Egypt.How many Israelis do you know right now can go or will go vacation in Jordan and wear their yellow star and walk down the street?Zero. Zero. You and I know the truthful answer to that question. Zero.So, people have economic prosperity and they have peace with you when they respect you, when they perceive you as strong.Thankfully, that is holding in Jordan, that is holding in Egypt.Hopefully, it's going to hold in other countries as well.The reason in Lebanon and in Syria and those other countries, they don't have peace with Israel is because they've got Iran supporting them fight Israel.You've got Iran trying to build another counter power to America in the Middle East.So Iran is working with Russia, which is supporting Assad in Syria.Remember, Russia propped up Assad in Syria and kept him protected.He is still here. What was the last time we heard anything about Bashar Assad in Syria?Remember five years ago it was all the news. He gassed his own people.Speaking of gassing his own people, How come we were not seeing demonstrations in the streets in every major city across the globe about the six thousand Muslims in Syria who were gassed by their own leader Bashar al Assad. Well, where were those demonstrations? What those lives don't matter? Only Palestinian lives matter? You know, yeah, the double standard is mind boggling, but the reason why Hezbollah is empowered, Syria is empowered is because they are funded by Iran. And they will continue to be funded by Iran as long as America has a weak president like senile Joe Biden or Obama before him, who empowered Iran, who sent pallets of money to Iran like Obama in the middle of the night in cash on pallets landed at the airport.Biden, right before this whole brouhaha, gave $6 billion to Iran that now we're trying to pause and put a pause on so they cannot touch it.Why? That's exactly how Iran can use the money to fund terrorism.When you have a president like President Trump, who basically had Iran almost suffocating, he had tightened the rope around Iran's neck so much with the sanctions, they were on the verge of collapse.But unfortunately, you saw what happens with the election in the United States.We have now senile Joe Biden sitting at the White House. And again, Iran is back being empowered, courtesy of the Democratic Party in the United States.
Well let me ask you about that international community response because it's been initially intriguing watching all the voices come out in support of Israel because you can't do anything else when you see what happened on October the 7th.We've then seen the massive demonstrations, we have them every weekend here in London, all over the world, we see it on social media.And there's that pressure on governments and it's intriguing to watch, obviously Biden initially coming on in support of Israel.That goes against the Democrat party.There'll be tensions there. How do you see kind of all that playing out?
Actually, can I answer the thing about Biden, you know, going and supporting Israel, you know, which was against the Democratic Party? Okay, let's be clear.Biden was not there to support Israel.Biden was forced Israel to invite him, Blinken, showing up immediately in Israel, sitting with the War Cabinet for seven hours, trying to convince them not to go into Gaza, forced them to invite Joe Biden.Joe Biden went there because Joe Biden knew as long as he is in the Middle East, he is basically Hamas's human shield, which will stop Israel from invading Gaza.As long as Biden was in Israel, Israel was not gonna go into Gaza.And the reason why Biden was there is to tell Israel, look, we're not going to give you or stand with you or give you the bunker buster bombs unless you agree on humanitarian aid to Gaza and to allow the humanitarian aid to enter.Biden was not there to support Israel.Biden was there to twist Israel's arm to agree to the Biden handlers, because Biden doesn't have a brain, it's whoever handling Biden, telling Biden that, you know, we need to send support for Hamas.We need to allow these trucks to enter and give gate to Israel.And they told Israel, we are not going to give you bunker busters unless you agree to that.Knowing that they had Israel by the you know what. Israel needed the bunker busters because that's the only way they can bomb the tunnels before they go into Gaza.They needed to be able to block and destroy those tunnels before they enter Gaza on the ground.And that's why Biden was there.Biden was not there because he loves Israel. He wants Israel to be strong.Biden was there for a reason, and the reason was more to benefit Hamas than to actually benefit Israel.We've seen the same from the media initially, as what else could you do, in these pictures from the seventh but then I've certainly witnessed a slow change certainly in the UK looking at the European media all focusing on, well these poor people they're simply living their lives, they're in a hospital that gets attacked by the Israelis and the suffering in the pictures and that's coming out and Israel have always had a PR problem in the media always and you see this beginning to come out again.Yes they still and they still don't know how to defend themselves even though they've got a Hasbara department you know we're willing to get together and give some tips to the Israeli government on how to defend themselves, on how to do PR but they don't and look I have sent emails to Israel I have personally I have appealed to the Israeli government to release the footage, the Hamas footage of the massacres that they have done.Israel has not released it yet. The world needs to see the images just like ISIS.You know, Hamas recorded their atrocities just like ISIS used to record theirs.ISIS used to send theirs to Al Jazeera and Al Jazeera gladly aired it of the beheading of the 20 Christian cops on the shores of whatever they beheaded them, or whatever, massacres, burning a guy in a tank, a pilot.I mean, remember, ISIS used to brag about these things, and Al Jazeera was glad to show all these images.On the other hand, Israel is reluctant to release the Hamas footage.Shooting the rape, shooting the cutting of a mother's stomach and getting the baby out.I mean, it is horrific images that the world has not seen yet.So this is exactly what gives the Palestinian a way out to saying, oh, it's ill horror. It's all hearsay None of this happened.This is all Israeli lies. Meanwhile Israel's killing all these Palestinians, which is absolutely not true. I mean the Palestinians who are the Ministry of Health are broadcasting information out the, exaggerated beyond exaggeration.I mean they're talking about that 30,000 people dead in Gaza so far and all the wounded and injured. Really?There are 3,000 hospital beds in Gaza. So where are the rest?Where are they? Show us images. Okay, so 30,000 people died.Where did you bury them? Where are they? Where did you bury them?I mean, you know, the numbers don't add up. The Gazans are not talking about how many Hamas soldiers have died.So far from the beginning of this war, we have not heard about one Hamas soldier dead.Really? With all the bombing, not one soldier dead?What about the heads of Hamas that died? Not one? We hear it from Israel when they kill somebody, but we don't hear it from Hamas. So we know the numbers are lying.Israel needs to come out and show the world the footage that they have, the monstrosities that Hamas committed against Israel, perpetrated against Israel.And I think if Israel does that, we will see a little bit of a change on the world stage with the sympathy.But Israel is not releasing those messages and all they're hearing is from the Palestinians saying this is all lies, nothing really happened.Otherwise Israel would have showed it. You know, Israel talks about beheaded children. We haven't seen anything yet. They've got to show it.And so that's the problem.And again, the media is always on the side of the Palestinians because the Palestinians scream and yell and talk about feelings while the Israelis are about logic.Israelis talk about legal stuff.You know, resolution, you know, UN article resolution 242, article one and two, they send you these big generals who speak with heavy accents, while the Palestinians, on the other hand, talk about.Oh, the poor old woman sitting in the hot sun in Gaza at a cross point for eight hours.She was about to faint and pass out because the bloody Israelis wouldn't let her pass.So the Palestinians talk about human suffering.They paint images with their words, while the Israelis talk about resolution 242, article one and two. That's how Israel loses the PR relationship, the PR relation.
Let me finish off on kind of how this plays out. I mean, can you defeat Hamas?Obviously Netanyahu, this is his third time as PM.He has been a fixture on the Israeli political scene since what, the mid 90s?Probably before then, but Prime Minister since 96 in three spells.I mean, he's fighting for his legacy as well.And I'm wondering, it actually is, is it achievable to destroy an enemy that not only has absolute hatred for you, but also has spent so long preparing for this.And Israel thought when they pulled out of Gaza in 2005, they thought that's it.We're now out of this, but now they've been sucked back in.So, kind of as you look ahead, BB's legacy, but also is it possible to actually get rid of this neighbour that is always on the edge of attacking?
You cannot get rid of an enemy that doesn't fear you.Back when Israel actually fought wars to win wars, not caring what the UN thought, not caring about the world media, back when Israel won 67, back when Israel won 73, the whole world was on the side of Israel.Israel fought a bloody war without caring what the UN thinks of Israel.So when Israel fought wars to win wars the people respected Israel when the new Israeli population started fighting wars thinking.Oh is the UN gonna like us? Oh my gosh. We know that you're gonna say bad things about us.Oh my goodness. What is America gonna think about us and the new generation wanted to live in a place? Oh, we don't want to fight wars anymore.We want to leave, you know. We want to have peace with them, this whole new weak generation who thought we can have peace with our enemies because, after all, we're all wonderful, and we all want to have a party, and we all want to go to concerts.And of course, Palestinian children would love to attend concerts as well.And of course, Palestinians want to live in peace as well.The Israeli side forgot what it's like.Because they had moved so far away from the Holocaust, they forgot how much people hated them.And when people hate you so much, I think this was a wake -up call to Israel to realize people really want to kill you, and not only kill you in Israel.They want to kill the Jews anywhere else in the world.They hate the Jewish people. When you see people in America screaming death to the Jews, when you see people in Australia screaming, annihilate the Jews, when you hear people from Europe on the streets, you know, less than 100 years since the Holocaust, screaming, kill the Jews.The Jewish people worldwide need to realize we have to create a country where we have to fight to survive, period. It's about us.It's not about anybody else. People in Australia do not want to kill the Americans.They're not saying kill all the Christians. They're not saying wipe the Buddhists off the map. They want to wipe the Jews off the map.So we need to defend ourselves. And so, for Netanyahu.Netanyahu's legacy is going to be, he fought as hard as he can for Israel.It's the weaklings in Israel who got so distracted and the little minutiae about whatever.And I'm not familiar with the politics inside Israel. You know, obviously I'm an outsider. I have no idea what they were fighting about.You know, we hear on the outside they were fighting over the judges and the judicial system, but obviously we're not members of the country.We do not know the intricacies of the inner fighting or the disagreements within whatever country.But when you look at the big scope, when you look at the world picture, at policies, like I mentioned to you at the beginning of this interview, I don't vote for a man, I vote for policies.Because like I said in the beginning of this interview, when I started my organization, George Bush was in power, Obama came to power, Trump came to power, Biden is in power, Biden's going to go, whoever else is going to come to power.I look at policies, not the man. The man going to come and go.And what Israel needs is a man who is willing to fight for the security and safety for Israel.Forget the name. Look at the policies.Are the policies good for Israel's survival?Is Iran going to fear an Ahud Barak or are they going to fear Netanyahu?Is Iran going to fear a lefty controller of Israel or as a right wing war hawk controller of Israel.You have to think through your enemy's eyes in order to secure your own safety.And so the only way Israel, Israel is going to be judged, not Netanyahu as a leader, but Israel, Israel's leadership in general, because Israel is a democratic nation and it's more than one man.It's a leadership. They elect their representative.And so Israel is going be judged whether the Jews took their eye off the ball and became too weak and too gullible to think they can have peace with people who repeatedly say, we hate you, we want to kill you and the Jews are not listening to those and they are not hearing the lessons of history, believe those who say they want to kill you because they usually follow through that's how history is going to judge Israel, not Netanyahu as a person, but Israeli leadership in general.
Brigitte Gabriel, I love having you on. Your insights on not only Islam, but the region in the Middle East is phenomenal. I love the work that ACT for America do, actforamerica.org, one of the premier grassroots organizations in America that will show the viewers and listeners how to get involved and how to really make a difference. So thank you so much for joining us today.
Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you for having me with you. And I encourage everybody, If you love Israel, if you agree with my point of view and the way I was discussing, please go to actforamerica.org and join us.We work on national security policy, and we believe Israel is a part of America's national security.That's how we were able to censure Rashida Tlaib. We led the charge in censuring Rashida Tlaib in Congress.We led the charge in isolating the support for Israel from the big bill in finance to make sure Israel gets the support.If you are a lover for Israel, please go to our website, actforamerica.org.Take action on our Act Now National. We have many bills right now to support Israel and the Jewish people and Israeli policies.Please take action. If you are an American watching us right now, anywhere in the world, please take action on our Act Now campaign and go to actforamerica.org.Thank you so much, Peter, for having me with you. It's always such a pleasure to be with you.
I love having you on and it's perfect that you've left the viewers with something they can actually do because I think often people feel maybe powerless in situations and it's great that this, at the finishing this interview, they can go and they can go to the website and they can actually sign up and make a difference.So thank you for what you do and Brigitte, thank you for your time today.
Thank you, my friend. Have a great day.

Pierre Kory MD - Is ”Shedding” the Greatest Scandal of the Jab?

Show Notes and Transcript
Dr Pierre Kory is a doctor who saw the COVID narrative unfold in front of his very eyes as he worked in his hospital. He was one of the very first voices recommending the use of Ivermectin which is the subject of his book that was published earlier this year. But he joins Hearts of Oak today to discuss shedding. Dr Kory has just written a nine part Substack on whether shedding has been the greatest scandal of the jabs. In it he shows how everything we were told was in fact wrong regarding the mRNA shots. Not only do the spike proteins and LNP's not stay in one place in the recipients body, but they can be transferred, from the jabbed to the un-jabbed. We look into the evidence for this and question if this means that the harms and adverse effects can be passed on to those who refused the shot?
Pierre Kory, MD, MPA is a Pulmonary and Critical Care Specialist. Co-Developer of effective, evidence/expertise-based COVID Treatment protocols with the medical professionals and science giants of the Front-Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance
Connect with Pierre...X                        https://x.com/PierreKory?s=20SUBSTACK         https://substack.com/@pierrekoryWEB                  https://drpierrekory.com/
War on Ivermectin: The Medicine that Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic (Hardback, e-book, audio-book)https://amzn.eu/d/9vEv1QV 
Interview recorded 10.11.23
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more... https://heartsofoak.org/connect/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
Transcript
(Hearts of Oak)
Dr. Pierre Kory, it is wonderful to have you with us today.Thanks so much for your time.
(Pierre Kory MD)
Great. Thanks, Peter. Good to join you. 
Great to have you.And of course, people can follow you @PierreKory is your Twitter handle and of course, your Substack Pierre Kory Medical Musings dot com.That is in the description for those watching and also any of the podcast listening on the go that is all available.And before we kick in, just for the viewers, Pierre is ICU in Lung, specialist, highly published expert in treating COVID -19, all its phases.And I remember you highlighting the benefits of ivermectin really early on.You're also the president and chief medical officer of the non-profit organization, Frontline COVID -19 Medical Care Analysis.And your latest book, War on Ivermectin, The Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic was published just earlier this year.And that is available again, all the links are in the description.Pierre, I want to get into your sub -stack, Shedding. Is Shedding the Greatest Scandal of the Job?But I think I've come across you quite a bit.I possibly was back whenever you did that interview with Joe Rogan and with Bret Weinstein. And that was probably, what, first half of 2021, wasn't it?
It was actually June of 2021. They were pretty close together, yeah.
And how, the thing, because I've talked to Robert Malone about how things changed for him slightly after doing Joe Rogan.I guess it was a similar experience for yourself.Yeah, I don't know, maybe in good and bad ways.I mean, it was, my career hadn't ended yet, but I don't know if that was one of the triggers for it. was going to happen anyway.But I should say my former career didn't end yet.But, you know, from my standpoint, I think it brought the knowledge of the efficacy of ivermectin to, you know, a significant portion of, I guess you could say, the world.
Absolutely. And before we jump in, obviously people can watch you, you'll be speaking at the International COVID Summit over in Bucharest and we will certainly be putting out the links for that and people can watch the live stream.So the viewers want to find a little bit more, just days later you'll be there in Romania.But if I did, on Substack, the issue on shedding, something that's come up a lot.And you've, I think you've done nine different parts of it, different articles on shedding.Maybe I could start just by asking you why you believe this is such an important topic, because you put a lot of time, a lot of research, it's all there with the references.There is a lot of information. I'm wondering why you felt it was so important to focus on this topic at this time.
That's a good question. I mean, I would say is two -fold. Number one is, you know, I have a private practice which specializes in the treatment of long COVID and long VAX, which is essentially a severe chronic fatigue syndrome, been around for decades, but, and it's typically caused by infections.But with SARS -CoV -2 or COVID -19, it's occurring at a very high rate.And in our practice of over a thousand patients, I mean, we have maybe a couple of dozen patients where they know that their chronic symptoms will flare or worse, or they'll kind of relapse and go backwards.And they report repeatedly around exposures to vaccinated people.And so we saw the phenomenon occurring clinically.And you know, it's always been talked about because people kind of was like, is shedding possible? I don't think people ever really looked into it.But when I travel and I speak and I go to conferences or lectures, I will tell you the first question at every Q and A is, is shedding real?Is it happening? And, you know, there was, there's bits and pieces of evidence that we had to suggest that it could happen.I think my clinical anecdotes are somewhat unconvincing because people don't have the science for why it would happen.And so, you know, I finally decided to say, you know, what is known?What can we find out? And I was absolutely shocked, just shocked at what I discovered.You know, I work largely off of a paper written by Helene Banoun from a very prominent institute in France, but she did this work independently.And she covered, you know, the history of regulatory standards for gene therapy products.So kind of the first points I make in that series is that number one, the COVID mRNA vaccines meet the definition, the FDA's definition of a gene therapy product, right?Which is anytime you inject genetic material into someone which is then transcribed into a protein, that's gene therapy.And gene therapies are proliferating. It's not just the vaccines.And if you look back into the history of gene therapies, You know, the regulatory standards are that shedding can happen with these things.They define shedding as the excretion of any bacterial or viral product of the vaccine and or protein of the vaccine.So whatever the protein is, is doing, can that product be, be excreted, right, or shed.And the FDA has clear statements in regulatory documents from 2015 that all gene therapy products must undergo not only animal but human shedding studies.So the fact that our regulators knew that this was required had essentially mandated it.And then to find out somewhat unsurprisingly at this point that those studies were not done because there's many types of studies that weren't done, right, we were doing science at warp speed.And so I'm finding that, you know, the first thing I found is really concerning emphasis that these things should be studied.And then actually a colleague of mine, Sasha Latypova, I was talking to her about shedding a few weeks ago.And she said, you know, I came across a gene therapy product where in its insert, it clearly warns that the gene therapy can be excreted.It was for an eye disease.It can be excreted in tears and secretions and dressings and that you should take special care.They said for seven days and that's an issue we can talk about later is how long can the shedding go on?But clearly it's a risk. It's a known risk of gene therapy products.And here we go. We launch a global genetic therapy vaccine campaign without doing shedding studies.And that's kind of like the first thing that I found. And I was like, whoa, this isn't just hearsay or social media inventions.I mean, this is really coming out of the regulators framework.
But of course, the passing on of something wouldn't be an issue if it was absolutely safe.So they're separate to find out whether shedding happens or not, but it wouldn't be an issue.But yet right at the beginning of, I think, the first article, you highlight that the manufacturers, the regulatory authorities would have seen the the excess deaths and the vaccine injuries from VAERS.That data was there early on. 
They've ignored this.I mean, I mean, let's put this all into context. Right.So the lack of sufficient safety studies is should be unsurprising when you see how this campaign was conducted.Right. So they were rushed to production and, you know, disseminated and championed across the world.But you know, the only way and along with that, we saw those of us COVID scientists, we saw unending censorship and propaganda.So the censorship started very early, right? You start talking badly about the vaccines, you got de-platformed off of Twitter off of any social media.So there's like no tolerance for anyone questioning or bringing up concerns.The vaccine injured were not only getting pulled down off social media, but then they were getting attacked by others, right?Because of this, this propaganda campaign that they're safe, effective, do it for grandma, save all of us.And then they kind of presented the unvaccinated as these villains, right, that there was a scourge causing all of this.I mean, it was absurd what they were doing. But the censorship and propaganda has been absolutely shocking to me. And it's on every facet of this vaccine.And, you know, let's put shedding in the context of all that we've learned about the vaccine. It's just the latest.I mean, if the story can't get worse, or actually, I should say, I can't imagine how could get worse, because to me, the shedding should also be thought about in terms of what we recently discovered, which is that all the Moderna and Pfizer vials were contaminated with DNA fragments and DNA plasmids, you know, with very scary promoter sequence in there that we know promote cancer and integration into the genome.So if those can be excreted, and transmitted and absorbed by someone, you know, I have worries, right?I'm not vaccinated, but you know, I live in a world I travel, I circulate, I meet around 1000s of unvaccinated people a month. What is the risk to me?Now, I'm not someone who gets symptomatic from being exposed to vaccinated people.I think that's a small proportion. And I don't know how big or small that proportion is. I think it's a minority.But it really is quite troubling. All that we're finding out about the vaccines, you know, the life insurance industry exploding with, you know, huge spikes in the healthiest members of society.You know, the death claims being paid out going into the billions.And, you know, the life insurance industry is weird. And put that in the context, right, whereas literally, our public health authorities are saying nothing to see here safe and effective.And those of us are screaming, look at the life insurance industry data.And, and that that's only some parts of the data, the disability roles, right?Government data showing an explosion of people landing on disability who were employed, right? They were employed.These weren't people who were unemployed and disabled and finally got disability.They went from full employment to disability. And we saw that all temporarily related to the proliferation of mandates.So, so that seems really bad, but to go back to shedding, Peter, you know, so the two things, right, is that there are regulatory standards.The shedding should be done because they are a possibility. They're in inserts of similar products.But how do these things shed and the, you know, although I've said, you know, these should be understood as a gene therapy product, I think it's much more important to categorize them for what they are, which is they're a nanoparticle technology.So nanoparticles are these tiny little sacks with a fatty membrane, the lipid nanoparticle, and they enclose the mRNA.And when you inject those lipid nanoparticles, they're supposed to be able to enter the cell and then deliver the genetic instructions to the cell to make the protein.The problem is they don't stay locally in the arm, right?So in order to shed from someone, you'd have to get it to distribute to either other organs, tissues, or fluids in the body.And all of the nanoparticle technology or the review papers, and, you know, it's probably 10 or 15 years now that nanoparticles have been studied as a therapeutic delivery mechanism, all of the papers say over and over more studies need to be done to ensure safety or to evaluate the potential toxicity because the nanoparticles disseminate widely throughout the body. We already know that with these COVID mRNA vaccines.We have FOIA documents that we've discovered where regulators flat out said that they knew that the lipid nanoparticles were distributing, but once it enters the body, it starts to produce spike.Now spike protein can also be taken up by the natural counterpart of the synthetic lipid nanoparticles, which we use two different terms.So the LNP or the lipid nanoparticles is a synthetic thing. That's how they enclose the mRNA.But in our bodies, we also have nanoparticles, which are called exosomes, which are essentially the kind of function as hormones.They direct cellular activities and function. and so they circulate widely in our body and exosomes can enclose the spike.So what's injected into us distributes widely, the product spike protein also distributes widely and can be enclosed in exosomes.And then when you talk about these exosomes or LMPs, essentially these nanoparticles, the most salient thing to know about them is that they literally can pass through almost any physiologic barrier.So they can cross into breast milk, they can cross the placenta, they can be inhaled into the lungs and exhaled in the breath.They can enter through skin, through skin follicles, excreted into sweat.So they're literally almost...I wouldn't say that they can. Yeah, I guess I would say they literally can distribute and disseminate widely. And so so the picture gets worse.It just gets worse and worse. The science is absolutely shocking that we're using nanoparticle technology, where when you look at, you know, kind of landmark papers in the field, they're all crying out for more studies.And actually, one of the most shocking things I discovered in one review paper, they literally state that currently there's 1 ,814 consumer products using nanoparticle technology.So this is an example of the human race proliferating a technology where they don't even know the short term or the long term risks.In fact, in these vaccines, they're purposely not looking for those short term and you can bet they're not looking for long term risks.There's a lot to unpack there, the passing over from blood, placenta, I think it was I first came across that name, Naomi Wolf, I think it was Dr.Thorpe had done it and others have have highlighted this.The information is out there and yet it's just business as usual.I thought whenever it came out that it was passing over breast milk, passing over through placenta, passing over to the unborn child, then suddenly there'll be a wake -up.And that really has shocked me that that hasn't woken up people.
No, I think the waking up, although we're all trying to do it, we're censored either overtly in terms of major media, mass media ignoring us, with exceptions.I would say conservative or right -of -centre media, at least in the US, seems much more open to discussing all of these issues, but it's what we call the mainstream or corporate controlled media, which definitely has a liberal tend, but they tend to support the government, the agencies, and these prevailing narratives.So it's very hard for us to get our word out to the masses.So one of the things that myself and a colleague would talk about is that, you know, the group of scientific experts that have really studied COVID openly, objectively, debated, brought forth the data, you know, we're still a small circle of the population.And so that all of this knowledge resides in what we call private knowledge.And our entire efforts are trying to bring this private knowledge to common knowledge.It's impossible. Because you have this iron dome of the media sphere, which doesn't allow anything adverse to be disseminated.And in return, you know, shoots at us nothing but disinformation, right? which is information, it's basically propaganda, which is, you know, a story or a message to get you to think or act in a certain way.And you're seeing these constant messages of safety and efficacy, and the need to get more and more of them.And we're sitting there screaming, looking at the toxicity and lethality data. And it, it's very difficult, but I do think that there might be a shift going on.I do think the answer is in independent and alternative media that are not influenced by, you know, the pharmaceutical industry and their advertisers.And that's really where I think the truth can be found. But you're not going to find it in major newspapers.You're not going to find it in high impact medical journals.They will not publish this stuff.So it's a really strange world we live in. I mean, it's quite dystopian, to be honest, especially when you're aware of everything that we're aware of and that we've deeply studied, and no one will listen, I won't say no one, we do reach a certain portion of the population, I don't know what number that is, but we want that number to grow.We're really just trying to do the right thing here. We want the average citizen to be fed accurate information upon which to make decisions, and instead they're being fed with truly manipulated and propagandized information that's trying to direct their actions.A lot of the terms you've mentioned have become more and more discussed, shedding or gene therapy or ivermectin.There are lots of terms that we've come across and I think for me as just a non -medical person, member of the public, it is shocking to hear that these have been talked about. There have been papers on these.It's not as if this has just appeared, these concepts have just come up with a group of people who are speaking misinformation, which is the term used.These are part and parcel, these terms are part and parcel of medical understanding.Yeah, and you're right, so you brought up misinformation because that was actually the point I wanted to make, is that not only is the censorship overt in which, you know, they don't interview us, they don't give us a platform, they don't give us an opportunity to even debate on a show or bring forth our evidence.So that's like literal censorship. But the other form of censorship is the labelling and attacking of our credibility, right?So they dismiss us as misinformation, as disinformation, as un-credible. You see all these whenever I'm mentioned in the media, you see all of these descriptors like controversial fringe, I've heard quack, right wing, which I didn't used to be.I am now but I don't want to get into politics. But um, you know, and it's always attacking our credibility.And that is a form of censorship, because as soon as they make you appear un-credible to the public, guess what, the public doesn't want to listen to, who wants to listen to some controversial doctor who is a misinformation is whose papers have been retracted, you know, all of the things that they've done to us, formerly highly credible academics, like, if you look at my non-profit, right, the FLCCC, you know, I should say the flcc .net.That's our website, if you look at us, in In our specialty, we're five of the most highly published, highly respected experts in our specialty.Paul Marek, who helped found the organization, is the most published practicing intensivist in the history of our specialty.So you look at the five of us who've published, cumulatively, I think something around 1 ,500 peer -reviewed articles throughout our careers.We have a cumulative 120 years in academic medicine, and suddenly we're fringe, quack, right -wing anti -vaxxers? I mean, it truly was shocking.And all of our careers, academic careers, have ended. We're not employable in the system anymore.I'm just trying to describe just how bad the state of science is.And science is still science. Science is good, but it's the influences and the corruption of science.The power of the pharmaceutical industry is absolutely immense.And of course, you're on the front line. I've talked to many who are academics, who are researchers who look at this, but you were there.I don't know whether you still, I've read about you being punished for speaking up, but you would have obviously seen things happening as this progressed through your own eyes, through your own practice.And it wasn't just what you were hearing, it was what you were witnessing.
Oh, yeah.I mean, we've we knew things. And that's that's been maybe it's been so chronic now that I'm sort of used to it.But I can go back to those first few months and the things that we knew when I say we, meaning the group of us five, right?Because when we first started the organization and started our work building protocols, we really focus on the ICU phase of the disease or the hospital phase of the disease. We weren't focused on early treatment.We were buried in ICUs, drowning in COVID patients, reading papers incessantly, talking to doctors who had survived the New York wave, that first surge in New York, which I was part of.I landed there April. I did five weeks in my old ICU in Manhattan.We talked to doctors in China and Italy. We learned things so quickly about steroids, hydroxychloroquine, any number, you know, use of anticoagulation.So our protocol from early on was not only mature, but there's not one element that we put on back in March of 2020 that we've taken off.All of them have stood the test of time, but we knew that clinically just based on our experience, expertise, knowledge of pathophysiology, and treating patients.And I want to bring that up because, you know, I listened to an interview with Bobby Kennedy maybe like a month or two ago.And one of the things he said, because I think someone asked the question, you know, what would you have done differently?And one of the things he said is he says, I would have immediately brought together a forum for clinicians, community physicians to share insights, develop, and that's real medicine, right?Especially in emergency, you want to know what people are doing.Is it working? Is it not? and we can share your experience.You know, we'll say, you know, we tried this, doesn't seem to have an effect.This seems to be really important.You can figure things out without these ridiculous randomized controlled trials, especially in a severe acute illness.I mean, it's pretty easy to tell when something's having a positive impact.So, you know, when I look back to those times, and that's just continued, the knowledge that we have gained, we're always in front of the system.And another reason why we're always in front of the system, not because we just have direct experience and observations, but we're doing research that they're not doing.They're wilfully not doing. I mean, like for instance, the shedding studies.I do wanna make one thing before I forget, Peter, that...And I kind of get uncomfortable talking about it because I don't want to betray my colleagues, but I know a group, a team of researchers who actually did do a shedding study.It's very close to publication. They didn't want to share it with us.But from what I understand is they took 100 unvaccinated women and exposed them to other vaccinated women.And then they look for the outcome of reports of abnormal menses.Right. And so apparently they were blinded. They didn't know, you know, exactly who they were up against.And I'm not even sure. Again, I haven't read the actual methods of the paper, but I do know that they're reporting highly positive findings.Meaning positive, meaning they are seeing and measuring a correlation between exposures to the vaccinated and then the development of abnormal menses in the unvaccinated.And that study, I would argue, should be done. And I think it's important you do it in a controlled fashion, but it does not advance our knowledge.We already know, and that was known within weeks of the rollout.You know what's happened on social media.Women all over the country reporting sudden, really disturbing changes in their menstrual cycles, many of whom did not get vaccinated.It was just as their colleagues and other people in their orbits were getting vaccinated.These women said, you know, I've been regular with uncomplicated menses for decades, and suddenly I'm having, you know, cramping, strange blood clots, heavy bleeding, irregular bleeding, long periods, you know, so many different disturbances were happening.And I'm going to tell you that has to be the nanoparticles that are getting absorbed.Either they're containing spike or the mRNA, which, and those things are inflammatory.They're disturbing something in the female body. So, but at least here we have a controlled study or will have a controlled study showing definitively cause and effect.
Because it is a requirement for the FDA to have those studies on shedding from gene therapy.I think in one of your Substack you mentioned Pfizer did a study on some rats, but it never was published.They literally haven't followed what they're supposed to follow.
No, and there's, you know, maybe this is another good thing we can talk about because, you know, for a long time in COVID, I couldn't understand why the government and its health agencies were behaving in the way I mean, pretty quickly figured out that obviously, they're under regulatory capture, the pharmaceutical companies are directing their behaviours.I mean, if you look at the policies that are being issued, every single one benefited a pharmaceutical industry interest.But what I couldn't understand was what was happening in society, which was the disappearance of biomedical ethics, respect for bodily autonomy, on putting a supreme emphasis on fully informed consent, right, you know, the famous pictures of the, the insert for one of the vaccines that it's blank, right.And so like, we're literally, you know, injecting people with things that we don't even know what the risks are.And, and then the disappearance of natural immunity. And I saw all of these strange things that I thought were bedrock principles, which guided our behaviour, especially as a medical system, they just disappeared.And it finally clicked to me why that happened. And what I discovered was based on the work of Todd Calendar, Sasha Latypova, Catherine Watts, right, they did this kind of legal investigatory work, where they look back over like a century of public health laws, other legislative laws around research.And they discovered that what these vaccines are labelled under or categorized under legally, is that they are a countermeasure.And I'm going to put the word military countermeasure in front of it.Because if you look at Operation Warp Speed, the COO in charge of Operation Warp Speed was a general from the military.We know that, number two, the pharmaceutical companies were all under contract with the Department of Defense, they didn't just bring their own, you know, come up with their own mRNA product, say, hey, we figured out a vaccine, and we're going to produce it and sell it.No, that the military contracted them to do it.And then, you know, when was the last time you've heard of two different pharmaceutical companies coming out with the same product at the same time, right Pfizer, Moderna, same exact time, they suddenly produce these barely tested products.And so you have to understand it as a military exercise.That's the only way I can understand all the behaviours and that's why we like...That's why the ethics of everything that happened change is because it was, I believe, it was a wartime mentality that we there was a perceived or actual attack by a bioweapon.And this was a countermeasure. And this is how you counteract a bioweapon is that you disseminate and launch this countermeasure in order, purportedly in order to save the population. Now, that's a whole other discussion with which is what they knew, did they make mistakes?Like, was this humanitarian catastrophe that they unleashed with the dissemination of a toxic medical product, was that an accident or was it wilful?And that those are discussions that it's very hard to get to but the results are the same. There's a humanitarian catastrophe.No it's huge and we're actually seeing a lot of stuff on AstraZeneca here in the UK which is a whole other issue but doesn't fit into this and I don't want to get side tracked. One of the other headings, one of your other articles was can you absorb lipid nanoparticles from being exposed?And I get, it's a question you said you got asked about the spike proteins, about the LNPs, about the mRNA passed over, does it stay in the body?Does everything get passed over? Does it still have the same potency, the same danger when it gets passed over?How have you answered some of those questions?
Yeah, but I think your question is a bit more specific because, So we definitely know that the lipid nanoparticles can be absorbed in any number of routes, right?And the reason why we know this is because there are numbers of studies of biomedical or biopharmaceutical companies developing these nanoparticles and delivering them through those routes.So there's one company developing a product that they're trying to deliver a gene gene therapy to a foetus and then so they're actually delivering it so it crosses the placenta.So we know it crosses the placenta because they've successfully done it.We know that there's a number of these products that can be administered to the skin, nebulized through the lungs, and so all of the routes can be done.Now here's the difference.When you're doing it as a therapy, right, there's probably an increased dose concentration, you know, instilled into the nebulizer, delivered as vapor, or administered as a cream. So those are probably high doses.So can just ambient exposure to the shedding of a vaccinated human, is there enough dose there to exert biological effects on the recipient?And we know that from all of those products, all of those delivery routes did lead to measured biologic changes in the body.That's how those therapies are working. And this whole area of nanoparticle therapeutics is expanding and exploding.And so we know that they can do it therapeutically and now can it happen accidentally and the evidence that I'll put for that is the many dozens of clinical anecdotes which again are these are just like very specific ones and if you look at the clinical anecdotes they're really interesting because the first part that I presented were ones that Scott, my partner in our practice, we observe, you know, just in taking histories and following our patients and caring for our patients.And we have a small cohort of patients who really had to make changes in how they're living their lives.They avoid big crowds. They avoid having people in their home who are vaccinated.And because each time they get ill, and some of them, the descriptions are just outlandish.I mean, And there's one woman who wrote to me from Australia who was probably the worst case.She is so physiologically sensitive that she put a whole list of insights, like of things that who sheds more, who shed less. There's also secondary shedding.Now, if you don't know what that means, secondary shedding is someone who gets exposed to a vaccinated, develop symptoms, and then is around like their partner, wife, or a family member, and then they get symptoms.And so there's a number of reports of even, so it's literally can go from a vaccinated to one and then to the other and both getting ill.And so the possibilities are limitless, but we started with our own clinical observations, very detailed from case notes and histories.And then I also had a couple of early treatment experiences with, I'm gonna call them shedding victims.Back in like March of 2021, two different women came to me after encounters with a practitioner. I think one had seen a massage therapist, the other one had seen an acupuncturist, and they had highly abnormal changes in their menstrual cycles.And they were really concerned, and they were convinced it was shedding.And in those two cases, they both actually normalized with treatment of ivermectin.There's very good reasons why ivermectin would do that.Basically, because it binds to spike protein. It's one of the most tightly binding medicines to spike protein.So, I think it mitigated those effects. It's also very anti -inflammatory.And so, you know, we know, and you can see it in a lot of the anecdotes that were submitted as many people report relief with taking ivermectin either singly or in frequent dosing.But the other thing about those clinical anecdotes that are submitted, many are submitted by physicians, microbiologists, different scientists.And so when you see their descriptions, I mean, it's very serious objective, they put in all of like the relevant variables that you'd want.And when you take a history to kind of rule in or rule other causes for the phenomenon and so when you read the Sontoli anecdotes it's overwhelmingly, if not compelling, it's convincing.I mean this is a real phenomenon that's happening. But again...What proportion of the population is capable of becoming symptomatic from being exposed to a vaccinated person.I think it's a small proportion that are physiologically sensitive, you know, like as a physician, you know, there's kind of three types of patients that you see, which is there are some which are like, you can call them almost like an ox or a bear, like nothing hurts them.Like, you can give them any pharmaceutical at any dose and they don't ever get side effects, they don't complain, and they just seem very resistant to, you know, outside exposures, pharmaceuticals, environmental.And then there's the great middle, which is, you know, variable sensitivities to environmental exposures.And then, you know, there's a distinct set of patients that I've had challenges treating with a cure because you have to use such low doses, you have to change doses slowly, you have to choose medicines carefully because they're so sensitive.And I think the vast majority of shedding victims, as it were, are the physiologically sensitive, but there are exceptions to that.There are definitely exceptions.I definitely have clinical anecdotes of people who got sick after close exposures who don't have that history of sensitivity.So I don't know what the true numbers are.
And of course, it's difficult to get the data, I assume, because people have been told safe and effective, therefore it can't be the jab I had.But then similar, if they even share that with the doctor, then the doctor has to listen and be respectful of that concern and not just shut it down.So even if those concerns are there, even if they're being raised, it's a big step to actually that data coming together and getting out and being open to the world to see?Yeah, I would say, you know, I don't know if you've seen some of these, you know, Rasmussen, the polling group, right?They're very highly respected as some of the top pollsters in the business.And, you know, their polls and surveys of the American population have been pretty astounding, right?They've asked certain questions, like most recently, you know, they asked a 1100 sample,do you know anyone who you think died as a result of the vaccine?And it was shocking. 25 % of the country said they did.And that number was evenly split between Republicans and Democrats.So the Republicans was 25%, Democrats were 24%. So it wasn't like a political bias against the vaccines.It's literally on an average sample, it was that many people thought someone died.Now I would love to see a survey because that's the only way we would know how many people truly are effected.I mean, you'd have to ask the question, like, do you believe you've ever gotten ill as a result of being exposed to either a vaccinated or recently vaccinated person?And I would love to know what that number is.I'm not affected. I mean, I'm around hundreds of unvaccinated all the time, I get nothing.I mean, actually, by the way, I'm one of those first categories, I'm pretty resistant to pharmaceuticals, even intoxicants, like, it's very hard to get me drunk and all that stuff. So I'm not kind of surprised that, you know, a spike protein, you know, it doesn't bother me.But, but you know, that DNA plasmid thing is what worries me, because that can be asymptomatic and subclinical.And if those lipid nanoparticles containing DNA plasmids with those promoters are capable, I'm capable of absorbing them, and they theoretically have the capacity to maybe integrate into my genome.Now, I'm getting some really uncomfortable areas, Peter, right? Because this affects everyone on earth.And we don't know the long term effects. And that's why I don't even know what to say about these vaccines anymore.It's dystopian. 
It is and I guess the industry does not want the information to get out that because people were told you get a jab in the arm and it stays there and suddenly if this is getting passed on it's moved from the arm and that changes a lot of the conversations and all the information that we're given to the public.100 % and I don't know when or how that's going to change but I guess my hope and belief is that the data on the toxicity and lethality is so immense that I don't know that they keep this under wraps forever, you know, and you are seeing cracks in this wall of censorship, you know, and this suppression of all this adverse information, I think you're seeing cracks, I think you can see more cracks with all the legal efforts that are happening, some of the discoveries around those legal cases.But again, even when you find something, it doesn't make headlines, it doesn't make the news, no one's, you know, no one's disseminating these new troubling discoveries that we're making.You know, it's funny, like, if you look, you know, I'll tell you about my experience that since I posted those sub stacks, I wasn't surprised, because I kind of knew that shedding was a real void of information.And like I said, a common question, so I knew there was general interest in it.But after I posted, I mean, who's reached out to me to learn more?It's folks like you, it's independent podcasters without financial conflicts of interest towards the information that they want to present.And so I'm in the usual media sphere that they've assigned us to, right, which is kind of walled off from the rest of society. But it's okay.I mean, I think there's a large audience that are in, you know, this sphere of, you know, listening to independent podcasters, deeply studied people, who like nuanced discussions, where you can ask questions, you can challenge me, you can say, well, how do you, why do you say that?What's your evidence for that? And like, so we can have these just, I think, really good scientific discussions.But yeah, but you know, Washington Post didn't come call me, New York Times didn't come calling, you know, you know, the big television stations didn't.And so it's not surprising. 
I guess talking about shedding is, that really does rubber stamp your misinformation to that group of society.You could have gone down a different avenue, but you went for, you've written on Ivermectin, you go for shedding.You go for those important issues.I'm wondering as you were looking through, putting this together, were there surprises?Did you see things you didn't expect? or were there any specific things that stuck out with you?
Yeah, I would say the FOIA discovered reports of, events that happened to breastfeeding infants that you like, I already knew that there were studies finding mRNA and spike protein in breast milk.I knew in a general sense that there had been breastfeeding reports, but when you actually find the document describing what happened to some of these infants, things like strokes, paralysis, respiratory arrest, seizures, you know, after a breastfeeding of a recently vaccinated mom, I mean, it was truly shocking.And then we have published papers showing that mRNA is present in breast milk for up to 48 hours.Where's the recommendation to breastfeeding women to not breastfeed for 48 hours after the vaccine?You know, not that that's an easy thing to do, but I mean, there's published evidence that they are ignoring.But yeah, I think it was the descriptions of the breastfeeding events.You know, the pregnancy data I'm already quite familiar with.The problem with the pregnancy data that I presented is that although we know that these vaccines are extremely dangerous for pregnant women and their foetuses because of the overwhelming, reports, and we have sudden increases now in maternal mortality, infant mortality, dropping birth rates, massive explosions, reports of miscarriages, stillbirths, you know, to VAERS.So we know it's a catastrophe, but I can't prove that it's directly a result from the passage of an LNP to the baby, because there's a lot of other things that the vaccine causes in the mother that could explain some of those phenomenon.But it truly is alarming, because it's in what we call the differential diagnosis of all those events happening to pregnant women.Is it because, or the loss of the baby, is it because those LNPs are getting to the baby and making them sick in some way?Or the spike protein is. My guess is that it's spike protein from the mom that's being shed or, you know, the word shed, you could also use the word transmitted or passed.I do think it's a spike protein being passed to the child that's causing a lot of the things that's being measured.Just can I finish off by asking you about the response?I think the latest part on your part nine, I think, is the response that you've had, cases coming forward.Can we just maybe touch on that? And then if there are people watching, listening to this, and they realize, actually, I've experienced this, is there a way for them to pass on that information to you?
Yeah, I would say you can make a comment on my sub stack.And I actually, I'm wondering, Peter, how much value it is for me to keep collecting the comments and then making new posts. because like each one of my posts in the series, if you look at the comment section, and that's what I did.So for my last two posts, I just pulled the most compelling and convincing descriptions that different subscribers or readers of mine posted.And, you know, to your question, what I found interesting about the post is that a few sentiments were expressed by the readers and subscribers.One, the one most satisfying was one of extreme gratitude for the work that I did, and the way I explained and presented all the science and evidence, people were just saying over and over, you know, how much they appreciate that work, so that they because they've always wondered about this, right.And I think I presented it in a rather, you know, somewhat succinct, although people could argue about that with nine posts on it.But in a clear, logical, marshalling and presentation of the evidence, I think people really felt grateful that they where, they felt themselves educated. That's one.The second sentiment I saw is the kind of what you kind of mentioned is that people after reading that, they started thinking of different symptoms and events and illnesses that happened to them.They said, you know what, now I realized I was shed upon.Now, there could be some recall bias, and those aren't the most compelling because the other parts of the comments, the ones that I know is that the people that read it, and they were like, yeah, not news.I knew this was real, because and then they would relate events that they have, they'd already made the diagnosis of shedding already.So these people already knew that it was real.And I think they just appreciated that I marshalled the science that supported what they were claiming was their reality, right?So it's now it's not an invention that you're making up, hey, I think I was shed upon and there's no science to support shedding.And so it was really just, you know, repeated, sort of thanks, appreciation and gratitude for me bringing up the topic.Researching the topic and supporting, you know, what they've found.And, and then the other is the anecdotes, which describe people who've had to under undertake rather dramatic changes to how they're living their lives. Right.Avoiding grocery, you know, some of the more sensitive ones, avoid grocery stores and crowds and try not to bring unvaccinated into their homes.And, you know, that's, shocking, right.And it's really impacting the lives of some of the population in that now they can't circulate in a general population.I mean, that that's coming at like out of a movie, right?Like, I don't want to bring up like the zombie movies or anything, but literally if you, you're, literally suddenly now you feel yourself at risk of getting sick by being around others in our society.I mean, I don't even know how to describe that.You're completely right. Let me just remind the viewers again, it is PierreKoryMedicalMusings.com, the Substack, the links are in the description.And again, his latest book, War on Ivermectin, The Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic.And of course, everything is on his Twitter link there.Dr. Pierre Kory, I appreciate you coming on. I've thoroughly enjoyed reading through that substack and following you over the last two, two and a bit years, I think. So thanks so much for giving us your time today.
Pleasure to meet you and look forward to Romania next week. 
Absolutely. Thank you. 
See you then. Awesome.
 

The Week According To . . . Karli Bonne’

Welcome to our weekend edition of free speech, straight talking and the return of Karli Bonne'.Hold onto your MAGA hats as The Cackling Conservative joins us for an hour of news driven chat and discussion, giving her unbridled opinions on some of the top stories bouncing around this week on the web, in the tabloids and from Karli's awesome social media!Tonight's talking points....- Karli visits The America First Warehouse.- Moody’s cuts U.S. outlook to negative, citing deficits and political polarization.- New York City Mayor Adams has his phone seized by FBI.- This is what happens when you go against MAGA.- A new survey of Republican county chairs reveals the door is closing for Trump’s opponents.- The Atlantic Magazine Admits: “Nothing is Going to Stop Donald Trump”- Trump leads Biden in six battleground states.- Viewing figures for third Republican debate drop by almost 50%- Ronna Resign: Another election, another RNC Train Wreck! - BillBlaster App: Call the 70 Republicans who voted to reward the Weaponized FBI with a new $300M headquarters.- Steve Bannon’s bid to avoid prison heads to appeals court.- How Covid crooks plundered over $280 BILLION of pandemic relief aid 
Get the BillBlaster App: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/billblaster/id6470323595
Karli Bonne' is a retired model, dancer and a Rockstar wanna be.Now she is a full blown MAGA maniac video clipper with three phones, continuously laughing at the establishment because it’s like holy water on a demon, and these demons must be eradicated.
If you are not following Karli, you should be!Here's all the links you need...Telegram: https://t.me/realKarliBonne (Midnight Rider Channel)Truth: https://truthsocial.com/@KarliBonneGETTR: https://gettr.com/user/karlibonne
Originally broadcast live 11.11.23
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more... https://heartsofoak.org/connect/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
Please subscribe, like and share!Links to stories...Karli's day outhttps://truthsocial.com/@KarliBonne/111389203614417777U.S. outlook https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/10/moodys-cuts-usa-outlook-to-negative-citing-higher-interest-rates-and-deficits.html  (SKB posted this) Mayor Adams https://truthsocial.com/@KarliBonne/111388252390969560MAGAhttps://truthsocial.com/@Kash/1113734671198469562024 Campaignhttps://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/11/10/trump-gop-county-chair-survey-00125631 The Atlantic Magazinehttps://x.com/gc22gc/status/1722976196680667384?s=20Trump  https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111383905917202990Republican debate https://truthsocial.com/@KarliBonne/111383670546098433Ronna McDanielhttps://truthsocial.com/@grrrgraphics/111381999951351647Bill Blaster https://truthsocial.com/@gracechong/111379238053859236Bannonhttps://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4300142-steve-bannons-bid-to-avoid-prison-heads-to-appeals-court/Covid crooks https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12734895/Covid-crooks-plundered-280-BILLION-relief-aid-buy-private-island-Florida.html

Dwight Schultz - Its Alright to be Dwight: #004

Welcome to 'Its Alright to be Dwight'A podcast with the television, film and voice actor Dwight Schultz, exclusive to Hearts of Oak.This episode Dwight waxes lyrical on The Department of 'Social' Justice', The Enduring Abuse of Donald Trump, The Mockery of Justice, Chief Justice John Roberts, Merrick Garland, Obama's Vision, Hope and Warnings, Transgender Acceptance, McConnell's peculiar ramblings, The Imposition of False Narratives and The Hard Left aligning with Islamist Organizations. 
A respected performer on Broadway, Dwight Schultz found everlasting fame by playing the certifiable "Howling Mad" Murdock on the action series "The A-Team" (1983-86).A living, breathing cartoon with a seemingly endless selection of voices and accents at his command, Murdock provided the air power for the A-Team's clandestine adventures, provided that his compatriots could break him out of the mental hospital where he resided.One of the show's most popular and memorable figures, Murdock ensured Schultz steady work on television and on the big screen playing Reginald Barclay in "Star Trek: The Next Generation"An accomplished voice actor, Dwight can be heard in numerous hit computer games and in countless animated shows. To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more... https://heartsofoak.org/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
Please subscribe, like and share!