5 Filters

Acclaimed interview of Bret Weinstein

OMG you’ve an awful lot of vids to catch up! The Baileys are magnifiques. Download ‘Farewell to Virology’ & give it to all your friends! Watch their monthly Q & A (- they’ve promised to tackle our question about epigenetics soon. . .)

Yes, we don’t dislike them.

Hi @AlanG this is their latest dated 13 02 2024 - I’ve enjoyed most of her vids I can see for free and shared FtoV to non believer friends who were impressed!

I thought it was useful to post under this thread as Weinstein falls into the Kirsh/Cummins bracket. Just to remind readers Cummins said ~even if I knew as a fact that virus’ didn’t exist I wouldn’t say anything as I want to win the battle and I have kids to feed ~ Cummins clearly knows that everytime a new “virus” is propagandised and a new jab comes out, he has another bout of “famous expert Cummins opposes new jabs”


1 Like

I think that Matthew Crawford’s recent piece linked here is worth reading in that regard.

It’s all happening over at Joe Mercola’s

1 Like

:frowning_face: :frowning_face: :frowning_face:

OMG. It looks as though Cremola’s outfit - a smooth, professional, multi-million $ and well staffed operation - has been nuked.
Sacked his CEO’s without warning, incommunicado with his family and seemingly dazzled by a mystic Rasputin figure that has come from nowhere, and talking like a madman himself, it’s hard to see how this can be extricated. Unless the guru really is a magical genius, but even then it’s unclear what will be extricated, with so many connections to the brand value being severed.
A new number two appeared at the helm to do the deeds - this is the blueprint that almost caused the instant downfall of America’s Frontline Doctors, and possibly Reiner Fuellmich too.

Thanks for the Crawford link - I’d stopped following him, as he was getting difficult to read, and also he seemed to have got caught up himself in a superior form of the blame game, one where it was never clear what the blame was even for. There was suddenly, just a lot of it about, as if it had been injected. And yet the targets seemed to be visibly tottering almost in order of their fairground number.
I rate Crawford highly but this seemed an unfathomable mess. Even when he posted to justify his accusations it was never possible to check where the problem lay. So it wasn’t more than a slight surprise when he revealed the toll his involvement had taken on him.

He’s now busy updating his list of connections - those conspiracy arrow diagrams that are so ridiculed from the likes of Paul Mason or Marianne Spring, the Center for Circulating Digital Hate. Except that unlike those professional propagandists, he is probably on the right lines, but can’t quite pin down who the agent is.
Crawford ruminates that multiple agents stirring the pot among the ‘Medical Freedom Movement’ would make perfect sense and he’s probably right - it would explain the unfathomability of the personal disputes - especially if, whoever the shit stirrers are, they are resourced to play the long game.
I hope he keeps it together and can step back from his involvements and his tormentors and tantalizers, and onto at least reliable ground, where IMO he excels.
Don’t know how Joe can reach the shore though. What a loss that will be - the biggest spreader of ‘misinformation’ :wink: . CCDH will be able to buy another phone box.
Thanks for the tip KE.

1 Like

They all need to go, Mercola too. Whatever usefulness to us they may have had has long been superseded by their usefulness to the Biosecurity agenda brigade.

Surely the most useful service to the Biosecurity agenda brigade is to shoot down their most effective opponents?

The best advocates for the biosecurity agenda are the ‘virus’ & ‘virus lab-leak’ pushers. Be very afraid of the invisible worm that flies in the night (and by day, especially if you’re of a vulnerable mental disposition). Only the WHO, the government, ‘the science’, the pharmaceutical corporations, the measures, rigorous enforcement of correct behaviour & thinking can save you. We’ve already watched ‘it’ being modelled (literally in the case of ‘the virus’) and many people will still fall for the next exciting instalment courtesy of the invisible worm propagandists. Good riddance I say.

1 Like

So if they are so useful to the biosecurity leaders, why are they spending fortunes trying to suppress them.

Seems like the most vocal no-virusers have the same targets (McCullough Kory, Cremola etc) as the GICs have. How can you explain that?

For Cremola himself, life goes on. Here he is with Del Bigtree in a long interview - though it’s more of a chat, very easily read through, at whatever pace.


His outfit is still functioning, at the moment at least. There’s no sign that all is not well with Joe personally.
In the last quarter so he mentions his new stuff, though not in great detail. He is writing books and many will be out this year he says.

He’s seen a big light of some kind apparently, but due to his sudden and drastic actions it’s hard to see it ending well.

Ah yes, the Del Bigtree who touted Geert Vanden Bossche like there was no tomorrow. Another fraud.

More spectacle, more distraction, more misleading. Waste of time.

Btw. The ‘target’ of us ‘vocal’ (yes, can still voice opinions!) no-virus types is Germ ‘Theory’ (hypothesis yet to be substantiated). Targeting people is for the military types.

Sorry for double posting!

I forgot to post the link to the transcript of the discussion between Cremola and Bigtree.

"Ah yes, the Del Bigtree who touted Geert Vanden Bossche like there was no tomorrow. Another fraud.

More spectacle, more distraction, more misleading. Waste of time."

Hasn’t Bigtree done more than anyone else to expose the risks of vaccines?
When he ‘touted’ Vanden Bosche, the latter was right it seems. Vaccines made the virus (thing) worse.

Thanks for clarifying it’s about germ theory.

What is your angle then. That germ theory is unsubstantiated - it may be wrong, or it may be right?
If so, how does that make people frauds that believe it?
Some would say it’s substatiated empirically because things based on it seem to work - like quantium theory, which isn’t verified. Not necessarily beyond any doubt whatsoever.

I wouldn’t say people are frauds unless I could establish they were wrong and knew it, or should have known it.
By that definition Bigtree isn’t a fraud as he can’t be expected to have sussed it all out when a million doctors haven’t.

In the link , he tells Cremola that he’s asked people who believe there are no viruses to come on the show.

Here it is:

"Del Bigtree:
I will say this, that I have always said I’m open to a conversation. I offered a couple of the
leading voices in that terrain theory, “there is no virus” space, the opportunity to come on my
show. I haven’t even said this on the show, and I’m probably getting in trouble by saying this, but
they came to me and said, “We will only come on your show to disprove germ theory. We are not
there to prove a theory of our own.”
And I don’t think people recognize that that’s where this is at. Like they speak with such
authority as though, “We’ve got evidence of terrain theory and exosomes and this entire
workaround to how we’re sharing energetic experiences.” But the truth is they know there’s not
enough science to prove that. And I just say this, Joe, I am a skeptic and I’m not against – I will
look at anything. I will look at-
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah, it’s just like me, 100%.
Del Bigtree:
I’ll look at this-
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
We’re open-minded. We’re not closed-minded.
Del Bigtree:
Right, right. So I’m not-
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
We’re willing to examine the evidence.
Del Bigtree:
Right. I’m open to having my mind changed, but you have to have evidence. And I’ve looked at
the evidence on this conversation. And for instance, in one of the books, I remember asking the
question, “Well, why is it when my child gets sick at the daycare and they come home and have
the sniffles, do I have the sniffles two or three days later?” Or measles is a really good example.
Measles is so highly infectious-
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah, exactly. That’s the one, that’s what Suzanne Humphries used. She used exactly that
Del Bigtree:
Yeah. If you have an island that hasn’t had measles in 50 years or something, and measles hits
that island, almost everybody that didn’t have prior immunity is going to catch it. "

So it didn’t happen - understandably, as the no-virusers don’t have a competing theory of their own, and Bigtree didn’t want to stand there all day and let them say this isn’t enough to prove germ theory; the standoff would remain in place.

I’d be interested in your thoughts on this part.

Not news I especially liked to pass on, regardless of my own misgivings about Dr Merc. You mentioned Marianna Spring which reminded me that the online retailer’s recommendations algorithm considered that I might be likely to enjoy her book… Yes, she has a book lol.

Check out how everyone is mad and hangry except dear Marianna on the cover art - looks a cracker huh

1 Like

‘Germ Theory’ isn’t substantiated because no ‘virus’ has yet been found. Its a jolly good theory for the corporations (and witch doctors) who have made immense fortunes (or pleasant livelihoods) from it. Its a massive industry and researchers who want to challenge any aspect of it will not get funded. And its the gift that keeps on giving for those who want to keep us fearful and separate from each other.

‘The vaccine’ didn’t make ‘the virus’ worse. ‘It’ made lots of people ill (or dead) like all vaccines have done to some extent (but more so in this instance!)

Let’s find these Latinate invisible flying poisons for a start, let’s identify them, get some samples, characterise them, you know the drill. . . we need something to go on. Why debate when it could be settled by the scientific method? ‘Science’ was never settled before by debate or consensus so why this? Look at Tom Cowan’s ‘virus challenge’ and tell me why its not been taken up.

Lots of people truly believe in these fairy entities, the propaganda is total(itarian) and I’m sure lots of sincere people are monetising their leadership of the ‘health freedom movement’ from the best of motives but, as I suggested above, if your income depends on your believing something (or, come to that, overlooking something). . . . well, I’ve worked at some pretty dodgy jobs in my time too and I had family & mortgage too of course. . .

Geert Vanden Bossche, in his video interview which our Del told us was the most important video he’d ever shared, was advertising his own vaccine which would counter the effects of everybody else’s. Even CHD had the sense to host Rosemary Frei’s takedown of it.

We see ‘the virus’ as akin to Israel’s right to self-defense and anthropogenic climate change. There is no evidence yet many people regard it as self-evident. Face it, there’s more evidence for flat earth than there is for ‘virus’.

1 Like

Thanks for that AlanG, it gives me a better idea of where you are coming from.

I’m open to correction, but presumably you don’t claim to have shown there is no virus, rather the case is that their existence hasn’t been established to the level of scientific proof?

I say this because of the No “Virus” Challenge. They wouldn’t be making this challenge if it could be shown - to the level the no-virusers demand of their opponents - that there is no virus.

So is it not over-stating your case to assert that those adhering to their own beliefs are frauds?
For me that’s the key question - as anyone should be free to argue any case they believe in.

Though, I do see what you do here as targeting - as you pop up and speak contemptuously of people who are making the most worthy (and/or sincere) effort to oppose and resist the same organisations, people and wheezes you yourself agree are killing more people than usual.

Maybe you can refute that by showing me where the no-virusers (is that an okay name btw!?) are having epic debates, or epic confrontations, with the mainstream. I say this and I may be wrong but I’ve only seen them opposing the opponents of the mainstream.
To be more convincing I think you/they’d need to be having it out with the mainstream, in front of an audience that’s more medical and therefore more challenging than those who are not only ultimately opposed to the same things as you are, but who also are committed, by virtue of opposing censorship, to free speech.


Edit. Some info I read, that I assume is relevant.

18/10/21 Covid: There Is No Virus, with Dr. Tom Cowan
By Hilda Labrada Gore

15/7/22 Dr. Tom Cowan, Dr. Mark Bailey, Dr. Kevin Corbett, et al.: A Proposal for Settling the Virus Debate
The No “Virus” Challenge
by Mike Stone

It’s a laughable self-portrayal. Just because Marianna is making people angry doesn’t mean she is doing something good!

I wonder if Ian Hislop’s double-meaning is deliberate.

1 Like

I’m not interested in convincing you evvy (but thanks for the tips anyway). Debates on this issue are pretty pointless. I’ll go on saying that, when there is evidence of the existence of ‘viruses’, invisible particles that can cause diseases and which we can pass to each other, I’ll be happy to look at it (it could even alter my current belief!).

As I wrote (you may have missed this bit) “I’m sure lots of sincere people are monetising their leadership of the ‘health freedom movement’ from the best of motives. . .” but to allay your concerns about my motives I’d add that I think lots of people follow these leaders from the best of motives too. (I’m not too keen on any leaders myself)

Please accept that its not you I want to piss on, its only your chips; and only in this one respect. I suppose all opposition to ‘vaccination’ is worth something even if the underlying lie has not been discerned.

How am I to go about showing that something that doesn’t exist actually doesn’t exist? Rather like Israel’s right to self-defense I suppose it depends where you start from. My belief that Israel, far from having a right to ‘self-defense’ (‘vaccinating’ Palestinians with bullets and shrapnel and controlling their behaviour) doesn’t have a right to exist in the first place is obviously open to dispute from those who believe in the Zionist project. I see the Virus project and its outcomes (‘vaccinating’ everybody with poisons and controlling their behaviour) in similar terms, that’s it really.

Extreme my comments may appear to them what don’t agree with them but I’m very happy to be posting in a forum where at least some of my beliefs are shared and I don’t expect unanimity.

Again, I’m not interested in convincing you of anything. We all believe this or that.

I’m not looking to be convinced, I think it would be too long a road for me to go down (and I don’t see it as crucial). I only added these links from your side to try to firm up what we were talking about.

They aren’t monetising in the sense you imply. None of them are making doctors’ money, and their careers are over. Ryan Cole has lost half his labs and his license is threatened. Bridle was chucked out of his workplace two and a half years ago. They - he and those like McCullough, Kory, Paul Marik, Meryl Nass and a host of suspended physicians have all made big sacrifices and most are scraping a living.

“How am I to go about showing that something that doesn’t exist actually doesn’t exist?”

Well you said that those who believe viruses exist are frauds. That’s why I was asking what you and the other no-virusers believe they can prove.
If it’s so hard to prove, what justification is there for saying they are frauds?
There’s none that I can see but if I’ve missed that bit you can set me straight on that. Like you and me they just argue what they believe. And they don’t attack innocent people.