Latest / UK Column Radio / Sasha Latypova on COVID, Trump, CIA, and the military

Transcript

Sasha Latypova on COVID, Trump, CIA, and the military · UK Column Radio

0:37
What's interesting to me though, is how few people want to
0:43
challenge their own views. And it's not just on COVID or,
0:47
or, or the, the, the quote UN quote pandemic, but it's on many
0:51
things. Have you noticed that only a
0:54
minority at any given time want to kind of hold up a mirror and
0:59
and and kind of look at really what it is that they believe and
1:03
why? Yeah, exactly.
1:06
That's that's been my experience.
1:07
I mean, it's, it's nothing, you know, I don't pass personal
1:12
judgement on people, although. People need to realize that
1:16
it's, you know, truth is independent.
1:19
Of. Whether you like somebody or you
1:23
don't like somebody, you know, and most people can't, just
1:26
can't, can't judge the facts and objective reality independent of
1:33
the actors involved. So that's why you see
1:36
frequently, you know, oh, you know, this was under, under
1:41
Biden. And I'm talking about the US
1:44
now. Yeah.
1:45
This was under Biden. Everything is bad under Biden,
1:47
but everything is good under Trump, while exactly the same
1:51
things are happening exactly the same and possibly even worse.
1:55
Yeah. And but it's not.
1:56
No, no, because Trump is doing it.
1:58
It's it's good, but you know it. And that's just, you know,
2:02
fighting it continuously is the most exhausting part of this
2:05
whole thing. And I'm sure you realize that
2:06
too, right? It's the most exhausting part
2:09
because you deal with people who previously you thought, oh, wow,
2:13
that, you know, he understands what they're what what's going
2:16
on, intelligent, very good analysis.
2:20
And then the political party switches and it's like this and,
2:23
and I'm like, what happened to you?
2:25
You know, and, and they're not necessarily, you know, bought
2:32
or, you know, money is involved or some kind of bribes or
2:35
blackmail. That's very, very rare when that
2:38
actually is there. It literally is.
2:41
People somehow just can't criticize somebody that they
2:46
politically support or like or follow or, and they, and they
2:50
just can't criticize their actions because there's like, Oh
2:52
my God, then I'm, I'm a bad person somehow.
2:55
No, you're not that person. You're just pointing to facts.
3:00
That's the thing about Trump. He's like a pied piper.
3:05
And I like some of the things that he says and does, and I
3:08
dislike other things that he says and does.
3:11
It's not binary. It's not I either love him or I
3:14
hate him. But he is effectively middle
3:17
management. He doesn't have as much power as
3:19
people think. I mean, the most obvious way to
3:22
see this is we can all agree that Joe Biden was, you know,
3:27
senile and he couldn't speak in full sentences.
3:30
And there's no ways that he was running the show.
3:34
So if he wasn't running the show, other people were.
3:37
So what makes you think that suddenly Trump is running the
3:40
show? That's.
3:42
Right, right, exactly. And I mean, the best way to
3:45
describe it is, is it's a, it's a theater or like they, they
3:49
call it kayfabe from, you know, the, the fights, the
3:53
orchestrated fights in this whole, you know, entertainment
3:56
genre. And yeah, because I think the, I
4:00
think the puppeteers behind the scenes or whoever control the
4:03
governments, which is clearly not people like Trump, not not
4:07
the visible political actors, no matter how popular they are.
4:11
They're never in control. And so the puppeteers, they know
4:15
this tendency of people to, you know, fall in love with some
4:19
political character and then and then use that to continue the
4:24
same agenda, the same narrative, the same actions, you know,
4:29
subversion of freedom, removal of rights, all that with now
4:33
with the new actor that you know, that the previous
4:36
previously the Democrats were all gung ho and everything that
4:40
Biden was endorsing. And then and the and the
4:44
Republicans were fighting. Now it's the time to switch the
4:46
actors so we can bring this this crowd of, of cattle now to where
4:51
we need them, right? So that that's exactly how they
4:54
like switch the actors. But the goal, you know they're.
4:57
Pushing the the the ball to the goal.
5:00
Together these both teams. You know, so and people just
5:04
can't wrap their heads around it.
5:05
And I'm asking everyone to, you know, don't you know, you can
5:10
hate me. It's fine.
5:11
Hate me all you want, but let's talk about facts.
5:17
Let's talk talk about actions. Let's not talk about Oh my God,
5:22
like another one. I, I just currently, I can't
5:24
stand this the, the new Maha Maha Make America healthy again
5:29
policy. It's a total propaganda piece.
5:31
And I called it out right again when, when they came out with it
5:36
in September 2024. So this is what while Trump was
5:39
still running before the election when RFK junior agreed
5:43
to to join his campaign at some point very shortly afterwards
5:49
they published this Make America Healthy Again.
5:53
Campaign policy, which later became the, the, the House
5:55
policy. And that was immediately
5:58
obvious. It was, it was written by pharma
6:00
lobbyists and it was written by pharma lobbyists.
6:03
It was written by Cali Means, who's a pharma lobbyist and who
6:06
works for Susie Wiles, who's now essentially running the
6:09
government. She's chief of staff for Trump
6:13
and she's also huge pharma lobbyist, you know, and it was
6:18
clear, it was clear as day, right?
6:21
And you know, I published and I said, you know, this is just
6:23
propaganda and, and it continues being propaganda and still today
6:28
the people. That I previously.
6:29
Respected published an article saying, Oh my gosh, the ASIP
6:35
Advisory Committee on Vaccination Practices was
6:37
deceived by CDC. Look, they pulled the wool over
6:41
their eyes and you know, they all, you know, CDC lied to them.
6:45
Can you imagine? It's so shocking.
6:47
Who could predict that? Yeah.
6:50
And like, how much of an idiot do you have to be to fall for
6:54
this, Right? And these people call themselves
6:57
experts, epidemiological experts who understand the data, who can
7:01
read the data. Yet, you know, CDC pushes total
7:04
garbage in front of them, which millions of people, lay people
7:07
have no problem picking apart and understanding what's what.
7:11
Somehow big experts can't. They were deceived.
7:14
They were deceived. They voted to approve monoclonal
7:17
antibody for all newborns in the United States.
7:20
All healthy newborns need to be injected on the first day of
7:24
birth with yet another poison. This is hugely poisonous
7:27
monoclonal antibody. It's it's, it's disaster.
7:31
They all voted yes. This product killed more babies
7:35
in clinical trial than the whatever was used for control.
7:39
That was clear as day. It was clear as day to all of
7:41
us. Yet this big group of experts
7:43
gets from Maha appointed by RFK junior get in the room, they get
7:49
put in front of them this complete piece of garbage and
7:52
they all want vote yes. So and everybody then hates me
7:58
for pointing this out and calls me for Michelle, calls me
8:02
controlled opposition, calls me a spy, calls me whatever because
8:05
I just said like, what, what are we supposed to do here?
8:08
How, how, how, how can they call themselves experts?
8:11
And that's my problem. So this like this all the time.
8:14
I appoint out these things all the time again, because people
8:19
are in love with their political favorites and they can't get
8:27
together together. That doesn't matter what you
8:30
love who that who you love. Now they're part of the
8:32
government, now they're going to be working for pharma and you,
8:35
your job is to call their BS now.
8:40
Speaking of being a farmer shell, what is your background?
8:44
Oh yeah. Pharmaceutical, yeah, no, I
8:45
wasn't very pharmaceutical, but I worked as a contractor in
8:49
Pharmaceutical industry. So I, I ran several companies
8:53
performing clinical trials for pharma companies for like, you
8:56
know, the pharma companies as clients.
8:58
And in a way I worked with FDA as part of this because you
9:01
submit data to the FDA. So I the, you know, my expertise
9:05
is I understand the, the regulations, the how they're
9:08
supposed to be done, what happens in practice in
9:11
regulatory environments. And you know, obviously how to
9:14
read the data from clinical trials.
9:16
And also, you know, anybody professional in the industry is
9:20
under no illusion that that manufacturers are, you know,
9:24
they again, you can't expect a manufacturer to be honest.
9:27
That's why we have regulators because manufacturers are biased
9:30
by definition by, you know, if they put the product on the
9:33
market, they make profit from it.
9:35
And that's why we have regulators to keep that in
9:37
check. And now we're being told that,
9:41
well, the manufacturer produced data that was copy pasted by CDC
9:45
and pushed in front of the experts.
9:47
Somehow it's insurmountable for an expert to look at it and say
9:55
I don't believe it and do their own analysis.
9:59
If they're independent analysis experts should.
10:05
Well, Speaking of expert analysis, tell me what happened
10:08
in the Netherlands. All right, so, so this is an
10:13
ongoing case or rather 2 cases. So this was 2 cases in the
10:17
Netherlands, one was started about two years ago and it's
10:21
ongoing. It's for the for seven victims
10:24
of COVID injections who got together and this law firm is
10:29
prosecuting the case for them in general.
10:31
It alleges that the government officials in the Netherlands
10:36
colluded with pharmaceutical companies and NGOs and WHO and
10:43
other governmental non governmental organizations to
10:46
conduct genocide or demosite. And it's extensively documented
10:51
as as very, very good set of evidence.
10:54
People have been injured, people have been lied to by the
10:57
government officials. It names several government
11:00
officials in the Netherlands, including the Prime Minister,
11:03
Mark Rutte, who is now actually head of NATO, and the other
11:10
health health officials, and also Albert Burla, the CEO of
11:14
Pfizer and Bill Gates as defendants.
11:17
And this is the case where the judge actually ruled that Bill
11:20
Gates can't get out of this case.
11:23
So he's still part of the prosecutor, part of the
11:25
different defendants. And then the second case was
11:29
started. There are additional 3
11:32
plaintiffs who wanted. So there is a legal procedure in
11:37
the Netherlands, which I was told by the lawyers that really
11:42
you can't even lose that procedure.
11:43
So you are allowed to bring a set of experts to the judge.
11:50
And experts would testify that, for example, you know, there's
11:54
this case, we are looking into our options of how to prosecute
11:58
this case. And that's why we're bringing
12:01
the experts to the judge to get advice.
12:03
So it's kind of like you're seeking legal advice from a
12:05
judge, which in principle, nobody should refuse.
12:09
And I was told historically, this is, you know, you can't
12:12
lose this. Now we.
12:17
The the the lawyers proposed that the experts include myself,
12:21
Catherine Watt, my colleague, she publishes on publishes on
12:25
Sub stack Bailiwick News and she has a extensive collection of
12:30
U.S. law primarily on related to vaccinations and going back 200
12:38
years. It's a legal encyclopedia on
12:41
this matter. And then Mike Eden in the UK, he
12:45
was formerly high level executive advisor, so very
12:49
experienced in toxicology and drug development.
12:52
Again, regulatory affairs. And Catherine Austin Fitts, who
12:57
is a publisher of salary report. She's former government U.S.
13:01
government official under Bush, she was in the housing
13:06
development and now she that she was an investment banker.
13:10
She's very experienced in finance.
13:12
And so she, she now writes her own publication, which is very
13:15
popular. And then Doctor Joe Simpson in
13:20
Florida. And so, so the 6th expert was
13:26
Professor Francis Boyle. He's AUS, he's academic, and he
13:33
was expert on bio weapons law because he helped draft several
13:38
bio weapons, international bio weapons prohibition conventions.
13:43
He agreed to testify in this case that specifically on the
13:46
question that these measures and COVID shots were bio weapons.
13:51
And you know, his agreement in three weeks after he agreed to
13:56
that he was suddenly dead. And we don't know why.
14:02
We still don't know. Nobody knows his cause of death.
14:05
But he died three weeks after he agreed to testify in this case
14:09
and on behalf of the of plaintiffs.
14:12
And he was perfectly healthy as far as we knew.
14:16
He was in his 70s and he was teaching full time.
14:20
So that so then, you know, the lawyers submitted this request
14:25
to the judge saying we have these three plaintiffs who would
14:28
like a speedy decision on this. Here, the experts that willing
14:31
to testify mentioned that Francis Boyle suddenly died and
14:36
this is very concerning. And the hearing was last week
14:41
and the judge, judge refused to hear us as well as experts,
14:45
which is very, very unusual. Again, as I said, this is a
14:48
procedure that technically just, you know, you just.
14:51
Get in front of the judge and they advise you how to file your
14:53
case. In this case, they didn't want
14:56
us to even, you know, they didn't want anything to do with
15:00
this. They refused.
15:01
So we knew we were anticipating that they would refuse.
15:05
And so we are now, you know, following another strategy.
15:11
It's going to be much more publicly.
15:13
Visible with Before we were staying quiet.
15:15
We didn't want to influence the judge's decision, but now that
15:18
that she's decided, we are going more public and there's going to
15:22
be more public communication about it and the cases will
15:26
likely emerge that these, these two cases, the seven victims and
15:30
three additional victims. So that's that's where we are
15:33
right now. But this is a very big deal and
15:35
very big case, and people should pay attention to it.
15:39
I can't believe Francis died. I didn't know that.
15:42
I think he was on my show when I was when I was still at TNT
15:44
Radio. Yeah, yeah, he died.
15:49
Yeah, we don't know. I'm just looking it up now.
15:53
Yeah, I'm just looking it up now.
15:54
I can't believe it. Yeah.
15:57
So I think it's, it was in February, end of or end of
16:00
January, I forget the date exactly.
16:04
Gee. Hey, Sasha, that's crazy.
16:08
Uh huh. Yeah.
16:11
So that's that's my, that's my point.
16:15
How serious this is, right? Do you think he died
16:22
mysteriously? To me this is very mysterious
16:25
because when a, you know apparently healthy person who is
16:29
working full time, teaching full time, speaking, agreeing to
16:33
testify, 3 weeks later is found dead and we don't know how, this
16:36
as suspicious as it gets. Sure.
16:43
That's derailed me a little bit. Yeah.
16:48
Actually, let's just take a segue.
16:50
Yeah, for those in my UK column, audience that don't know you or
16:56
your work, just very quickly, what is your background all?
16:59
Right. So, you know, as I said, I spent
17:01
about 25 years on pharmaceutical and medical device research and
17:04
development, clinical trials primarily and you know, running
17:09
different clinical trials in oncology actually across all all
17:12
disease categories and oncology a lot and in cardiovascular
17:17
disease a lot and cardiovascular specifically, I worked several
17:20
years in safety. So assessments of safety only.
17:23
So that cuts across all the therapeutic areas because
17:26
there's specific requirements for cardiovascular safety
17:29
assessments, which I can tell you totally were completely
17:33
ignored in case of these COVID shots.
17:36
And actually they are completely ignored in case of all vaccines.
17:39
Then they don't even apply to vaccines.
17:43
So that's how that's how safe they are.
17:46
They can't even test them for safety.
17:50
And I didn't know that. I didn't know that prior to 2020
17:54
because I never worked in vaccines.
17:56
I worked in drugs and I assumed, like a lot of my colleagues,
18:00
including my kid and also very high level executive advisor, we
18:05
all thought that all of the, all of the stuff that we have to
18:09
comply with applies to vaccines. It turns out no.
18:12
And actually, you know, that there's a, it's a longer story,
18:14
but it was never applicable and by design.
18:20
And then, you know, I, I, as I said, I ran several companies.
18:25
I sold them. I retired fully around maybe
18:29
2017 and 18. I just didn't need to work.
18:33
I didn't, you know, I wasn't interested in that anymore.
18:37
And I just, I was just having a great time.
18:39
I was, you know, enjoying myself, you know, doing sports
18:43
and art and just traveling and, yeah, living my life.
18:47
And then in 2020, I became increasingly concerned with the
18:51
government actions, particularly when they started suppressing
18:55
generic drugs for treatment of, of whatever covered illnesses.
18:59
You know, people argue about that.
19:01
It doesn't matter, you know, if people are ill and there are
19:06
generic drugs that are known very, very safe with long
19:09
history on the market. We always prefer those.
19:11
We prefer something that is known and very and you has been
19:14
used for a long time and is well documented to something
19:17
completely new. And so when they started saying
19:21
that, Oh, no, you know, can't use hydroxychloroquine, but you
19:24
have to wait for this mRNA shot, I was always like, whoa, wait, I
19:29
have to pay attention to this. And I, and I started paying
19:32
attention. I was, I started looking into
19:34
this and my, my first sort of, so I, I first was concerned and
19:39
I just kind of saw that it's BS and they are overreacting when
19:43
they started rolling out these mRNA shots.
19:45
Well, I personally know, knew that they were super toxic drugs
19:49
and from my history in pharma and I was like, there's no way
19:53
in, in, in hell. I'm touching this and my family
19:55
is not touching this. So I don't worry about myself,
19:58
but I was just concerned that they're pushing this on the
20:01
public. And I started doing analysis of
20:05
theirs data because that's the only publicly available vaccine
20:08
adverse event reporting system from CDC.
20:12
And I started analyzing it and I, I was the first person who
20:16
discovered the batch variability so that these mRNA shots had
20:20
humongous, I mean unbelievably humongous variability in terms
20:25
of. Toxicity batch to batch.
20:28
Because some batches had, you know, very few adverse events
20:31
and deaths and some had thousands.
20:33
And that should never ever, ever happened for any pharmaceutical
20:36
product or mass produced product of any kind.
20:40
Because you, you don't want to go and you know, get a beer and
20:44
a bar and this this week and next week you go there and it's
20:48
1000 * 1000 times alcohol, right?
20:52
It's going to kill you. So for that reason, you know,
20:56
all the consumer products are tightly controlled.
20:59
You, you should never see this type of variability yet this was
21:02
the, the magnitude of variability that we saw with
21:06
these shorts. And so I was the first one to
21:07
publish in it. I was the first one to, you
21:10
know, promote it and we build a website and you know, it became
21:14
very popular. It's it's a well known fact now,
21:19
but the FDA has not addressed it ever.
21:23
They never acknowledged it and they since have never addressed
21:26
it. Nothing has been done about it
21:29
under any administration. I remember coming across your,
21:37
your sub stack a few years ago and I, I actually didn't take it
21:41
very seriously because I saw your art and I wasn't quite sure
21:44
what I was looking at. And I think it took me maybe
21:47
about another year or so to go back to your sub stack and start
21:52
actually reading some of your, your articles.
21:57
Well. You didn't like my art?
22:00
No, I did like your art, but it didn't.
22:06
No, no, what I what I mean is that it it wasn't joining any
22:10
dots for me. OK, until I started reading
22:14
your, your, your articles on on the sub stack and suddenly it
22:19
felt like there was a whole new paradigm that nobody was talking
22:25
about what you were talking about.
22:27
And there was one other person, Debbie Lerman from Brownstone,
22:31
and but very few other people were actually suggesting that
22:37
the whole COVID event was actually a military operation.
22:42
Yeah, quickly summarize that for me.
22:44
All right, so first, you know, for the, for the longest time,
22:48
myself and Catherine Watt, we were, you know, we don't run
22:53
subtract together, but we like we were collaborating because
22:55
she was providing a lot of law information and I was looking
22:59
from the regulatory perspective. So we were the only people who
23:01
were publishing on this at all. And I, I originally published
23:06
the intent to harm. I think I, I, I realized that
23:11
this was a military operation when I, I was talking to Brooke
23:15
Jackson and she's a whistleblower.
23:18
She's, she was prosecuting, She is still prosecuting this case,
23:21
but it's kind of like very, you know, not going anywhere.
23:25
She was prosecuting case against Pfizer and she's also from
23:27
pharma industry. And at some point she sent me
23:32
these files that were produced by the CDC or FDA or somebody as
23:38
part of the legal proceedings and they included a PowerPoint
23:43
from presented at the vaccine advisory committee of the FDA
23:49
sometime in late 2020. And when I read this PowerPoint,
23:53
it became obvious to me from one slide.
23:56
They put organizational chart of Operation Warp Speed.
24:01
And this organizational chart was kind of funny.
24:04
It was turned on the side. You know, usually it's like CEO
24:07
and then you have this pyramid, right?
24:09
They turn the pyramid on the side to make it less obvious.
24:16
But on the side, the chief operating officer of this whole
24:21
thing was the Department of Defense.
24:25
So there's this logo of the Department of Defense and then
24:29
next to it it says HHS, which is Health and Human Services
24:33
department is advisor. While to the public it was
24:37
always presented as this is a public health event.
24:40
And you know, it's all about virus and illness and vaccines.
24:46
And you know, you just you're bad person if you're endangering
24:49
your grandma without wearing the mask and all that, right?
24:52
So and that and that. But that org chart said
24:56
completely the opposite thing. It said that this is a military
24:59
controlled exercise where HHS is alone for the right and
25:03
providing, you know, advice, but it's being managed by the
25:08
Department of Defense. And furthermore, there was a
25:10
whole executive layer to this org chart that consisted
25:15
entirely of the US government, mainly executive branch
25:20
departments of the government, including various state and
25:25
security and things like that. So I, when I, when I looked at
25:29
it, I was like, wow, this is just really strange.
25:31
I've never seen anything like this.
25:33
You clearly military is in control.
25:36
And then I started digging into that and Debbie Lerman was the
25:41
person I found through this. You know, she's also writing on
25:44
subsets. She was writing at Brownstone
25:47
Institute publication at that time, and she wrote one article
25:52
where she found documentation from the, again, from the United
25:56
States government. It was somehow it was this
25:58
document was very obscure. It was linked to a New York
26:01
Times article. That's where she found it.
26:04
And it's called Pandemic Action Plan.
26:08
So U.S. government at some point put together action plan for
26:12
what? What happens if we have a
26:13
pandemic? And that action plan was
26:17
originally written as a public health document with more or
26:20
less normal public health things.
26:22
And it said something like, well, you don't do lockdowns and
26:26
masking is not helpful. You just advise public not to
26:30
panic, wash their hands and stay home of sick.
26:32
So normal things like that. They don't close the schools and
26:36
you know, so it was normal, more or less normal public health
26:40
document. And sometime during maybe
26:44
shortly before 2020, literally months before 2020, the document
26:49
was changed somehow. No, nobody still knows how she
26:52
is, by the way, still trying to FOIA how that happened.
26:56
But it she's have this has been like years and she's having a
26:59
really hard time. And you know, that document was
27:04
changed and now it's called pandemic action plan adapted who
27:07
adapted it and how they how you know what process?
27:10
We don't know, but the adapted plan was completely opposite.
27:14
So all of the public health things went away.
27:17
And now she found another org chart in it, which is another
27:22
very, very confusing one. But if you kind of go through
27:26
it, you understand. And we've done several videos on
27:28
this as well, walking people through this.
27:30
So in that org chart, it said specifically that National
27:34
Security Council was in charge of pandemic response and that's
27:38
even worse than Department of Defense being in charge.
27:42
So clearly it says that National Security Council is the CEO
27:46
because they remember in in the orchard that I saw where I
27:49
started this investigation, the chief operating officer was the
27:53
Department of Defence, but above Department of Defence we have
27:57
National Security Council. National Security Council is.
28:02
Advisory body to the US. President and it consists of
28:05
heads of military and intelligence services, you know,
28:11
agencies and vice president and the president, nobody else.
28:16
It doesn't have any health representatives on it, so
28:22
they're not allowed in. You don't, you have to have a
28:25
very high security clearance to be on it.
28:28
So that was the body and that body usually advises the
28:32
president on matters of war and foreign policy, not on health.
28:38
Somehow in this adopted pandemic action plan, we have them in
28:42
charge of the COVID pandemic response.
28:46
And So what happened is then ultimately our investigation.
28:53
I, you know, at somebody, at some point, somebody send me
28:56
whistleblower tape from inside AstraZeneca meeting, executive
29:01
meeting at the end of 2020. And the in this tape, it was
29:05
recorded from a Zoom call. I have a video of the Zoom, but
29:09
I separated the video from the audio and I only released the
29:13
audio because I didn't want to inadvertently do something to
29:18
reveal who who recorded it. Because of this, it was a
29:21
internal meeting at the company and so I released the audio and
29:26
I published it on myself stack. In this recording, 6 minutes
29:29
from the Zoom meeting, there are two speakers, the CEO of
29:32
AstraZeneca, Pascal Soro, and VP of monoclonal antibodies Mark
29:37
Asser. And they're, you know, high
29:39
fiving each other, celebrating the approval of their monoclonal
29:42
antibody, which which was approved in the US Their vaccine
29:45
was never approved in the US. It was approved in UK and other
29:48
places. And but in the US, they only got
29:52
the monoclonal approved. And so during this discussion,
29:55
they're kind of like revisiting the history of what happened and
29:59
they said, So at some point, Mark Esser says we were
30:02
approached by DARPA, which is part of Department of Defence.
30:06
It's the department. Darpa's Defence Advanced
30:10
Research Projects Agency, and specifically Colonel Matt
30:15
Hepburn of DARPA approached them in 2017 and said that we're
30:19
starting a consortium between pharmaceutical companies and the
30:21
Department of Defence to work on pandemic products.
30:25
And, you know, Department of Defense will identify viruses of
30:29
pandemic potential and you, the pharma, will be making vaccines
30:33
and therapeutics for it within 60 days.
30:37
To which Mark Asser said, I thought it was science fiction
30:41
at 1st. And that's a correct reaction
30:43
because it is science fiction because there is no science
30:46
today. It never was.
30:49
That can from a computer model of a virus tell you how how
30:53
pandemic potential it is. None.
30:55
It's not possible to do. And there are actually
30:59
extensive, extensive set of sets of literature confirming it,
31:02
including large reports and books published by National
31:06
Academies of Science, including Ralph Barrick as a co-author,
31:09
saying specifically, we do not know how to model pandemic
31:12
potential viruses. We will have to predict whether
31:16
they're going to be pandemic potential or not.
31:18
And the only way to predict or to understand that is an actual
31:22
interaction of humans with that virus, if you believe in
31:25
viruses. So you can't prospectively
31:29
determine when something is going to cause pandemics.
31:32
Yet this is what Matt Hepburn was enticing pharmaceutical
31:35
companies to agree to participate in, which is a
31:39
deception. It's a fake for money obviously.
31:43
And of course they agreed for money, even though, even though
31:46
you know, Marcus expressed his reservations, doesn't matter.
31:49
They, the Department of Defence waived a lot of dollars and they
31:52
said OK, it's fine. And so they started
31:54
participating in this and in 2020, then Marcus are again says
31:59
that on February 4th, 2020, we received a phone call from DARPA
32:04
telling us probably Hepburn himself again telling them that
32:09
COVID was declared a national security threat.
32:12
So this is what happened on February 4th.
32:15
Somebody inside U.S. government, we still don't know who
32:18
identified this COVID virus which did not exist at the time
32:24
in the US. There were barely maybe handful
32:26
of cases PCR identified. PCR is not diagnostic.
32:29
You can't use it for diagnosis. And so we didn't have any
32:34
illness, no deaths, nothing was happening.
32:37
Yet somebody in the US government determined that this
32:41
is a national security threat, classified everything, put
32:45
National Security Council in charge so that nobody from any,
32:49
you know, agencies that were actually implementing anything
32:53
could even know how those decisions are made because they
32:55
don't have the top clearance and proceeded to democide the entire
33:02
world from here. So that's what, you know, I
33:05
identified and Debbie Lerman identified and we eventually
33:09
published the COVID dossier where we are now.
33:13
You know, given this evidence where we started from, we also
33:16
collected the corresponding evidence from all over the
33:20
world. Now we have pretty much every
33:22
region of the world covered where we're listing all the
33:26
agencies that were in charge, how who was you know who, how
33:31
decisions were made, key timelines, key people so linked
33:34
to source documents. And in every single country we
33:37
looked at, the identical formula is used is equivalent of
33:43
national security apparatus is put in charge of the response.
33:48
The military is running the operation as a execution as the
33:52
operate is chief operation operating officer in logistics
33:56
and distribution, manufacturing, all of that the the.
33:59
Laws that are used. For what's called
34:01
countermeasures, which is a military term, all of these
34:05
COVID products are countermeasures.
34:08
And they're equivalent laws in the in other countries that
34:12
treat these products as countermeasures, which removes
34:15
them from any regulation that applies to consumer products and
34:18
pharmaceuticals completely. And also removes any liability
34:23
from anyone who is a covered person who is doing these these
34:28
procedures, products, protocols, enforcement, anything,
34:32
regardless of how many people they kill or injure.
34:34
And that's how all of these laws are written.
34:36
And that's how all this framework is in place.
34:38
And, and it continues. It never stopped, actually, it
34:40
continues. I remember back in March 2020
34:46
when our president went on TV to announce we're going to have
34:51
locked down for 21 days, but it flattened the curve.
34:54
Flattened curve, yeah, blah, blah, blah.
34:56
Yes. And it just coincidentally
34:59
happened in the same week that the UK also locked down Sasha.
35:04
It's just a coincidence. Coincidence.
35:06
Yeah, and. And I remember somebody sent me
35:09
a WhatsApp video within two hours after the president
35:13
announced the lockdown, a video from one of the townships,
35:19
what's, what's the international term, a squatter camp.
35:22
So we call it a Township, but it's the poor areas.
35:26
And it was military vehicles with guys on the soldiers on the
35:30
top carrying guns and shouting at everybody, telling them to go
35:34
in indoors now. I mean, that was very quick.
35:40
Yeah, yeah. Look at what happened and what
35:44
they did in Australia. That was probably the most
35:46
tyrannical of all, you know, Western countries.
35:52
It was it was incredible. And there's footage what they
35:55
were doing and how can anybody in their right mind believe that
35:59
this is about a virus or some sort of respiratory illness?
36:03
Yeah, just quickly, because you know the kinds of people that
36:07
follow us, Sasha, you've mentioned, yes, you've mentioned
36:11
the word virus a few times. You've said pandemic a couple
36:14
times. Let's just quickly clarify in
36:18
your view, was there a pandemic? No, no, no.
36:21
There was never a pandemic. As I said, this is a military
36:23
operation. And, and as I said, you know,
36:25
they enticed pharmacom. They, they, they, they DoD,
36:28
DARPA enticed pharma companies to participate in the fake.
36:34
And, and in fact, this is how it's called by WHO.
36:37
It's public health emergency of international concern, which is
36:40
pronounced fake, right? So they, they, they like to do
36:44
these kind of Easter eggs to laugh at peasants.
36:49
It could fall for their behest. And yeah, so, so yeah, they
36:55
orchestrated the fake and I actually have written a series
37:00
of articles, it's called How to Fake Pandemics.
37:02
So it's a four part series. And I have some other additional
37:06
material, 4 parts part series explaining exactly the script
37:10
used by the DoD and used by the governments and academia to to
37:15
fake pandemics. It's not the first time they did
37:18
it. But why I would say they they
37:20
faked epidemics, not necessarily they call it, they didn't call
37:23
it pandemic, but definition of pandemic if you believe in such
37:27
a thing. I don't they don't exist, by the
37:29
way, they only faked. But the definition that they use
37:33
it's it's a, you know, a severe illness with lots of deaths
37:38
occurring simultaneously in all over the world, or at least in
37:42
several major regions of the world.
37:44
And such thing has never happened in the world history,
37:48
ever. There have been local outbreaks
37:51
of what is considered infectious disease, most of it based on
37:55
polluted water. Water, especially water polluted
37:58
with sewage. But the humans are animals of
38:00
both open, open sewage somewhere nearby.
38:06
So those those are typically the sources of these kinds of
38:08
illnesses like color, the plagues, smallpox, you know, and
38:12
they're also the insects are vectors involved in this.
38:15
And, and I also write articles explaining how that happens, as
38:20
opposed to other commentators who don't.
38:22
They just say there are no viruses, but they don't provide
38:24
an explanation, right? I do, but but as I said, but in
38:29
this case, these are faked. And there is a very, very well
38:32
known DoD script of on how to do it.
38:35
And there is one particular propagandist from DoD called
38:38
James Giordano. He's a professor of
38:40
neuroscience, Johns Hopkins, I believe.
38:44
And so he he does, there's a bunch of lectures by him on
38:47
YouTube. He does lectures to military
38:51
cadets, brainwashing them on various topics.
38:55
And he, in one of these lectures, several actually, he
38:58
mentions the script of faking pandemics.
39:01
And that's exactly what they did in my opinion.
39:04
So it wasn't a real event. There wasn't any real like what
39:09
virus or communicable illness spreading.
39:13
There was a lot of things that the governments did.
39:15
So I, I, my personal view, my personal theory is they followed
39:21
Giordano script, which involves some use of chemical weapons,
39:26
such as they can use pesticides as chemical weapons.
39:29
They can use metals. They've, they've used arcelized
39:35
metals and metal, metal particles quite a bit.
39:37
U.S. Army did continuously.
39:40
And they can produce respiratory illness.
39:42
So like for example, there is a known saying it's called welders
39:45
flu. So in welding, when you're
39:48
working with metals, you may inhale arcelized metal and it
39:53
causes flu. So there's a flu, but there's no
39:55
virus. It's caused by metal inhalation
39:58
and it's one of the ways to simulate it.
40:00
So you so he says, you know, we use some kind of a simulant to
40:04
produce unusual symptoms in people in some locations so that
40:09
then the media can pick it up. And with the whole media
40:11
propaganda campaign, we can create a lot of panic.
40:15
And then because this this media campaign targets what he
40:19
specifically calls as hypochondriacs.
40:22
And he says those people when they hear.
40:25
These stories and they see the listing of the symptoms,
40:28
including everything. You are symptomatic.
40:30
You're worried, you are panicked, you are.
40:33
You know you can't sleep very well.
40:36
It means you have that deadly virus, right?
40:38
So then those people actually start having symptoms.
40:43
That's another known effect. It it's known in psychiatry and
40:48
it's known in hypnosis that a large percentage of the
40:51
population, somewhere between 10 and 20%, depending on the fear
40:55
factor, are very susceptible to this kind of propaganda.
40:59
And they will develop symptoms if you tell them they're
41:01
suggestible. So you can you can tell them and
41:04
they'll develop those symptoms. And so he says this is what's
41:07
what's designed to produce in the society so that then those
41:10
people run to the hospitals and get tested with PCR, which is,
41:14
you know, is very easy to manipulate and set to put the
41:19
settings at high cycles so that it will find positive.
41:24
And there you go. That's how you fake the
41:26
pandemics. That's how they did it.
41:31
Trump is a bit of a blockhead who likes swinging his Dick and
41:35
typing in uppercase letters the whole time.
41:38
Sasha. And he was the president in
41:39
2020. Do you think he knew what was
41:42
going on before March? Before March, you know, there's
41:51
a video where he's visibly surprised.
41:54
So there's on March 20, 2020, there is a video of him where
41:59
he's visibly surprised by Mike Pompeo saying where this is a
42:04
live exercise. So what I think happened is he
42:08
was briefed in just enough to sign off on Stafford Act
42:13
declaration, which is which is what was needed to announce the
42:18
state of public health emergency in all 50 states simultaneously.
42:21
This hasn't been used ever in in U.S. history.
42:26
This this law has not been used across 50 states simultaneously
42:30
and. So and Deborah Birx, she was
42:32
part of it, wasn't she? Yes, Deborah Birx was part of
42:34
it. So what I think and Deborah
42:36
Birx, by the way, she has, she's not public house.
42:38
She is the Spooks, State Department, CIACIA.
42:43
Yeah. So, so she was actually quite
42:48
instrumental. And Debbie Lerman wrote a great
42:50
book, it's called Deep State Goes Viral, detailing her
42:54
activities very well and other key actors that people don't
42:59
realize. Everybody yells at Fauci and
43:02
wants to detain Fauci, which, well, I mean, I think he should
43:06
be prosecuted for crimes, but he he definitely wasn't in charge
43:10
of this thing. He was just a pawn.
43:12
He was just a pawn. He.
43:13
Was a pawn. He was a very experienced
43:14
advisor on these matters, but he he didn't make any decisions.
43:19
You know, Deborah Brooks is much more important than this
43:22
picture. And so, so, yeah.
43:25
So I think they brought actors like her and a bunch of others
43:30
perhaps. And they somehow convinced Trump
43:35
enough or briefed him enough to say, well, yeah, let's do this.
43:39
But they probably said something like, it's a drill to him.
43:44
You know, they said, well, we need this.
43:46
I don't know what they they told him that, but he probably was
43:49
under impression that this is some sort of a drill.
43:52
And then when Mike Pompeo said it's a live exercise, that's
43:55
what like, you know, visibly got him to say, oh, you should have
43:59
told us. You should have told us.
44:00
So I probably that's what happened.
44:04
And, and it was also clear, I'm sorry, it was also clear from
44:08
several Pentagon videos that I reviewed that he was not in
44:15
charge at all. It was Department of Defense
44:16
running ahead of him. But they were kind of managing
44:19
him to think that he was making decisions.
44:23
So there were several instances where, for example, $50 billion
44:27
were, were distributed to pharma companies before he authorized
44:32
it. And that got him pissed off, you
44:35
know? But he couldn't do anything
44:37
meaningful about it, which again says that he wasn't in charge.
44:41
And so that's, that's how, that's how I see it.
44:45
He may, maybe he well, he definitely knows now.
44:48
So definitely there's no question in my mind.
44:51
It shouldn't be in anybody's mind that he's not in on this
44:55
game now. He is maybe he, you know, he
44:58
probably was enraged that they didn't like cut him in, right?
45:02
And now he's somehow reimbursed. Do you remember?
45:07
Do you remember those that one AT that he did on Twitter?
45:11
Like within a space of two or three days, his whole approach
45:14
changed very dramatically. Yeah, yeah, he was resisting the
45:19
lockdowns for a long time. Well, not a long time, but
45:23
initially he was resisting lockdowns.
45:26
And at some point, I think Jeffrey Tucker from Brownstone
45:32
went and reviewed his tweets around that time and found this
45:36
switch around March 10th. So I think that's when they
45:42
brought in and Debbie Lerman and others think that it was Tucker
45:47
Carlson who went to Mar a Lago and told him something that
45:52
changed his mind. So that's what I'm saying.
45:55
They somehow manipulated with Tucker Carlson, with Deborah
45:59
Birx, whoever manipulated him enough by March 10th just to go
46:05
ahead with lockdowns again, Two weeks to flatten the curve.
46:08
Maybe he thought that there was two weeks, I don't know, to sign
46:11
off on Stafford Act and to start this whole thing afterwards.
46:15
They didn't care. They didn't care anymore.
46:18
And so he had to just be surprised.
46:20
And then they probably told him additional stuff and now he's
46:24
fully on board. What makes this whole thing so
46:29
interesting also is that the mainstream and even many
46:36
alternative narratives completely avoid the military
46:40
aspect. And what that means is that they
46:42
look in the wrong direction. They keep looking at Fauci, they
46:45
keep looking at Bill Gates. Now they look at Wuhan since
46:48
Trump came and suddenly it's Wuhan.
46:50
And, and, and remember on the White House's website on the
46:54
front page, it said it was a lab leak.
46:56
And, and there's a picture of Trump and, and you know, he's
46:59
the hero. And the whole thing now is the
47:02
lab leak, and it's China again. That's the other red flag.
47:06
Like why is it always China? Do people not see through this?
47:10
Exactly why can people see through this?
47:12
Because by the way, this whole China virus, do you think this
47:16
is recent invention? Well, they did the same thing in
47:19
the 50s and they, they, they've done it a dozen Times Now.
47:23
They, I mean, the CDC together with the military, the same
47:27
script has been done millions of times.
47:28
I mean they, and that's actually written into DoD documents that
47:33
you know, if anything, you know, if we do that.
47:37
So I reviewed U.S. Army documentation, available
47:42
documentation on their official biological weapons development
47:45
program, which they had between end of the Second World War in
47:50
the late 40s. Actually I think they even
47:53
started in 43 or something. So from 1943 to 1969 to bio
47:58
weapons convention when Nixon signed off on it, they had an
48:03
official bio weapons development program at the US Army funded
48:07
and several locations where they were doing it.
48:11
The the main one is for Dietrich.
48:13
In Maryland and they were working together with the UK and
48:19
Canada, all that from the start. They were also was always
48:21
collaboration between UKUS and Canada and they did operations
48:26
together and tests together. And so I reviewed that, that
48:32
documentation and their policy was always, we do some tests
48:37
either in the US or in Canada or in the UK.
48:41
We do the tests with these agents.
48:43
If anything happens and there is like public outcry, we blame
48:46
China. Number one, we blame China.
48:49
It's a China virus, Yeah. It's their policy, always.
48:53
Always. So it's always China.
48:55
If it's not China, it's Russia or Iran.
48:57
OK, That's that sequence. China, Russia, Iran, and that's
49:02
their policy. So.
49:06
People don't see through it. And and everybody falls for it
49:10
again with this, you know, Gulf virus.
49:12
I can't believe how many people in this health freedom, which I
49:16
now call health freedom movement, they're just grifting
49:20
off of this recycling these nonsense headlines that China
49:25
engineered virus leaked from Wuhan.
49:28
I, I mean, I'm sick of it. I like I wrote about this a long
49:32
time ago, actually two years. It was 2 1/2 years ago.
49:35
I wrote an article when they first sort of allowed this
49:40
headline that. Oh.
49:41
It wasn't a natural virus. It wasn't evolved.
49:44
Do you remember for two for about two years?
49:46
It was a zoonosis, zoonotically evolved virus from Chinese.
49:51
What that you Wuhan wet market, right?
49:55
And everybody was supposed to believe it.
49:56
And if you said I don't believe it or publish something contrary
50:00
on the Internet as I did. You immediately was banned, were
50:03
banned and I I was banned on Twitter right away and you know,
50:08
so initially it would be like a lot of bots would.
50:10
Appear Swarm, you start, you know, creating nonsense.
50:14
Yeah, just was just total BS and it was obviously designed to to
50:18
suppress this, but if anybody was questioning zoonoses, they
50:21
were immediately banned. Now then then two years, a
50:24
little bit later, Tucker Carlson starts coming out.
50:27
Oh, and then they have this whole.
50:28
James O'Keefe Remember that James O'Keefe incident with the.
50:32
Yes, with the with the guy from Pfizer who went on a date with
50:37
James O'Keefe and. Yes, remember that it was
50:39
undercover. Undercover.
50:41
Yeah. Undercover date with James
50:42
O'Keefe. This guy from Pfizer pretends
50:44
into, by the way, wasn't a Pfizer employee.
50:47
It was a BCG Boston Consulting Group.
50:50
Boston Consulting Group employed Boston Consulting Group Federal
50:54
OK federal division of the Boston Consulting Group.
50:57
Person placed at Pfizer to pretend that he's some sort of a
51:00
scientist to go with James O'Keefe to record this whole
51:04
nonsense where he's. Oh, Pfizer's mutating viruses in
51:08
the lab. And then Tucker Carlson is all
51:10
like, Oh my God. And then Robert Malone is like,
51:13
oh, this is so terrible. China's developing bio weapons.
51:17
I mean, that was just, that was, it was incredible and every,
51:22
everybody. Fell for it.
51:23
It was circulated, we had millions and millions of views.
51:26
Everybody copy pasted at that point.
51:29
I wrote an article, I said, OK, this is total baloney, you know,
51:33
and I, I kind of debunked it. So but then.
51:36
The thing? Yeah, sorry.
51:37
Go on. Yeah, so.
51:38
But now, of course, Trump 2.0 comes in power puts up a website
51:44
that says it's leaked from Chinese.
51:47
Go virus leaked from China. My question is, OK, So what?
51:52
How you are you going to address the fact that you were censoring
51:55
everyone under your first administration who said that?
51:59
And second of all, look at the NATO website.
52:01
It still says it's a natural virus.
52:04
So do do you guys like talk to each other?
52:10
The thing also, Sasha, is that what this does is that it
52:15
actually protects high level people like Deborah Birx, like
52:20
Donald Trump himself because he signed Warp Speed.
52:23
Oh, but now, no, no, no, no, he's playing 5D chess.
52:27
If he didn't sign Warp Speed, which was a choice by the way,
52:30
we all would have been in FEMA camps.
52:33
Oh yeah, he's exposing them. Yeah, it's exposure.
52:38
He's fighting globalist, you know.
52:41
But what what this whole thing does is that it it distracts
52:43
from who the real bad people are.
52:48
Yeah, exactly. Absolutely.
52:49
It distracts from who the real bad people are, and it continues
52:52
to cover up the crime. And this whole nonsense of
52:57
treating it as a public health event after five years, clear
53:01
evidence that it's not a public health event, that it has
53:03
nothing to do with with disease or illness.
53:06
It has nothing to do with pharmaceuticals.
53:08
Yet the same people are still with humongous followers, with
53:11
millions of followers are still writing that FDA doesn't see my
53:16
data and I need to collect unimpeachable data to convince
53:22
the FDA to remove these products from market.
53:24
I mean, you want to bend your head against the wall really.
53:27
I mean this is just incredible, the amount of hubris and and
53:32
denial that people will stay in. You're right, five years.
53:39
So some comments that I have started receiving is get over it
53:43
now it's gone. It's, it's, it's in the past.
53:46
But I mean, is it in the past, Sasha?
53:49
Is this something that we must just put behind us?
53:51
Oh no, no, it's not in the past at all, especially in the US and
53:56
in many other countries. I advise people to check your
54:01
existing law on this matter and consult with the the COVID
54:04
dossier, because we're listing the agencies, the relevant
54:08
documents that you need to look at.
54:09
And so I can tell you specifically for the US how it's
54:12
not over at all. In the US, there is a piece of
54:15
legislation that's called PREP Act, Public Readiness Emergency
54:20
to Something Act. And it was put on the books in
54:23
2005 by Republicans. By the way, it was opposed by
54:26
Democrats. And as usual, Republicans
54:30
pretended that it's not a piece of legislation, it's an
54:32
appropriations bill. And at the time there was a
54:35
Katrina hurricane relief funding that was necessary.
54:39
And so as usual, they, they make the relief funding hostage, hold
54:43
it hostage so that the entire Congress agrees.
54:46
And they slip in all these, these kinds of laws that they
54:49
know otherwise because they are unconstitutional and they, they
54:52
violate several provisions of US Constitution.
54:54
So they've, they've written it up around Christmas on the
54:58
weekend in the middle of the night into a multi thousand page
55:01
bill that was supposed to be voted on to, to get the funding
55:05
for Katrina relief. But the Democrats at that time,
55:09
you know, and always they, they're not born yesterday.
55:12
And they were, they knew this and they organized themselves.
55:15
They got a legal opinion from a legal constitutional scholar,
55:19
Edwin Shimrinsky. There's a great letter that he
55:21
rolled up on this, this law and, and then several Democratic
55:26
Congress people, including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden,
55:31
Richard Burr and Ted Kennedy spoke against this bill and they
55:34
said it's unconstitutional. It violates several provisions.
55:37
It removes people's rights to to to redress, to seek compensation
55:42
for their injuries, to sue the manufacturers for liability, all
55:47
correct things. I completely agree with them
55:49
because this is what this law does.
55:50
But the law actually well, but but then they voted yes because
55:54
they couldn't, you know, not because otherwise, you know, the
55:57
Katrina relief funding. So since 2005, we have this
56:00
monstrosity on the books and they fully used it on the
56:04
population in 2020. What it does it if so, it's
56:09
written this the following way. If several heads of executive
56:12
agencies, including HHS, if HHS Secretary says just says
56:18
declares it is my opinion that there is a a public health
56:22
emergency of national concern, he can issue this declaration.
56:27
The the declaration of emergency.
56:29
The declaration of emergency requires no data whatsoever.
56:32
There's no justification needed for this opinion expressed by
56:35
one person who is not elected, he's appointed, appointed
56:39
bureaucrat issues an opinion. And, and by the way, this is the
56:42
same in all the countries that participated in lockstep.
56:45
Your equivalent Minister of Health has the same power and
56:50
they probably did that in your country to enable this.
56:54
So they issued this opinion. Now we're now we're in the state
56:56
of public health emergency or fake by by WHO.
57:00
And under this condition, it treats now the situation as if
57:05
it's war in net effect and legal effect.
57:09
It enables military law to be now enacted.
57:14
And from that then they say then then the same person is just
57:18
secretary directs FDA to issue EUA authorizations for products
57:26
for this emergency. In this case, it's all the COVID
57:30
products, not just vaccines but everything that they used,
57:33
masks, swabs, PCR tests are not not validated.
57:38
All the process, processes and protocols such as killing people
57:43
in the hospitals with remdesivir and sedatives and calling it
57:47
COVID, Lying to the public, especially propaganda, lying,
57:53
censorship, are all COVID countermeasures and being
57:58
treated as if I lie to you to your detriment or your death
58:03
under following the instructions of HHS.
58:08
I have no liability. That's how the law is written
58:10
and you can never prosecute me. That's why no meaningful
58:14
prosecution has happened in the space.
58:16
Yes, there were some legal winds here and there.
58:18
Mask mandates were overturned someplace.
58:22
They are very, very small and meaningless.
58:25
The, the number one, the deaths that they caused have not been
58:29
prosecuted. So, and that's because that's
58:33
why, because the entire sovereign power is behind this
58:38
saying I authorize all these people to do this.
58:44
And no matter who they kill or injure, they're as long as they
58:48
follow my orders, they're OK. So if you remember Nuremberg
58:54
trials, right? They're the Nazi doctors.
58:58
Their legal chance was we were just following orders and it was
59:02
found that no, no, no, you can't.
59:04
You can't have that legal defense if you're killing
59:06
people. Well, so the US law makes it
59:09
explicitly legal. To kill people.
59:12
As long as you follow the orders of HHS and it's also legal to
59:16
lie about it. So FDA can continue lying about
59:19
it forever. As long as they say it's safe
59:20
and effective, they're absolved from any liability.
59:23
Now this law is is enacted, all of this procedure is enacted as
59:30
long as the prep back declaration for this emergency
59:34
remains open, remains in place and it remains in place.
59:38
So the outgoing agency secretary under Biden administration,
59:41
Javier Becerra extended it in December 2024 to last until
59:46
December of 2029. So now we have 10 years of
59:50
emergency of national grave concern of this respiratory
59:54
virus. And so that's why it's not over
59:59
because all of this continues. That's why FDA has been
1:00:02
approving more and more and more of these mRNA shots for COVID
1:00:06
without placebo-controlled trials, without safety
1:00:09
monitoring, without anything, despite people totally despite
1:00:14
the same people who are now in HHS.
1:00:16
They were all talking against COVID vaccines, yet the minute
1:00:19
they showed up on in HHS. Yeah, complete flip and they now
1:00:26
they're approving all these shots and they are now going to
1:00:28
approve self amplifying mRNA shot as well later this year.
1:00:32
Stargate. Oh, and Stargate and all that.
1:00:36
Yeah, so that's why I'm saying it's not over.
1:00:39
It continues. They continue lying to you.
1:00:41
They continue lying to the public.
1:00:44
They continue and now and now the the Maha propaganda
1:00:47
operation is to label me and people like, you know, I've been
1:00:52
collaborating a little bit on this with the the Mary Mary
1:00:56
Taylor Bowden and Naomi Wolf and Shannon Joy because we were four
1:00:59
of us kind of got together like we're we're just sick and tired
1:01:02
of this. And they're so they're calling
1:01:05
us crazy and unchanged and just emotional women and we just
1:01:12
can't understand the yeah, calm down, woman.
1:01:21
So we just understand politics, that big boys understand
1:01:23
politics better. We just understand politics, you
1:01:26
know, because, you know, if if RFK Junior removes that
1:01:29
declaration, he's gonna get fired.
1:01:31
I'm like, duh, because Trump works for pharma and RFK Junior
1:01:35
works for Trump. I understand politics, but look,
1:01:39
you know, they are on pharma payroll.
1:01:42
I'm not on pharma payroll. That's why I'm not crazy.
1:01:44
I'm calling for these shots to be removed.
1:01:53
You're just an emotional woman. Just an.
1:01:54
Emotional woman. Right, Sasha, I could talk to
1:01:59
you for hours more, but I can't if I'm looking at the time.
1:02:04
So how can my audience follow your work?
1:02:09
Right, so Sub Stack is the best place to find my work and to
1:02:14
read my articles. I publish several times a week
1:02:17
and it's Sasha latifa.substack.com and my
1:02:22
publication is called Due Diligence and art.
1:02:25
I also publish art piece with. They're not related at all, but
1:02:29
just people like the art. I like you Odd too.
1:02:34
Thank you Sasha, as always, it's such a pleasure chatting to you.
1:02:40
Thank you for joining me in the trenches.
1:02:41
Thank you. Thank you so much.