exposes Gates plan tocontrol global health policy Alex: All Right.
Alexander, we need to talk about the formerfounder of Microsoft and his involvement in CV [coronavirus], and his vaccine agenda.
Now, on January 30th-31st there was an incredibleinterview with Robert F.
Kennedy Jr on RT America [Transcript of Kennedy interview here] He’s chairman for the Children’s HealthDefense.
He’s a philanthropist; he’s an activist;he’s a Democrat; he’s a liberal; he comes from one of the most elite liberal Democratfamilies probably ever in the history of the US.
And he’s really outspoken against Bill G, the Microsoft founder, and what he is pushing now with his vaccine agenda, and dealing withCV.
I’m concerned with what he’s pushing aswell because he’s appearing everywhere all of a sudden.
He was kind of off the map for a couple ofyears; he stepped down from the day-to-day operations at Microsoft a while ago and he’sbeen working on his foundation [Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation].
All of a sudden it seems that he’s on everychannel, taking every interview and talking about how he feels that every country shouldact, and how the world should act when dealing with CV [coronavirus].
Unfortunately it seems that a lot of governmentsaround the world are going along with what he’s saying, and what he’s saying seemsto be where we’re heading – i.
, a vaccination where they’ll be able to then see if youcan travel abroad, if you can go outside, and go to certain shops, because that vaccinationmay have a chip or may have some sort of marker, or maybe some sort of paper documents as well, and when you show those credentials then you’ll be able to go about your normal business.
If you don’t have those credentials thenof course you won’t be able to do anything; you may not even be able to open up a bankaccount.
I don’t know.
Billy seems to be pushing.
From Robert F.
Kennedy’s article, in whichhe eviscerates Bill G – and before you go on, I just want to let all our viewers knowthat we’re being extremely careful what we’re saying because we know that YT [YouTube]may – will, not may – absolutely take down this video if we start mentioning names.
And what’s going on here.
We’re being very careful with the wordsthat we use.
That’s why we’re using “founder of Microsoft”or “Bill G” or “CV” or “corona”, etc.
So just keep that in mind everybody.
We want this video to be up online for peopleto see it.
So, Alexander? Alexander M: Exactly.
So bear with us if we have to use carefullanguage and choose our words very carefully.
This is something that we have to do.
But first of all, you’ve mentioned a certainperson, the founder of Microsoft.
As far as I know, he’s not a biologist oran epidemiologist, or a medical doctor, or an expert in all of these things.
Alex [interjecting]: He’s a computer nerd.
Alexander M: He’s that, obviously.
He’s also a monopolist, because that’swhat Microsoft for a very long time was, and to a great extent still is.
I mean, it still dominates vast chunks ofthe IT industry.
So he’s a monopolist.
He’s a billionaire.
For a very long time he was one of the richest…well, he was the richest man in the world.
He’s also somebody who has a history ofbeing extremely controlling.
So I ask this question, and I think it leadsback directly to the points that you were making: Firstly, why is he interested so much in thesesubjects and topics, and upon what authority does he come forward and give all these interviews, and express himself in all these ways about subjects which seem to me to be completelyoutside his sphere of knowledge? And secondly, why is he being treated by somany people as if he were an authority on these kinds of subjects in which he is notremotely qualified? Why is it not being pointed out that whilehe is not in any sense a medical authority, or in biology, or a scientist, or a life scientist, he is a monopolist and a billionaire, and an oligarch? The one thing I know about monopolists andbillionaires and oligarchs, even when they say they are philanthropists, is that theyare invariably and always people with agendas, and I can’t help but think that he has anagenda, and that this is an agenda we should be extremely careful about.
I’m going to add something else.
I was reading a few days ago – this is notdirectly à propos of this gentlemen that we’ve been talking about, but of the enormousprofits that whoever is the first person to come up with a vaccine to deal with this presentcrisis is going to make, and of the enormous amount of competition between various laboratoriesand groups of people to produce this vaccine.
I also remember how this used to be said formerlyabout IT, and how certain very well-placed people scooped in all this work that peoplehad been doing in IT, took control of it, imposed their own conception of it, and asa result obtained an absolute stranglehold, for a long time, of the IT industry.
And I can’t help but think, when I lookback at the history of this person, that maybe he has a similar plan for vaccines.
Alex: I agree, and I think it’s even moresinister than that: I think it’s the combination of having a monopoly on the vaccine and thenhaving a monopoly on the technology to track people who have tested negative or positivefor the virus.
Alexander M: It brings the two together, andof course you’re already looking at all these apps which, to be very clear, beganin China but also South Korea, where the South Korean government gives you an app which tellsyou, alerts you, whether you’re in close proximity to someone who is testing positive.
So is this the world where we’re going tobe? Let’s assume this particular health crisisis gone once and for all – but we’ll have other ones, because there’s always goingto be other things.
Are you going to be alerted every time somebodyclose to you comes round with rubella, or ‘flu, or whatever it is? Are you going to have people monitored likethis so that you’re alerted in this fashion, and that you’ll have to have the vaccinebecause if you don’t have the vaccine an app of this kind will be warning people – youknow, red lights will be flashing – that you’re close to somebody who hasn’t beenvaccinated.
Is that the world we’re heading towards? It seems to me you’re bringing togethervaccines and IT technology in a way which is extremely disturbing.
You see somebody who knows all about IT, presumably, and who’s suddenly taking this very, very extraordinary interest in vaccines.
And we’re talking about somebody who hasa history of wanting to control vast swathes not just of industry but of life, the waypeople live their lives, because IT does determine to a great extent how people live their livesnowadays.
So I’d be very, very wary about all of this.
Go on, Alex.
It’s very scary because it’s going todictate whether you travel or not; whether you can to on a plane; go to a shop or shoppingmall… Alexander M [interjecting]: …get a taxi, get admitted into hospital; go to see your doctor, if you want to do that.
Or, if you want to follow the Chinese model, get credit.
If you need credit, if you want to get a creditcard, have you got all of these vaccines, for example? Alex: Sounds like hell.
But yeah, I want to say that I’m going toput that RT America interview which took place on January 31st 2020, with Robert F.
KennedyJr, which is just an incredible interview because it does predate this pandemic crisisby a good month.
It’s very interesting to hear what he hasto say.
Alexander M: And just to remind everybody, we are talking about a Kennedy, Democratic Party royalty to all intents and purposes, so you know this is something that is concerning people from many sides of the political spectrum.
You mustn’t pigeon-hole people who say thatthey’re concerned about this particular gentleman we’ve been talking about is upto.
Even a Kennedy is worried about him.
And going on that, during the interview withRT he makes it a point to say – and this is his own words; I’m paraphrasing – hesays ‘I’m not anti-vaccine.
What I am is someone who wants to make surethat vaccines are properly tested before we start distributing them to the masses.
’ He starts bringing up examples of how BigPharma along with…let’s call it the ‘Bill Foundation’…have joined forces to forcepeople in certain countries and certain regions, for example India and Africa are the two regionsthat he highlights, to force them to get these vaccines and the results have been absolutelyhorrific.
Let me read you just one part from the articlethat he wrote the other day.
I’m putting a link in the description boxbelow – and here – and I suggest everyone read it.
It’s not that long of a read.
I’ll read you one part, Alexander, and youcan comment on it because after I read it I was absolutely horrified as to what they’redoing to people, Big Pharma and the Bill Foundation.
“Vaccines, for [Bill] are a strategic philanthropythat feed his many vaccine-related businesses (including Microsoft’s ambition to controla global vaccination ID enterprise) and give him dictatorial control of global health policy.
[Bill’s] obsession with vaccines seems tobe fueled by a conviction to save the world with technology.
Promising his share of $450 million of $1.
2billion to eradicate polio, [Bill] took control of India’s National Technical Advisory Groupon Immunization (NTAGI) which mandated up to 50 doses of polio vaccines through overlappingimmunization programs to children before the age of five.
Indian doctors blame the [Bill G] campaignfor a devastating non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) epidemic that paralyzed490000 children beyond expected rates between 2000 and 2017.
In 2017, the Indian government dialed back[Bill’s] vaccine regimen and asked [Bill] and his vaccine policies to leave India.
NPAFP rates dropped precipitously.
” Alexander, what do you make of that? It’s incredible.
Alexander M: It is incredible, but it doesn’tsurprise me.
Now can I just say that I’m not somebodywho is against vaccines.
I get flu vaccines regularly, every year.
But vaccines are highly intrusive things andI come back to what I said about [Bill]: he is not somebody who has any knowledge, anyacademic training or practical training in this field.
He is becoming involved in something whichhe doesn’t understand, at least he doesn’t understand it scientifically or medically, because he doesn’t have that kind of a qualification.
He is intruding into something that he notonly doesn’t understand, but which he has a very, very clear agenda – which of coursehe’s packaging in this humanitarian way.
Vaccines are massively intrusive things.
This is one thing, by the way, which severaldoctors have told me that if you’re going to have a program of vaccination, or you aregoing to develop vaccines, you need to know very well what you’re doing.
It’s got to be done very carefully, andin fact a lot of doctors tell me – doctors who support vaccines, and I’ve discussedthis with doctors – that we are vaccinating far too much, that there are far too manyvaccines floating around, too many vaccinations, far too much use of antibiotics, and of courseit can have very negative consequences if it’s not done sensibly and intelligently– and sparingly.
What this particular individual wants to dois he wants to force vaccines on people.
It’s a very top-down, authoritarian model, and he wants to do it in a way that will give him a monopoly of it, and ultimately an informationmonopoly also.
So it’s alarming, and I think all thesepeople who are inviting him onto their programs and letting him give interviews should bemuch more careful about this, and should ask themselves, firstly, does this person knowwhat he’s talking about medically or scientifically? And secondly, what agenda does he have? Because he clearly does have one.
If he wants to help people health-wise thereare lots of charities he can give his money to.
Alex: I think Robert F.
Kennedy is onto him.
Alexander, I’ll read you two more paragraphsbefore you close out the video, and these two paragraphs are just as incredible as thelast paragraphs that I read.
“During [Bill’s] 2002 MenAfriVac campaignin Sub-Saharan Africa, Gates’ operatives forcibly vaccinated thousands of African childrenagainst meningitis.
Approximately 50 of the 500 children [whoreceived a new vaccine against meningitis] developed paralysis.
South African newspapers complained “Weare guinea pigs for the drug makers.
” Nelson Mandela’s former Senior Economist, Professor Patrick Bond, describes Gates’ philanthropic practices as “ruthless andimmoral.
In 2010 [Biil] committed $10 billion to theWHO saying “We must make this the decade of vaccines.
” A month later, [Bill] said in a TED talk thatnew vaccines “could reduce population.
” In 2014, Kenya’s Catholic Doctors Associationaccused WHO of chemically sterilizing millions of unwilling Kenyah women with a “tetanus”vaccine campaign.
Independent labs found a sterility formulain every vaccine tested.
After denying the charges, WHO finally admittedit had been developing the sterility vaccines for over a decade.
Similar accusations came rom Tanzania, Nicaragua, Mexico and the Philippines.
” Alexander, I know that India pretty much booted[Bill] and his entire operation out of their country as well.
You have a lot of countries here who are pissedoff as to what was going on via Big Pharma and the [Bill Foundation].
Alexander M: Well, indeed we do, and can Ijust point out, forcible vaccination.
Who empowered…what does it even mean? I mean, how is it done? Alex [interjecting]: Can I just say that RobertF.
Kennedy, in the article, has all the hyperlinks, everything is very well sourced.
I just want to make a note of that.
Everything is very well sourced, and whenyou see the article you’ll see that he’s pretty much linked every one of his claims.
Alexander M: It sounds to me like an extremelypowerful man and an immensely powerful company and organization and foundation are basicallystrong-arming governments in weak countries.
India is not perhaps quite such a weak country, which is why they booted him out; but in weak countries to actually carry out compulsoryand forcible – and ‘forcible’ implies violent – vaccination programs, which area form, frankly, of human engineering.
That’s the only word I can use for it.
And human control – I mean it’s very, very disturbing to me.
I repeat, again, I am not against vaccineswhen they’re properly used by people who understand what they’re doing and are doingit for a genuine health purpose.
I’m not convinced that this is what thisis all about.
It sounds very, very sinister to me, and Iquestion whether it is in fact for this person to say that this is “the century of vaccines.
” I mean this is an absurd thing for someonelike that to say.
This is not his field of expertise.
We shouldn’t treat him as if he has greatknowledge of these things.
And he’s clearly pursuing an agenda – anddoing this in a violent way, because ‘forcible’ seems to me to imply violence, or at leastcoercion, and we’ve seen that it’s had some catastrophic consequences for many ofthe people that he’s forced this thing on.
Alex: It’s very dangerous to have someonelike this force themselves into the public policy debate, isn’t it? Alexander M: It’s extremely dangerous.
And when people talk about the world becomingan oligarchy this is the classic example of this.
Remember, he is a private individual.
He’s not elected; he’s not accountableto people.
He’s not accountable to the people of Kenyawho find they’ve been sterilized.
He’s not accountable to the people of Indiaon whom he’s forced polio vaccines which have resulted in people – children – dying.
He’s not accountable to those people.
He could simply walk away, and if he’s managedto get governments to agree to do these things with him I don’t think he’s even financiallyaccountable for them.
So this is a very, very dangerous thing, andit should be stopped.
It’s not for him to do.
I come back to what I said: if he cares abouthealth, that’s fine.
If he wants to help people there’s plentyof good, reputable health charities he could give his money to.
What he’s actually doing is he’s actinglike a parastatal person [i.
someone having political authority, serving the state directly]and a policy maker, imposing his policies or his agenda on individuals in India andKenya and Nicaragua, wherever – and doing so through force.
[NB] I didn’t use the word ‘forcible’vaccinations; that comes in this article, which as you say, correctly, is extremelywell researched.
Alex: One final question.
Hypothetically speaking, and it’s actuallya probable hypothetical scenario.
Say [Bill] in the UK (and you, Alexander, understand UK law), say [Bill] does manage to push parts of his agenda, or his full agenda, in the UK, how is a UK citizen protected from opting out of such policies or orders thatsay you have to get this vaccine or this certificate or this document, otherwise, I’m sorry, you can’t go to the gym, or you can’t open a bank account, or can’t get in a plane.
I mean, what is a citizen to do if [Bill]and the machine behind him actually get governments to go along with his thinking? Alexander M: Well, there are privacy lawswhich are in place.
Whether they would be a strong enough protectionin this kind of situation I don’t know.
I suspect not, probably, so it’s somethingto be very, very worried about.
And bear in mind that if we’re talking aboutspecifically Britain, we already have an over-close connection between the pharmaceutical industry–Big Pharma, if you like – and the National Health Service, and of course the NationalHealth Service can effectively decide what kind of treatment you receive, and it’svery difficult to resist it.
I mean, you go to a doctor in the NationalHealth Service, and the doctor tells you that you must be vaccinated against X, and yourefuse to accept that vaccination, then it’s very difficult to change [doctors].
You might find it extremely difficult to getalternative treatment elsewhere.
Alex: What about your daily life? Like, say you say ‘I don’t want this vaccine.
I just don’t want it’? Are there are laws that protect you from goingto the bank and opening a bank account, and the bank says “We’re not going to giveanyone a bank account unless they scan t heir chip over our bar code, which shows that they’vebeen vaccinated? Alexander M: Well, as I said, there are dataprotection laws, there are privacy laws, but the point is these are not very strong, andthey could become much weaker if a political decision is taken to go along with somethinglike this then it’s very easy to see how those would break down.
At the moment, the places where they’vebeen breaking down, as we’ve seen from this article, are poor countries, or weak countries, but of course if you start doing that and you start establishing your foothold in countrieslike India or Kenya, or Nicaragua or wherever, then slowly that can incrementally build untilyou start to expand your presence in big countries.
We mustn’t think that this isn’t somethingwe should be concerned about.
We should be extremely concerned about it, and I come back to what I said: this person has no background in this field.
What he has is an awful lot of money and anawful lot of power, but he is ultimately unaccountable and that makes him extremely dangerous.
If he wants to help people there are plentyof health charities he can give his money to.
What he is doing is he’s meddling in medicaland health policy to pursue an agenda of his own which is to get everybody vaccinated.
Alex: Very dangerous stuff.
Alexander M: Very dangerous.
Get everybody vaccinated…for what purpose? Alex: To have everybody tracked.
Alexander M: To have everybody tracked.
And of course he’s got the big technologybackground and company which is there to do it for him.
So let’s be very careful – not just careful, let’s be… Alex [interjecting]: Vigilant… Alexander M: Extremely vigilant, about this.
It’s something we should be very, very waryabout, and of course if he tries…if this individual tries to capitalize on the currenthealth crisis to pursue this agenda we should be even more vigilant and even more careful.
We should not let him exploit this for hisown purposes in this way.
Alex: All right.
Alexander Mercouris, Editor-in-Chief of The Duran, thank you very much.