All right. Joining us now is Ryan Christian of the Last American Vagabond dot
com, and I wanted to get Ryan on. I talked about a landmark
fluoride lawsuit. I saw this reprinted on Free Thought Project, but of course
it goes back quite a while. The Last American Vagabond has been covering this
florid trial, going back to November of last year, but November of twenty
twenty two, and then again in the summer, because this is something that
has drug on for years in legal limbo and it's now about to come back
up in January. So I wanted to get Ryan on to talk about that
in some other issues. Thank you for joining us, Ryan, Hey,
my pleasure. David. It's an honor to be on with you. It's
a lot of our audience overlaps and that's something that people have been asking for
for a long time. So it's my pleasure to join. Well. Thank
you, thank you. It's great to have you on, and especially I
thought it was very important and I had not noticed this lawsuit until you've picked
it up and you've been on it. As you point out, the mainstream
media and even conservative media is not really talking about what's going on with this
fluoride lawsuit and bring us up to date as to some of the aspects of
this, and we can talk a little bit about what we anticipate is going
to happen as it resumes really in this month, but give people kind of
a background of what's been happening with us. Yeah, first of all,
the credit really goes to Derek Brose, writer for The Last American Bagbat,
who also runs The Conscious Resistance, who's been doing this work on this specific
topic even before the as we've turned it, the fluoride trial began. So
a lot of great credit goes to Derek Brose for keeping up on this when
so many others are. You know, it's such an important topic and so
many others, including independent media, aren't really talking about this, and it's
such an important shift in the understanding, and so for people to understand there's
been a debate about fluoride in your water for a long time, and a
quick small background on that. It really breaks down to being a byproduct that
was I mean, think of it this way. It's a byproduct that these
companies would otherwise have to pay to dispose of, but ultimately now pay to
put into our water under the argument that it somehow benefits our teeth, which
I mean, I make the joke all the time where it's like, our
government barely wants to take care of us in serious ways, but we're going
to pretend we're going to pay money to keep our teeth white. It just
doesn't make any sense. And even then, you could talk about floridos the
dental fluorosis of the teeth, which is what actually happens when people have too
much fluoride. But so really this has been put in our water under You
could argue that they think it's good for you or not. The point is
that the information over a very long period of time, and it's it goes
back a long time periviod study after period study finds that it is damaging.
Now there's a whole level when you get into the different science and different opinions
of how damaging. But let's be clear, it is not healthy for you,
and it has a lot of dangerou effects. It is neurotoxic. And
I'll get into the studies that are showing this. The most important point they're
pushing in the trial right now is that it is actually hurting your children.
It is reducing the IQ of your children, and it is in fact neurotoxic
and it has a lot of military's effects. Now the point of the trial,
now, this came in regard to the NACENT National Toxicology Program basically trying
to push investigate this study, this toxicology report, where they're trying to basically
get this study to be seen and acknowledged by the US government. Now at
the moment, they've been dragging their feet on this for I think over four
years since this report has been completed. Now, this is the important part.
And this is largely because of the fluoride Action Network. I mean almost
entirely. They've been really driving this entire thing. And the report has been
finished, the report has been stated to be finished, and every single time
it comes to a sort of a point culmination, they argue something's needed.
We need another report, we need another evaluation this time and this is you
know, there's a lot we can get into in between all of that,
right, And what it came down to in the last year Derek's been covering
this is they essentially said, look, we have the report that's done,
it has all the information included. You guys have checked off on it just
because you want another group that's not included to reevaluate this does not change the
fact that the report has been completed and it shows exactly what you guys are
trying to refuse to show. And all that ultimately happened was interestingly enough,
of all people, Rachel Levine put her basically stepped in and said, no,
we're going to pause this and this is publicly discussed until further notice.
And that was after all these different delays. Now Judge Chen, who is
the one who's been involved in this entire process, basically agreed with this.
You can sense frustration through these processes, and this entire time it's been done
via zoom because of COVID nineteen or the illusion they're in. And now what's
happened today or rather over the last so many months weeks, is they ultimately
Judge Chen came back and said, Okay, we're going to have the final
push for this. It's going to be in person. So one thing,
we're trying to fly out or we're going to be flying out Derek to cover
this in person, trying to raise some funds for that, and he's going
to be going either way. And what we're expecting is the actual culmination here
where I don't see how they can get away with another dragging of their feet.
This is going to be the moment we're hoping where they essentially go,
Okay, the report is public, here's what it shows, and then it
really is a game of who chooses to acknowledge it, which we already know
how that works. But it's there and the evidence is astoundingly clear. Well,
you know it's interesting, and you talk about this in your articles as
well. A CDC says, so this is our crowning achievement, you know,
the twentieth century until I guess they get their MR and A vaccines.
But really what we're talking about here above and beyond the debate over medical issues,
is we're talking about course consumption or course treatment, right, and so
in that way it ties to what we've just been through with the medical martial
law in the last couple of years, very tightly to that. We see
the CDC is going to decide where they're going to put in your body one
way or the other, put it in the water supply or put it in
and coerse you through. You know, the vaccine programs. You're not going
to go anywhere, do anything, or have a job unless you get this.
So they're all about this forced medication, and to me, that ought
to be the showstopper right there. You know, even we got a lot
of data that's gone over a lot of years. Harvard even did a study
talking about the correlation between lower IQ and children and fluoridation in the water.
So you know, we can have these arguments, and we should have these
arguments about this, but to me, it kind of feels like, for
the longest time, it feels like, you know, the debate that we
had over just the MRI vaccine. You know, it's like, well,
this is something is new, it's not been tested, but regardless, you
don't have any right to coerce me into this. And that's really what is
at the basis of all this fluorite stuff. It's big corporations working with the
CDC for their financial benefit and they're forcing you to consume this stuff. That's
that's the worst thing. Not only are they ripping us off, but they're
poisoning us and one way after the other, aren't they. Yeah, that's
such an important point, And exactly where I'm coming from in this is that
obviously we should be engaging with the fact that these things are dangerous and they're
killing people in the sense of the COVID nineteen injections, and that's an important
primary part of this, But obviously the central conversation should be around whether or
not it's dangerous. They have the right to just coerce you into doing this
or I mean, I agree with the word coerce in this, however,
but people would argue that essentially it's not being coerced, that's being put But
ultimately it's the same conversation, right that you are You ultimately don't have a
choice here unless you want to, and this is the choice game they play
with the COVID nineteen injections. Well you can go buy bottled water. Well,
not everybody has the option to do that, and ultimately it's not healthy
anyway. So I think it's an early example of how they were trying to
and to your point, go back and state for this long period of time
that that's our crowning achievement, trying to create the illusion, the understanding,
the impression that this was a success. And that's why that's the precedent for
X, Y and Z coming next. And there's been conversations about lithium in
the water. I mean, I often point to this a study that's been
done more than once in fact, where at high levels, and IH was
one of them discussing that should there be a need for some kind of in
this case, it was a bioethics like an mRNA conversation, a need for
something like that to be done compulsory, like we saw with COVID nineteen.
They'd argue time and again that it should be done secretly because well, they
don't understand and that wasn't peer reviewed science that was before COVID nineteen. So
I think that plays a factor. But the whole point is the mindset of
what they think they're allowed to do, whether or not. Really it's counterdew
constitutional rights, and they know that that's right. And as we look at
this, to bring this up to date and to look forward into the future,
we now see these people because hey, we know that you don't like
to get the shots, and so we're not going to stick a needle in
your arm. Instead, we've got these other forms of delivery, including aerosol
mRNA. So there's a lot of talk about that. Let's talk about putting
it into our food, mRNA shots and things like that. So again,
if we let this principle stand that they can put stuff in without our knowledge,
without our consent, they're going to find a way to do that with
many other products, and probably already are. You know, it's certainly food
additives and other things like that that are happening, and the way they've contaminated
so many things. But again, wherever we see this, we need to
oppose this openly. What they're trying to do in a hit way without our
consent, and it's going to come across a whole spectrum of things. Let
me also point out too something else that I think correlates with the vaccine stuff,
and that is the dosage. Right, how do you control the dosage
for something that you dump into the water. Well, I think the answer
is that you don't. You know, they can come up with a concentration
of it, but that's not necessarily going to be the concentration that you get
out of it. And then when you dump it into the water, you're
giving the same dosage of this to a baby that you're giving to a two
hundred pounds man. Okay, So how do they justify something like that?
And when you look at the mRNA aspect of it. When you had the
mRNA shots going out. We now know from looking at these different lots that
different lots varied by factor of thirty three from the lowest to the highest dosage.
The highest dosage was thirty three times which you would get at the lowest
dosage. To me, that looks very much like what they're doing in terms
dumping this stuff in the water. And if you don't control for dosage,
any medication, even something is beneficial, turns into a poison. Yes,
we all said exactly, And I think this overlaps with the first point you
made in regard to the m RNA and where it's going. But you know,
the first obvious point there is such an important thing to think about is
that they in any number of these conversations, you can see that kind of
disregard for the dose conversation actually, and I wanted to point out that in
regard to a lot, I think that's a really important conversation that we that
still needs more investigation. But one of the arguments that I want people to
remember is I think it was Ryan Cole made the argument that it's not necessarily
that that proves that was a deliberate act, which I'm completely considering that it
is, but that he argues that it's part of it is that the the
m RNA essentially or rather the lipid nanoparticles broke down and in ultimately that then
changed or altered the dose comparatively in one case anyway, and argue that in
some cases that might have actually saved people's lives. But you know, the
m RNA itself is dangerous, spike protein and so on. But but to
your other point, I just want to include that because I think it's fascinating
kind of where look, just so it's clear, I one hundred percent think
there was deliberate mouthfecence and then deliberate actual criminal action to hurt people. I
really believe that. I do. I can't think about the fact that overlapped
with that, there was just simple mistakes by people that don't care about your
safety, in you know, in conclusion, in combination. But to your
other point, let me say before we leave at that, you know,
when we look at that, and I made this point, when we looked
at it, it's like a factor of thirty three, It's like thirty three
hundred percent more dosage said, how in the world does this happen in pharmaceutical
world? Right? You know, they're so careful about the dosages and the
quantities that they put out there, and they have to be because, as
I said before, it turns into a poison. How could you have a
manufacturer that's kind of again, maybe it's something about the lipid nanoparticles breaking down.
I don't know, but it seems to me that is so extreme.
I can't imagine how that could be done in a pharmaceutical environment without deliberate malfeasance
with that or whatever you want to call it, maliciousness, but it seems
to be that it have to be a deliberate process. But go ahead to
the other point, and I agree completely. I think that really it matters
obviously whether it's delivered or not, But in the larger sense, it kind
of doesn't. It just shows you that either way, obviously, it still
leans into the point that we should have a choice here. Either they're making
so many mistakes that are killing people, or they're choosing to It kind of
amounts to the same point. But on the other side of it, the
m R and a part of it. To overlap that with what you were
saying it's exactly. One of my biggest fears around all of this is either
the step that's already taken that we're unaware of or that we haven't acknowledged,
or that it is about to happen, which is in regard to the self
spreading and really the same one step before that, the self amplifying vaccines,
which I think that's what this already is. They've already argued this. One
of Pfizer's earliest documents said self amplifying in regard to their Pfizer BNT too one
B two. I think that series and then that went away, And all
that really means is that essentially continues to produce the spike protein in a simplified
way, And that's what we know is happening already. As I think doctor
Peter mccolaugh in an unchallenged peer if you'd study that still stands on Elisa her
the sustained synthesis of the spike protein, that's what we're seeing. It's undeniable,
and we'll get into Arn't burkhartt same point, finding spike protein and all
over the body and the same kind of things. But my point is that
the self spreading, which I again question whether that might have already been used.
The omicron overlap and how that seems to be kind of a similar point
and where it started in Botswana or they claim it was South Africa and diplomats
that we can't verify that came from Botswana, you know, diplomatic community.
It seems like something was executed there. My point though, is that self
spreading, whether happening or next step is it keeps me up at night.
We're talking about something that's already been designed. They've talked about this going back
as far as I don't know if you're familiar with it, but it's called
insect Allies. It was a CDC program that scientists around the world signed documents
saying, you know, we know what you're doing. This is dual use
technology. It's a weapon, and they made it, but they just kind
of walked it back. Now we're talking about the same concept with with pathogens
or whatever you want to understand it as where it's something that could be released
that literally spreads from person to person and they proudly say and it inoculates these
people and there's no need for informed consent, like that's a proud statement coming
from the people discussing this. Yeah, that really concerns me. And to
your point, there's no dosage there. You can get back, you know,
inoculated whatever you want to call it, over and over and over.
If you're around the same people, the same thing happening. I don't know
how they make sense of that. And you know, there's also you know,
besides the aerosol delivery that they're talking about and putting it in food they're
talking about, there's also the issue of shedding. I was just talking to
a friend this last weekend back in Austin, and he never took the vaccine,
but he's got very sick with COVID and it's taken out his hearing in
one ear as he's so congested with He went to the dog, didn't get
into his chest into pneumonia, but he went to the doctor and they were
doing some blood tests and they were trying to draw the blood out and he
said it literally took them like twenty minutes to get a sufficient amount of blood
to come out. He said, the blood just wasn't flown. The technicians
said, have you ran a problem like this before us? Now as blood
was super super thick, and so the question is, you know, is
this something that is spreading even to unvaccinated people. They don't want there.
They have nothing but contempt for our consent, that's the key thing. And
they don't follow any procedures or testing, you know, they don't. They
don't even pretend to do testing to see if this stuff is safe or not.
We've had that discussion through this MR and A stuff all along. And
that's really began though with fluoride many many years ago. As you point out,
it was an industrial waste product that they would have had to pay a
lot of money to get rid of. It's used as rat poison in China.
And yet if they told everybody that this is going to be something's going
to help your teeth, they could get paid to dump it into our water.
That's the most amazing thing, isn't it It is? It is?
And one more point before we go, if we go back to Florida,
just that the overlap there you made is so important that it's This is why
I'm convinced this was not by accident that every single choice made, whether we're
talking about the choice to make people wear cloth masks, where a peer OFVID
study in twenty fifteen prove that increase your risk of illness. Every choice that
was made deliberately seemed to well, I think deliberately seemed to increase all the
problems. But it's the overlap of both mechanisms here or religious aspects of it.
The m RNA itself, as you pointed out, is at least now
being discussed as I think it was an overlap of MIT and Harvard of the
both the aerosolization of it and as well as the fact that it can be
deployed via particle like so they can release all the nanoparticles and it can inoculate
you in the same way. They say. So that's one side of it,
and let's not forget the technology. They argue is that mr and A
is the instruction to create the spike protein. But then, as you point
out, the spike protein itself, however, that comes along in and of
itself, is cytotoxic. That Salk Institute proved that with a peervieed study.
And the point was that itself, and this was the main point. They
said, the spike protein is capable of shedding, or rather they did in
that stity. They didn't say shedding, but rather just the in and of
itself can cause disease, which means that gives you symptoms, which means it
can then be spread. So whatever you want call that, How is that
not a self spreading concept. I mean that's what we're you know, you
get the spike proteins delivered, then it spreads to somebody else. But the
real problem is that we also know, as doctor Warren, Luigi Warren,
who was one of the primary people in regard to this technology itself the discovery
of m R and A, said that, yes, of course it can
shed. Rather the spike protein itself, he said, of course it can
shed, but he argued at the time that it was not likely to get
you sick because the amount was so small. But we've then later come to
find out that it was sustained synthesis. So it's all there if you really
just look at the information. So you're definitely spreading spike protein. And to
your question, I really don't know whether it's a risk. I would imagine
it clearly is to the average person. But you know, it's about keep
being healthy and fighting things off like anything, you know, But ultimately I
think that's a deliberate action. Oh, yeah, yeah, I said.
From the very beginning, I said, okay, so as they're describing this
self replicating, and you know, as Trump had his little dog and pony
show, he went around the table, how long is it going to take
you? That's too long, next person is faster, and then then I
finally get to the punchline. It's like, well, we can do it
right now because we can turn your body into a manufat actoring plant. And
I said, okay, so as they're describing this sounds like cancer or something,
that's how you turn this thing off? You know, how do you
stop this? And it turns out as people are starting to see, no,
it doesn't turn off. It keeps going on, It keeps replicating,
it keeps amplifying, as you pointed out. And so that's where we are
with us. But again, I think the floor I thing is healthy is
important from a health standpoint, and I think it's also important that people see
the bigger picture and how this has been done for many decades. They really
kind of set this precedent of coerced ingestion of their stuff for their corporate cronies,
and I think there's a lot of that that is connected. Let me
ask you this though, as we move forward to this year, talking about
the report that was there, and there's an article that just came out saying
that in that last Wednesday, there was a let me find the thing.
Yeah, here it is reportingly Florida to lower IQ and children is made public
after the CDC and the HHS tried to block it. Is that something that's
a new development because you've been talking about this for a long time. Is
that the report that I call him Dick Divine, Rachel Levine or whatever.
Is that the report that you tried to suppress? Or is this something that
we that is different from that. Yeah, I'm not I'm not familiar with
what article you're referencing. If it's new, then it's old. I mean
Derek Derek covered that exact point, I think maybe six months ago, I
think the same report. So basically this is in the opening discussion. I
don't think I mentioned that. The reason that we know and verbatim what the
report already shows is because it was leaked. It already information was already released,
it was already discussed, and it's already present. Now that's what's so
crazy is that you could we linked to the report in our coverage, so
it's already present, and yet that the corporate media nobody's talking about it.
And so yeah, that that might if it's a new article, that's a
little bit of old news. But I'm glad it's getting out to people.
You know, it's important because it's damning. I mean, it really is.
There's literally nothing in there that even gives you the indication that there might
be a benefit to it. And that's why I think they're dragging their feet.
That's the craziest part to think about. So they're aware of what it
says. They're not even disputing what it says. They're just going like,
well, let's get more evaluation from groups that have no historical being involved in
this process, you know. And yet they are okay allowing it to continue
to be in your water while terning your children. But we know, different
than in vaccinations or anything else we're talking about. But it just shows a
level of deliberate harm I think, you know, like choosing to let this
happen. Oh yeah, absolutely. And you know they've played this game with
the scientists who said, well we've got our conclusion, let us put it
out there. If you disagree with it. You can do that, but
that's not the way the game's played. The way the game is played is
to shut down anything that goes against their narrative. And that even happens,
of course internally, when you've got government scientists who are talking about the dangers
of floor right, they're just going to suppress that. That's where we are
right now, and that's why it's very important for people to see. You
know, Last American Vagabond, you guys have been covering this stuff, and
thanks for doing that. It's just amazing to me how nobody really seems to
care about anything except the presidential election. It is ain't going to change anything,
you know, if you're going to get focused on politics, focused locally
as to what's going to happen there. But you know, it takes up
everybody. It's all about entertainment, it's about national politics, and yet none
of the people and national politics are going to put any restrictions on the CDC,
let alone get rid of it. This predatory organization has been poisoning us
since the middle of the twentieth century, just in the water, let alone
the vaccines that they're involved in. You've got an article at Last American Vagabond
about Arnie Berthardt tell us a little bit about this guy who came out of
retirement to take a look at mRNA. Yeah, we're very, very very
proud of this work, and Taylor or Hudak deserves every ounce of credit for
the amazing work that was done here. She's a writer and interviewer for The
Last American Bagabond. It's it's profound and quite frankly, probably one of the
things I'm most proud of that we've ever done at The Last American Vagabond.
And it is it's a you know, high level, multi camera kind of
in his lab interview. And this was the final interview he gave before he
died. And there's a lot of discussion to be had around that. That's
something that I think we're going to dive into going forward. But it's a
it's a very strange circumstance. But the so he as you said, he
came out, you know, it's basically in the process of retiring. You
know that it was, as he says in the interview, it was something
somebody contacted him with this information and he kind of felt drawn to do something
about it. And and that draw him, drew him back into this and
so he was, as we now know looking back, one of the few
people that was willing that we're willing to go through and do what they thought
was right, you know. And that's one of the things, by the
way to state right out of the gate that is just over it's just blowing
over the top. In this interview. His integrity is impossible to miss.
Ever, is what he's doing is is at his expense, and it was
doing it because he thought it was right, you know, going to the
point to where he was working with other German pathologists and in the beginning until
suddenly whatever happened, somebody told no, they thought it was conspiracy theory.
They all just dropped it and ran. And so he was the he got
pulled into it and then ended up being the only one really driving this forward
save for the people in his inner circle. So the bottom line is that
he was a you know, very very highly respected pathologist and he went into
this work and started doing autopsies where people, as you well know, we're
not doing them like this is the lie that we were sold from the CDC
as I broke down in the first year, they're not doing the work they
claim they were doing in the investigation around the people they claim are dying,
they're not, you know, or rather I think more so into the second
year when the injections were given in regard to the byproducts of what was happening,
and they remember, they claimed were investigating every one of them, until
it came out that they didn't have the resources to do that, let alone
the autopsies, let alone interview everybody, you know, And so he started
doing this and lo and behold, it was exactly what we found. And
I think the two other examples that I've seen of autopsies that it's your body
is being overwhelmed with this process, I mean, And we can get into
the different and to be clear, I'm in no way an expert like he
was, and even Taylor, I think is far more immersed in the interworkings
of how these things all operate. But really coming down to just some of
the things I'd pulled up, the first part of it was the assumption of
what was really being caused in the process of these injections. And so people
were, like we all saw, they were saying, well, this looks
like this. Therefore it was caused by COVID, and nobody was doing in
the histopathology. Nobody was really diving into it to find these things out.
And what he ultimately found is what we what we all talk about, the
thrombocides thrombosis. Even doctor Bocti made this claim right in the first year.
If Armber correctly, the vit vaccine induced thromboid thrombosi is thrombocide ofpenia. And
so as he points out in this that it's really about this is your body's
process to try to heal the problems that are being created by by the injection.
But see the problem is that that's never stopping, so it causes all
these blood claws. He talks about lymphocytic in nation, which is the kind
of you know, I've talked about systemic inflammation for a long time, and
I think that's what ultimately this develops into. And then he argues the most
alarming problem, and this is what he argued was the vascolitis the argument about
the you know, the brain and the as well as the end of the
reel cells and the blood vessels, and how this is all causing the blood
clots and the breakdown of your system. I personally find the most alarming aspect
of this to be the sperm point. And he made this point before this
interview and in a public presentation, but he really made this clear in this
interview with Taylor that there there, in my opinion, there's just no way
that this was an accident. I mean, you can go back as far
as you want and find other research showing the same overlap. Knowing how this
process works, that he basically shows that these these are passing through your sperm.
And I mean, I think doctor Peter mccol has made that point as
well. I mean, and I don't know how we get away from something
like that. I often make the point about glyphosate in the sense that we
had a chance in time to maybe stop what they did with that, But
at this point, it's the world around, it's in the area breathing,
it's the clothes you're wearing, it's literally everywhere, And so how we stopped
this I think should be another main focus in regard to the spread of these
kind of things. But we're right now battling with people's awareness of whether this
is even the case. That's right, that's the heart part, that's right.
Yeah, we've got a lot of scientists and medical people who are now
looking at this. But of course, from the very beginning, the same
type of stuff we're talking about with fluoride was the big warning sign about this.
It's not been tested. We know what these people are doing. Yeah,
and they've come up with all these these talking about oh well look this
is long COVID, or now they talk about holiday heart, or this is
a new variant is going to come after your heart, or the brain fog.
There was a study I talked about yesterday. They said, well,
you know, look at this brain fog, that it must be due to
COVID. They said, as they did the study, they found that it
was due to people being in the hospital. So they said, it's not
the hospital though. It's serious illness always, no matter what it points to.
I had an orthopedic surgeon who got the shot because he was being coerced
into doing it, and it ended his career. He can't do surgery anymore.
And with all the horrible symptoms that he was having, he went to
doctor after doctor and they would just say, no, I'm not going to
touch this. They're afraid of this one. There's one of the reasons why
Bert Hart, who is retired. I think he came out and he didn't
have you know, you know, it makes it easier when you don't have
your career on the line, but you know, it's still it's a bold
thing to come out and oppose this and to expose this. And perhaps he
did pay the price for this, but for doing that, but for the
most part, he Finally, this orthopedic surgeon that I interviewed, he found
a doctor he said, well, I know what it is, and you
know what it is, but we're not going to say that, and I'll
help to try to treat you with this. That's how afraid everybody is of
identifying what this Trump shot is doing to people. Yeah. Yeah, I
also and I believe he was also an orthopedic surgeon. Doctor Malick I just
recently interviewed similar similar point, except he basically went to you know, he
went with the truth and ultimately lost his career for it, and now he's
spreading, you know, trying to do podcasts and just talk about this.
And so I like promoting his work because it's, you know, anybody that's
willing to sacrifice everything for the truth as somebody that I respect, you know,
it's yeah, it's really this whole process has been so overwhelmingly obvious from
day one in my opinion, you know, the everything seemed to be clear,
and the almost deliberate effort to both create the circumstance to drive this on
people, and that this is where I get into the question of what the
ultimate outcome, what the ultimate driving purpose was of all this, And I
think it is ultimately to create the setting sort of like we talk about the
fluoride step into what we're doing now for whatever is coming next. And I
think that this has been a resounding failure. Doctor Fauci has written articles and
cell dot com that make the argument that this didn't work, and we're not
even taking a step back. I mean they're now driving aggressively into things like
ferret nanoparticle universal flu vaccines that's literally about to come out, or a pan
coronavirus vaccine also using ferret and nanoparticles, which I mean the Guardian word an
article about this, I think in two thousand and six in regard to how
these the ferret and nanoparticle injections were used to literally control the movements of these
animals and an insect. Now that may sound ridiculous to some people. But
this is The Guardian covered this, and it's a peer reviewed science that overlaps
with people that were involved with the COVID nineteen injection, one of them being
Bob Langer, with the co founder of Maderna. You know, So these
things are very real and it's an alarming step that I think we're seeing.
That's why I think this conversation of what we're doing is so important. People
realize, you know, not what's coming next, but that it's already happening,
you know, right, that's right. Yeah, When we look at
nano tech, that's one of the things that is so you just don't know
what they're capable of doing. It's got like infinite possibilities. And you know,
as people look at artificial intelligence and some of these other things, I
think the most apaque of all of these is really nano tech that people don't
really understand the capabilities that are there. But when we look at the overall
picture, and I've talked about this with net and ya who and pushing his
own people in Israel as labrats, pushing them to Pfiser and of course you
know, I've played the clips of him multiple times calling doing a teleconference with
the World Economic Forum, Davos talking about how he's constantly on the phone with
Moderna and all these other people, how they're using his people as labrats.
It's just amazing. And yet you know, another part of it was they
were really leading in terms of tying a digital ID. That's a big part
of where this is all coming. And you've got an article that came out
just to let's see December twenty seventh, just the end of last week,
Pfiser is experimenting in Gaza with a digital ID, just the beginning of this.
So tell us now what is happening. We know what what Netanyahu did
to you know, push Israel to the front of the line, uses people
as labrats to collect data for Pfizer and then to push the digital ID.
What is happening now in Gaza with that? Well, just to clarify the
title, and this is the way my title my shows often that there's a
comment that's kind of like separate topics. But but ultimately the Ffiser part of
it is they're they're right now experimenting with a A it is stated an experimental
injection to fight what was I think uh A fungus of undefined origin and this,
and this goes into the very alarming discussion about what's been done to gas
And I'm not even getting into the bombing aspect of it, just the deliberate
kind of destabilization, the flooding, which weirdly was stopped to discuss they know
a lot to talk about on the corporate media. And right after that happened,
we saw this flooding and yes it was raining, but I've never seen
this kind of flooding before in the areas. To add their flooding underneath the
ground that rose up to their waste into many places, you know, and
so that what that caused is what they worried about, was a massive spreading
of waste and and you know it caused the spreading of illness. Right,
So one part of it is wondering whether this was deliberate, right and then
and then ask her, I mean, we've talked about the I'm sure you
have discussed before the concept of Israel's battle tested weapons that they test on Palestinians
and then sell as battle tested. So I wonder what this kind of dynamic
is. As you mentioned as Netnyah, who openly stated that this is Pfiser's
or rather Pfiser called it Pfiser's lab, as he openly stated that they were
allowing them to find out how these things worked on people. So what they're
using is an injection that Peiser of course is testing, and it's barely tested.
It's unexperimental, and interestingly, this is designed to stop in one case,
Condida Albacon, which was guess what the thing that was spreading through hospitals
during all of the COVID nineteen discussion. So I don't know if there's an
exact point that makes that overlap, but I found that interesting either case.
The point is that Pfiser, yet again is being allowed to experiment on the
Israeli people or in this case the Palestinian people, because they're being told they
can based on something that we can't even define. The digital ID part of
it was just going into the deeper part of it, which I can't easily
overlap with Israel. The point made and all of this is, I mean,
this is a universal agenda, as I think you're well aware of,
and this is going around the world and it is already happening now. I
think what is the original drive was sort of as we all saw the vaccine
passport and the argument that that was in, you know, one that we're
stepping into a technological world, so we shouldn't do paper anymore, but rather
that it was safer and less dangerous than germs in the paper, you know.
And so that didn't work. I mean, clearly people pushed back.
They tried. It worked in some cases, but it wasn't as sound as
I think they wanted. Now it's sort of coming the other way, and
this is how I see this happening. And this is where you know,
Israel's involved with the CBDC aspect, and what they're creating is this justification for
digital currency in the same discussion, right, they say paper money is dangerous
and spreads pathogens. And so what I believe is now going to happen is
sort of the inverse of what I expected, which is that the CBDC aspect
is going to be pushed on us, maybe because of some mass event that
wipes out all of their you know, paper money records and they have to
dole out digital currency, like that's a worry that I have. But then
that will be the point at which, and this is my guess, where
they say, oh, well, we'll give you back your digital currency.
We don't worry you didn't lose anything as long as you sign up for this
digital life ID that then will allow you to have it. I mean,
who wouldn't go through that process to get what they think is theirs back,
you know, the money you stored in the bank before the EMP or whatever
happens. Now. I'm not saying I think that's happening. I just think
that's a possibility. So that being said, last point is just that this
is how we're seeing this driven and everywhere around the world, coercion as you're
pointing out the justification that is needed because these people in South America don't have
rights without it, which is a lie, or you know, any number
of ways that's happening. That's right, And that's when I can't That's why
I tried to get people to understand. Now, the way the government gets
what it wants is usually not with direct mandates and coercion. It's usually with
bribery. And you know, they can conveniently, with some kind of a
financial crisis take everything away from you and then doll this out. That's what
they did. Bill Gates did with Odhar and India went to the poor people
and said, well, we'll give you health care, we'll give you welfare,
but you're gonna have to take the number. And so I think that's
going to be the way they're going to do this. So probably even pull
kind of a world coin type of thing and say, hey, you know
this new stuff here. We're going to give you special treatment, reduce the
taxes or something, or you know, here's some free money, but you've
got to sign up for this stuff. And so it'll be that way.
It'll be done as something that you must accept or that you made as an
offer for you to accept. But they will make your life very difficult if
you don't accept it. They will take things away and then offer this as
a carit to you. And that's the way the federal government always operates.
They operate by using their ability to create money out of thin air. They
use it to bribe states and local governments to you know, here's a bunch
of money. Now if you don't do X, we're going to take that
money away. It doesn't matter whether you're talking about the boys in the girls
bathroom or whether you're talking about any of these other issues. I think that
is going to be the way they're going to operate. They're going to create
some kind of a crisis. This will be their helping hand to you.
It won't probably come to you as a mandate. And that's the scary thing,
because this is being pushed by the CBDC and the digital ID stuff,
and everything's being pushed by both Biden and the Trump administration was being pushed,
was pushing it. Jared Kushner when he was there, was pushing CBDC.
And so for the most part, the politicians won't even talk about this.
And as you point out, every country, every political philosophy, every political
party was marching in lockstep to this global agenda throughout twenty twenty. It truly
was amazing to see. And it is amazing. I think, Ryan,
as I try to talk about this, people just well Trump never forced anything
on anybody. It's like, okay, you know, we just we got
this partisan blindness about this because they're lined up behind you know, the left
or the right, or the Republicans or Democrats, and we can't say what
is actually being done to us and what they're going to do in the future.
But I think you're right. I think it will be presented to us
as well, here's this this nice stuff that you can we're going to help
you out after the problems that we created. That's always what they do.
Well, what I often have said over the years is it started. That's
how it starts every time, where it's just like we saw with the COVID
injection, it's you know, here this, if you take this thing or
you do this action, you get to go to the front of the line.
Yeah. Right, But then eventually when especially if nobody does it,
they go okay, But now if you don't do it, now you go
to the back of the line, right then it becomes well, if you
don't do what, you're killing grandma, So we have to do it right.
Like, that's the escalation we've seen. And so that's where I worry
about this is I feel like we've already passed that step where they're trying to
go like, look at this great new thing. So I worry that it's
going to be something that's a little bit more coercive or like a rug pull
kind of an action. But you know, I think that it all very
clearly shows you that the same people that you know. A good example is
something like the GMO program. Right, How is it possible that we have
somebody like Bill Gates who has spectacularly in worldview failed. Right, The company,
the countries that they were pushing GMOs are more food and secure now than
they were before they push that agenda. So the point is we let them
just try again with another GMO product. You know, these people are connected
with all of this, and then includes the CBDCs, that includes you know,
it's all interconnected. Now for those that feel like that somehow starts to
develop into an image of what you think you're supposed to dispute as conspiracy theory,
it's just a reality of the way the world works. As you well
know, David, the powerful people will often collect, conspire if you will,
you can use whatever word you want to decide what they will do to
gain more power, to influence their position. And you know, you could
pretend that sometimes that overlaps with what's best for the people. Quite frankly,
I think that's just a coincidence when that happens. Oh yeah, yeah,
it absolutely is true. And that's why I'm trying to explain to people.
It doesn't matter what country or what party, but it blinds people because they
get into these political loyalties to really see what's going on, and it is
across the board. And that's what's so dangerous about this is that you know
they control and manipulate us with this phony competition between different groups that are both
pushing for the same thing. And so that's why it's very important. I
want to keep a track of what's going on with the fluoride stuff, so
I know we'll be talking again about that. That's a very important thing.
And again it shows the long term disregard for our choice as well as a
portion of consumption of this stuff in and of itself. Ought to be something
that people push back against, and they need to realize that this has been
going on for decades. It's been going on through Republicans and Democrats being in
charge in Washington. It really doesn't matter from that standpoint. So we really
do have to fight this, bring up awareness of it, and maybe we
can get people start fighting this at the local level. That's really ultimately is
there where they pump it into the water. So if you can stop this
at the local level, then you're on your way to getting control of individual
health, taking it away from these public health dictators that really have established themselves
in the last couple of years. It's great talking to you again, Ryan
Christian and it is the last American Vagabond. Dot com is where you'll find
these articles in a great interview. Take a look at that interview with Arnie
Berkhart that we were talking about. A lot to learn from that. Thank
you so much, Ryan, great talking to you, My pleasure, David.
If I could just leave you with one one in general, I think
it's important, you know, maybe we could talk about this in the future,
maybe have you on my show and so on, about the idea of
you know, as far more than just what we talked about today and akin
disrupting chemicals, you know, all the different things that are just drenched.
Our world is drenched with these things and they don't care about our health.
And so we'll be covering this more. And you know that by that way,
that includes life of state, what's in the injections and so on.
But Derek is going to be covering the Florid trial, so make sure you
keep track of that and we'll we'll be talking soon about that in general.
And it's an honor to be on the show, David, so nice.
Thank you and thank you for being on top of this when everybody else is
ignoring it, and you know, we can throw into all that soup,
even things like five G. You know, the health effects of five G
another example they don't care and another example of how it comes back to surveillance.
The surveillance is not even a question, you know, but there is
a lot of evidence to show that the health effects of five G and other
things. But again, we got to have this because you know, we
got to beat the Chinese and that type of thing. It is absolutely it's
absolute insanity and all we can try to do is try to inform people about
this. So thank you so so much for what you do. Ryan appreciate
it. The Last American Vagabond dot com. That's where you can keep up
with what's going on with the fluoride stuff as well as many other issues.
Thank you, Ryan, appreciate it. The David Knight Show is a critical
thinking super spreader. If you've been exposed to logic by listening to The David
Knight Show, please do your part and try not to spread it. Financial
support or simply telling others about the show causes this dangerous information to spread.
Father people have to trust me, I mean trust the science. Wear your
mask, take your vaccine, don't ask questions using free speech to free minds.
It's The David Knight Show.