He is joined by Bret Weinstein, who provides insights into the response to the pandemic and the World Health Organization's (WHO) plans for the future.
Weinstein begins by discussing how the Covid-19 crisis has exposed the pharmaceutical industry's focus on profit rather than improving overall health. He highlights the demonization of alternative treatments like Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, as well as the potential consequences of the Covid-19 vaccine, including an estimated 17 million deaths.
Tucker expresses shock at the potential death toll and compares it to the casualties of a global war. Weinstein agrees, describing it as a tragic historical event. He criticizes the administration of the vaccine to healthy children, who are unlikely to benefit from it but may suffer serious harm. He questions the justification for continuing to administer the vaccine when the emergency is over and there is no evidence that it prevents transmission of the virus.
WATCH: BRITISH COLONEL RICHARD KEMP REPORTING FROM GAZA
January 07, 2024
Weinstein delves into the ethical dilemma faced by the pharmaceutical industry, which must balance the benefits of drugs with the potential harms they may cause. He argues that once the industry becomes comfortable with causing deaths, it becomes easier to rationalize actions that prioritize profit over public health. He also emphasizes the importance of relying on older drugs with established safety profiles, rather than constantly pursuing new, potentially riskier options.
WATCH: NO CLUE WHY THEY ARE PROTESTING: "I WISH I WAS MORE EDUCATED"
The conversation then shifts to the battle between those questioning the Covid-19 vaccine narrative and the WHO's efforts to control the narrative. Weinstein describes it as a David versus Goliath struggle, with dissenting voices managing to reach millions of people through platforms like Joe Rogan's podcast. He suggests that the WHO is revising its structures to prevent such dissent in the future, aiming to silence podcasters and mandate certain measures internationally. Weinstein warns that this could hinder the ability to assess the true harms of future emergencies and emphasizes the need for tools to make informed decisions.
TRUMP READY TO DEBATE BIDEN 'ANYWHERE, ANYTIME, ANYPLACE,' BUT WILL IT HAPPEN?
Tucker raises the concern that an international health organization could undermine the First Amendment in the United States. Weinstein confirms that this is indeed a possibility, as discussions are underway at the international level to grant such powers to the WHO. He describes the situation as a coup, with the potential elimination of national and personal sovereignty. Weinstein argues that the proposed modifications to global public health regulations and treaties could allow the WHO to define a public health emergency in any way it sees fit and mandate remedies, including vaccines and gene therapy. He also highlights the potential for censorship and control over discussions surrounding these measures.
CRITICS SLAM BIDEN'S ATTEMPT TO RELATE PERSONAL TRAGEDY TO POLICE OFFICER DEATHS
In conclusion, Tucker and Weinstein shed light on the Covid-19 pandemic and its aftermath, raising important questions about the pharmaceutical industry, the WHO's plans, and the potential erosion of personal freedoms. Their discussion serves as a reminder to critically evaluate the actions and motives of those in power, especially in times of crisis.
Discover alternative ideas that will make you think
Engage in mind bending debate
Earn points, rise in rank, have fun
