PERSPECTIVES ON THE PANDEMIC XII
May 15th, 2020
[00:00:20.06] JOHN KIRBY: What is the importance of the term, biologics?
[00:00:23.05] ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.: Biologics are a family of medications
that, essentially, is grown on biological material, like we were talking about. They're viruses that are grown on animal tissue. The regulatory significance of the term is that when the CDC was originally the Public Health Services (and Public Health Services was the predecessor agency), the Public Health Services was a quasi-military agency. And from the beginning, the vaccine program was looked upon as a national security defense against biological attacks on our country. So, it always had military implications. They wanted to make sure that if, particularly during the Cold War period, that if the Russians attacked us with anthrax or some other biological agent, we could quickly formulate a vaccine and then deploy it to 200 million people without regulatory impediments.
[00:01:31.23] And so—but if you call it a medicine, it would have to go through a
regulatory process that other medications have to go through, including double-blind placebo studies, prior to licensing. And so, they opted to give it this, kind of, to call vaccines biologiques, rather than calling them medicines, and to exempt, informally, but in truth, in fact, exempt biologiques from the necessity of going through safety testing. So, of the 72 vaccines that are now mandated, vaccine doses, that are now mandated for our children, if they want to get an education, prior to the age of 18, not one of them has ever gone through double-blind placebo testing, or, indeed, been tested against an inert placebo, under any kind of situation, prior to getting their license from the FDA. And that's a problem, because what it means is that nobody knows what the risk profile for those products is.
[00:02:41.17] And what that means is, there is nobody who—you know, you hear again
and again, "Well, yes, vaccines do cause injuries, but the good they do is so much better, so dwarfs the harm that they cause, that it's practically infinitesimal." But that's all speculation. Nobody can actually tell you that, because they don't know what the risk profile for those products is, so they don't know whether that—
[00:03:10.26] KIRBY: Isn't there after-market testing? Isn't there after-market—
[00:03:14.22] KENNEDY: Well, there's a surveillance system, called VAERS (Vaccine
Adverse Event Reporting System), but the surveillance system is designed to fail. It is failure by design. And HHS acknowledges that fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries are captured by that system. And, it's a voluntary—the reason it's not captured is it's a voluntary system. And so, just put yourself in the position of a doctor who can volunteer to report a vaccine injury: if he gives your baby a vaccine, and your baby, and you come back two days later and say, "Oh, he had a fever," or "He got a seizure," many doctors will want to say, "Well, that’s normal at that age. It's not a vaccine injury," because they gave that parent the vaccine saying, "It's going to help your child, and it's completely safe." According to Heidi Larkin, who is one of the big proponents of vaccines, and she said this recently in front of the World Health Organization, that, on average, a doctor going through medical school has less than ½ a day of training in vaccines. So, there is no training in vaccine injuries. Doctors are not trained to recognize vaccine injuries. In fact, they're told by the AAP and the AMA and the CDC, FDA, NIH, HHS, etc.—WHO—etc., vaccine injuries don't exist.
[00:04:53.24] So, they have a bias against recognizing them, particularly those injuries that
have long diagnostic horizons, like diabetes, or autism, or ASD, or neurodevelopmental delays—dyslexia, or food allergies. They don't appear till years after you get the vaccine. And so, you think any doctor, historically, ever, has had—a pediatrician—has had a patient where they've given a Hepatitis B vaccine at birth; three years later, that baby is diagnosed with a peanut allergy. Do you think they ever write that down as a vaccine injury? of course they don't. So, what it means is that fewer than 1% are reported. And even though fewer than 1% are reported, the vaccine court has awarded over four billion dollars—
[00:05:46.24] KIRBY: But, wait, let's pause there: what is the VICA Act, and what is
[00:05:51.04] KENNEDY: The Vaccine Act was passed in 1986, by Congress, and it gave
vaccine makers blanket immunity from liability. And the reason Congress passed the act is because there was a Diphtheria, Tetanus, and Pertussis vaccine called the DPT that has since been banned in the United States. It's still used in Africa by Bill Gates and WHO, they give it to kids there, but it was banned because it was so dangerous in this country. And Wyeth (which is now Pfizer), and the other vaccine makers, each one of them had a DPT vaccine, and they were all killing lots of kids and they were causing severe brain injury. They call it encephalopathy. And the industry, Wyeth, particularly, went to Congress and said, "We cannot make these vaccines safely. They are unavoidably unsafe," that's the language they used, "you cannot make them safe. And we are losing $20 paying for injuries and lawsuits for every $1 we bring in selling the vaccine. And so, we're going stop all vaccines unless you give us blanket immunity from liability.
[00:06:59.04] Think about that: Congress did it for a product that they said, "We need it
because you can't make it safely." And so, and now, they had no incentive to make it safe, because the lawsuits are all disappeared. Because you can't sue them: you can’t sue them for medical malpractice, there are no depositions, there’s no discovery, there's no mast or class action suits, or, you know, document discovery—nothing. They have zero incentive to make them safe, and not only that, because the vaccine industry was exempt from vaccine testing, they're saving a huge amount of money, hundreds of millions of dollars, because they don't have to safety test them. The other big cost, after safety testing and licensing, for bringing a drug to market is the subsequent cost of lawsuits. Now they didn't have that cost. Not only that, but they don't have any marketing or advertising costs, because the product is mandated to 74 million people and they're very high-margin products.
[00:08:02.27] So, you know the Gardasil vaccine, they get $420 for the vaccine course.
They're making—if you can get a vaccine on CDC schedule, it’s worth an average of about a billion dollars a year in profit to your company. So, there was a gold rush. And when I was a kid, I got three vaccines. I was fully compliant. Today, you need 72 doses to be fully compliant, and most of them are for injury—for illnesses, that are not even casually contagious. Hepatitis B vaccine was developed specifically for promiscuous male homosexuals, intravenous drug users, and prostitutes. Those were really the only people getting Hepatitis B. The CDC approved the vaccine, which means that it asked Merck and Glaxo to make it (you know, they made a deal to make it and get it approved), and then it turned out (surprise) that the prostitutes and the promiscuous homosexuals and the drug addicts were not buying the vaccine, so there was none being sold. Then, Merck went back to the CDC and said, "You've got to help us make money on this product. We built a factory. We're putting it out." And so, the CDC said, "Don't worry. We will order it mandated for children." So, they mandated it for babies, and every baby, now, in this country, gets it the day of birth, and then they get four other ones, because it only lasts five years. And I ask you—
[00:09:42.06] KIRBY: How can they justify giving it to infants that are only two hours
[00:09:45.26] KENNEDY: They're giving it to an infant. And there's zero chance that that
infant is going to have sex with a prostitute or have intravenous drug use in the next two years. And, they have to give it to them continuously, because they only last two years. So, they give them five of them. And the rotavirus vaccine—and it's clear, that vaccine is causing far more injuries and deaths than it's averting. Clearly. The meningitis vaccine, all you have to do is read its insert, and it is clearly causing more deaths than injuries. The Gardasil is causing more deaths than injuries, clearly, and some of the others ones as well. So, that's the problem. And then, what happened was, you suddenly had all these vaccines that hit the schedule, beginning in 1989. And 1989 is the beginning of what we call The Vaccine Generation.
[00:10:41.25] And it is the sickest generation in history, not from infectious disease, but
from chronic disease. Chronic disease level in this country in 1940 was 6%. In 1986, when we had 11 vaccines on the schedule, it was 12.8%. If you were born prior to 1989, your chance of having a chronic disease is 12.8%. If you are born after 1989, your chance of having a chronic disease is 54%-60%. And what are those chronic diseases? There are three main categories: the neurodevelopment diseases (ADD, ADHD, SIDS, speech delay, learning disabilities, sleep disorders—these are all neurodevelopmental—tics, Tourette’s syndrome, narcolepsy, ASD, autism).
[00:11:39.17] KENNEDY: In my generation 1 in 10,000 people have autism. Today, in
my children's generation, 1 in every 34 kids, 1 in every 22 boys. Then, you have allergies. Vaccines are designed to give you an allergic response to the antigen, to the microbe. They also give you an allergic response to anything else that is injected—the peanut oil excipient, the Timothy weed outbreaks that are occurring at the time you get the vaccines—you now have a lifetime allergy to those. So, children who are vaccinated have 30x the allergic rhinitis as children who are unvaccinated. Peanut allergies went from 1 in 1,200 Americans, to 1 in every 12. And then you had anaphylaxis and asthma, which are allergic diseases. And then, finally, the last category is autoimmune diseases. And those just exploded. And that's a whole range of diseases where your body essentially gets an allergic reaction to your own organs, and the immune system begins attacking your own organs. So, juvenile diabetes (I only knew one kid growing up who had diabetes; now, it’s everywhere), Rheumatoid arthritis, Guillain-Barre, all these fibromyalgias, and, you know, multiple sclerosis. All these other diseases that exploded.
[00:13:10.05] And here's the thing: there's about 420 diseases that became epidemic
beginning in 1989 that we know of. And there are two lists on which those diseases appear. One, list of diseases that became epidemic in 1989; two, on the manufacturer's inserts, the 72 vaccine doses that are given to our kids. Under the Vaccine Act, the only way you can sue a manufacturer is if they know of an injury and they fail to list it. So, it's the one place where they're honest. And they list autism on the DTAP vaccine; although, publicly, they'll say, "We don't cause it,” but they list it, because they know if they don't, somebody's going to sue them. And all of these other diseases that I just talked about are all listed as vaccine side-effects on their own manufacturer's insert. And here's the last thought I'll leave you with: The vaccine industry when I was a kid was making about 200 million dollars a year. Today it's making 60 billion.
[00:14:21.20] They make 60 billion from the mandated vaccines. But they're making 500
billion a year treating injuries that are listed as side effects on their vaccines. They are selling us the albuterol inhalers for our children's asthma, the EpiPens, the anti-seizure medications, the Prozac for the depression, the diabetes medications, the arthritis medications, all of these other—and if you look at the top 20 blockbuster drugs for these four companies, virtually all of them are targeted to treat injuries that are listed as a side effect on their own vaccine inserts. It's a racket. It is the perfect business model: you make people sick the day they are born, you keep making them sick till their 18th birthday, and then you have a permanent customer. Listen, if you get a measles infection, what's the treatment? A week in bed, chicken soup, and vitamin D. None of that can be patented. Pharma makes nothing on measles. If you have a measles vaccine, and you give that child seizures, and epilepsy, and encephalopathy, and all these other injuries, you have a permanent customer for life. It's the perfect business model, but it's killing our country.
[00:15:57.06] And, by the way, I want to say one other thing: there are injuries that are not
listed on those vaccine inserts, that we know are coming from vaccines. And, you know, the biggest drug for Merck is Keytruda, which is to treat soft tissue cancers. And that's not—soft tissue cancers are not listed as an injury on any vaccine insert, but we've had an explosion of soft tissue cancers in this generation of children. And it's highly likely, these are the same cancers that we know are caused by the XMRV virus.
[00:16:35.24] DR. JUDY MIKOVITS: Exactly.
[00:16:36.25] KENNEDY: And they don't list them, but they're making money on them.
[00:16:41.07] MIKOVITS: Correct.
[00:16:42.11] KIRBY: Okay. On this topic, briefly, Judy, you've said in interviews that
there are no successful RNA virus vaccines. The Journal of Science recently contradicts you, of course, saying that there are effective RNA virus vaccines against influenza, measles, mumps, rubella, rabies, yellow fever, and Ebola. So, how would you respond to that?
[00:17:02.22] MIKOVITS: Well, the only polio in this country is caused by the polio
vaccine. And that vaccine, they simply changed the name of the polio to “acute flaccid myelitis” because there are other viruses that are contaminating, that are enteroviruses causing encephalitis. So, the MMR clearly doesn't work, because there's no memory immune response. What are we seeing? These measles outbreaks. So, you don't have—it’s called anergy in science. So, a paper was published last year saying, oh, measles infection causes amnesia and that you need to reboot the whole immune system because it doesn’t remember. Actually, people that are inoculated, that are vaccinated against measles with MMR can't make antibodies at all. They're anergic, they're non-responsive. Where, I had a natural measles infection and I have life-long immunity.
[00:18:08.20] So we have to give booster, after booster, after booster because they only
last a few years, and in fact, they don't provide memory responses. They don't provide life-long immunity. So, there simply isn't an RNA virus vaccine that they've made. Influenza, why do we have to give it every year? If you've ever had influenza, or you've ever had the vaccine, you have as much protection as you're going to get, because the vaccines are made to conserve epitopes, and they don't prevent infection. They're not intended to. They prevent you from getting as sick. They ameliorate the disease. They lessen the disease so that you develop that life-long immunity and we don't have it, only the infected. Natural infection is life-long immunity.
[00:18:57.07] The shingles, the varicella vaccine. It's clear that the huge increases in
shingles in this country are because, in fact, the chicken pox vaccine, varicella, does not provide lifelong immunity so that is the basis for that statement, and the fact of the failure of these vaccines proves it.
[00:19:24.29] KIRBY: Bobby, just to very quickly to finish up on VICA. So, what—just
very quickly, describe for us, what is the mechanism for VICA? Who is doing the defense? Who is paying? And how much have they paid for vaccine injury?
[00:19:42.12] KENNEDY: Well, VICA gave immunity to the vaccine companies from
any liability. So, what that means is that, no matter how negligent that company is, no matter how toxic the ingredient of the vaccine, no matter how grievous your injury, you cannot sue them. There was a process set up in VICA that said, "Okay, if kids do get injured, we're going to allow them to make a claim against the United States government. And there's a trust fund that was set up with a 75-cent surcharge on every vaccine, a tax on Americans, and there's supposed to be a payment to injured people that come out of that. The problem is, so many people made claims for injuries so soon, that the vaccine court had to begin to insulate itself by denying that certain injuries were associated with vaccines. And that's why, in the early ears, they were compensating cases of autism that were caused by vaccine, but then 5,400 autism cases landed in the vaccine court suddenly, and it was a trillion dollars of liability. It would have bankrupted the whole program a hundred times over. And so, they had to come up, CDC created all this phony science, in order to make the case that vaccines don't cause autism. And, of course, they do. And, you know, there's a lot of independent science that says that. And they—
[00:21:23.02] KIRBY: Don't we have a whistleblower who was an expert witness for the
CDC who has put out an affidavit? Didn't he tell the vaccine—the Department of Justice lawyers that, in fact, in some circumstances, you know, vaccines can cause autism, and wasn't that removed?
[00:21:41.00] KENNEDY: There's two different instances that I think you're conflating:
One is, Dr. William Thompson, who was the senior safety scientist at the CDC, who was in charge of doing the studies. And he is the author, co-author, lead author or co-author on all the American studies that “proved” this supposition that vaccines don't cause autism. And he actually found out, the data, when they were doing those studies, actually showed that vaccines do cause autism. He was instructed in one instance, the most important study, the most widely-cited study, which is called DeStefano 2004, published in Pediatrics, where they found enormous causation, causal-association, between vaccines, between the MMR vaccine and autism. He was instructed by his boss, Frank DeStefano, he and the other four coauthors, to bring all that data in to a conference room at the CDC, and then destroy it in large blue garbage cans; and he testified to that, including a deposition to congressman William Posey.
[00:22:58.13] The other case that you're talking about is Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, who
was the government's chief witness before the vaccine court. And Dr. Zimmerman is the one who testified that vaccines do not cause autism. He was the world's number one expert on autism. And he's a very compassionate man, but he believed, at that time, that vaccines did not cause autism. But halfway through—you know, they chose six bellwether cases, and they said, “Okay, here's what we're going to do: we're going to try six cases, and if any of those cases can prove that vaccines cause autism, then all 5,400 cases will get hearings before the court.” They were determined, the Justice Department and HHS lawyers were determined, that those six cases would fail. And Andrew Zimmerman was their ace in the hole. He was the guy who was going to come in and testify.
[00:24:01.22] KENNEDY: So, the first case he testified, "Vaccines don't cause autism,"
but then he was sitting, listening to the testimony, subsequent testimony. of the petitioner’s experts, and while he was sitting through that testimony, he had a revelation, and he realized that vaccines can cause autism in children who have preexisting mitochondrial disorders and who suffer fever-related seizures after vaccination. Those kids can emerge with autism. It can do a certain kind of brain damage, and a cascade of mitochondrial death, essentially, that causes the autism. And he went to the Justice Department, the lawyers, and told them he had changed his mind. And they immediately fired him, but they took his earlier testimony, and they used that in the other cases.
[00:25:01.12] And then the kicker was that there was a little girl. He worked at Johns
Hopkins; there was another scientist at John's Hopkins who was also a neurologist, named Jon Poling, a brilliant neurologist. His wife was a lawyer and a pharmacist. They had a little girl who got autism from the vaccines, Hannah.
[00:25:24.19] NEWSCASTER, GMA: The symptoms began after a series of
vaccinations, nine in all. Some doctors say the vaccinations may have aggravated a preexisting disease in Hannah's brain, called mitochondrial disease. Once that happened, Hannah's father, a neurologist, believes it triggered her autism.
POLING: Following vaccination, that illness produced stress leading to permanent brain injury, as manifested by autism and seizures.
[00:25:51.08] KENNEDY: She was an 8-year-old girl when she made it to vaccine court.
I think she had the—she got the autism late, maybe at 36 months, from the MMR vaccine—and from a number of vaccines during that wellness visit. But these parents, because they were very well-educated, because they were neurologists, because they had extraordinary documentation—the little girl, Hannah, had exceeded all her milestones; she had been a brilliant little girl, a prodigy, really, way ahead of her class in playing, and coordination, and social interactions, etc.—and they had films that demonstrated that. And then, they had films documenting, showing, what happened to her after the vaccine, where she just disappeared, and it was a devastating case for the Justice Department.
[00:26:42.13] NEWSCASTER, GMA: Jon, let me get to you, just as a parent, you know,
I know that you're a neurologist, and I know that your wife is a nurse, but how did you see this as a victory? What did this mean to you, this decision?
POLING: Well, I think we can debate semantics over this case for hours, but I think the bottom line is: our daughter was born normal; she developed normally for the first 18 months of life; there were no signs of any underlying genetic disorder. Then, she was vaccinated; she became ill; that illness eventually led to a diagnosis of autism; then, later, seizures. I think that's the bottom line, and that vaccines were related to her illness.
[00:27:20.08] KENNEDY: Zimmerman knew about it, and he was friends with Poling.
And he said to Poling, "I'll testify for you, and I know your daughter." He had brought his daughter to be treated by Poling, because they were in the same hospital, and—by Zimmerman—and Zimmerman said, “She got this from the vaccine." So, that case was one of the six bellwether cases. And the Justice Department lawyers went to the Polings, and said, "Listen: we're going to give you the best possible settlement. We're going to give you 20 million dollars, a lifetime settlement. But, you have to keep your mouth shut. And we're going to seal this case so nobody knows about it, and we're going to take another case and substitute it, out of the six.” And that's what they did. And they defrauded the court, they defrauded the vaccine court, they defrauded the 5,400 people who were in line, who thought they were being dealt with fairly. And they lied.
[00:28:23.14] And right now, you know, we have a compliant. The two lawyers who did
that, Ricciardella and Matanoski, you know, who did that fraud, we have a complaint in front of the Washington DC and Maryland Bar Associations, trying to yank their licenses, which, you know, they should go to jail for a long time. It's like a war crime. Because if they had been honest and allowed that to happen, the mercury would have been taken out of the vaccines, the studies would have had to have been done, and Congress would have made sure the vaccine supply was safe. Because they hid it, another million kids got autism.
[00:29:03.21] KIRBY: In the introduction to Judy's book, you say that scientific journals
are all now, "admittedly" controlled by Big Pharma. How do we know that?
[00:29:12.01] KENNEDY: I think it was in 2002, the 12 biggest—the editors of the 12
biggest journals got together and said, "We are being taken over by pharma. And somebody has to do something." And that was kind of the last gasp. The editors have publicly stated that, “Most of the stuff that we now publish is propaganda. It is not science,” that, “we're no longer doing science." And it's very, very well-documented that, you know, 80-90% of those revenues for those companies is coming from pharmaceutical industries. The biggest companies, Elsevier, which I think has 2,500 journals, by far the biggest publisher, has secret partnerships with the four vaccine makers, with Pfizer, Sanofi, Merck, and GlaxoSmithKline. There are also examples, in the past, of journals that tried to publish something that the companies didn’t like and were absolutely destroyed.
[00:30:20.22] So, the companies have, you know, there's no—I don't think there's any
question today that those journals are just arms, they're subsidiaries, of the vaccine industry and the pharmaceutical industry. They're not publishing science anymore. They're—not only that, but the Cochrane collaboration – which is the kind of the most trusted arbiter of pharmaceutical science; it's 30,000 scientists, independent scientists, from across the globe, and they volunteer to review the articles that have been put in the journals—and they’ve repeatedly said, “The stuff that you're seeing in the journals no longer can be considered science.” The journals make their money, not only from advertising, but they make the bulk of their money from what they call “reprints”. And a reprint is, if a company—if there is a flattering article about Viox, for example:
[00:31:22.01] Elsevier knew that Viox caused heart attacks and killed people: it was going
to kill a lot of people. But Merck pays it to, pays it for reprints, so if Elsevier wants to make money, it publishes a flattering article about a drug. It ignores the bad stuff, just puts in the goods stuff, then Merck orders reprints and pays hundreds of thousands of dollars to get thousands of reprints of that article, and then distributes them to doctors. And there's reps, there's 70,000 pharmaceutical reps in this country—
[00:31:59.09] KIRBY: So, that's academic cover?
[00:32:01.05] KENNEDY: Yeah. They bring those reprints with them to the doctor’s
office, and they say, "Look, here's what Lancet wrote about Viox." And the doctor reads that, and he says, “Oh, the Lancet wrote it. It's good" but he doesn't know that Merck paid Lancet $450,000 to publish that article. And that's how, you know, "science," that's how the sausage is made today.
[00:32:29.16] KIRBY: So, let me ask you both, what is Fauci's role in all of this? He's
been at the NIAID for, what, four decades? Does he benefit from this somehow? He seems to be at the center of the nexus of all this.
[00:32:44.27] MIKOVITS: Well, he funds six billion dollars so the other end of that for
scientists who are working, NIAID funds six billion dollars of research. If investigators don't publish in these journals, or they give a message of inconvenient truth, he pulls the funding and the journals go on, as we talked about, in my case, to destroy the reputation of the scientist. So, if the scientists don't publish in these journals, they don't get grants, they don't get work. They lose their jobs, and it's a vicious cycle. And that is what was happening and the other authors in my case, they got grant funding from Tony Fauci to, you know, you either end up like Judy Mikovits and you're no longer in science, or worse. And they’ve gotten millions, tens of millions of dollars of grants, even Robert Silverman in his laboratory since 2012, for publishing those studies or retracting those studies that were, in fact, fraud. For going along—
[00:33:56.03] KIRBY: What's Fauci in it for? What's Fauci in it for? Is he in it for money
[00:33:58.18] KENNEDY: Let me explain the essence, the dynamic of corruption: Tony
Fauci is—you know, you have a vaccine program that is corrupt, because the vaccines are not safety-tested. And so, a huge amount of research goes into creating fraudulent studies to prove that vaccines are safe, when they are not. And so, for example, when they needed to create studies to persuade people that vaccines don't cause autism, they funded about 17 studies that they have, that's their archive. Meanwhile, we have 1,400 independent studies that show it is causing autism and these other injuries, but they have 17 studies, and that's what they show the New York Times, and they say, "Look, it's proven."
[00:34:58.01] KENNEDY: If you look at those studies, they're all epidemiological studies.
They—it’s harder to cheat on animal studies. They're very straightforward. With epidemiological studies, it's very, very easy to cheat. Because—I’ll tell you the ways that they cheat. They net, not one of those studies does what you would want a scientific study to do, if you really wanted to know, it's common sense, but, is this exposure, is the vaccine causing autism? It's easy to do that. Any child could design that study. You look at 5,000 people who go the vaccine, and you look at 5,000 people who didn't, who are similarly situated, and you look at the autism rates in those groups. That study has never been done. Every one of those 17 studies looks at, compares, heavily vaccinated people against heavily vaccinated people. And then, it’s easy to manipulate those kinds of groups, because you can use what they call “exclusionary criteria” to get rid of vulnerable subsets. So, you get rid of the older children. Autism doesn't show up till your 4.2 on average. So, if you are looking act kids who are between 1 and 10, and if you really want to look for autism, you'll just look at the kids who are between 8 and 10 years old.
[00:36:30.10] Well, what they do is they look at the kids who are between 1 and 7 years
old. And the autism disappears. And then those groups are overmatched, meaning they—it’s like studying, looking for lung cancer by studying a group that smoked 20 cigarettes a day for 20 years, and a group that smoked 22 cigarettes a day for 20 years, rather than looking at a group that didn't smoke anything. And that's what you would do, if you wanted to know the answer. But Tony Fauci would never fund one of those studies. He funds the phony studies that are designed to give cover to the industry. And he, you know, he's like the Bill Gates of funding. If you want to do science in the United States of America, you’ve got to be friends with Tony Fauci. Because he controls all the funding that’s going to the universities, to the individuals, to the grants, the research centers. If you make an enemy of him, he not only controls all of that funding, that federal funding, but he has the power to stop anybody else who's going to fund you, like Gates or whatever, from giving you funding. So, he can blackball you for life. And that's what he did to Judy. She can no longer do science because it costs money to do science, and there's no money.
[00:37:49.08] And Tony Fauci can cut off that money. So, his posture is that he is going to
protect a crooked corrupt vaccine program no matter—that he helped design—no matter what. And that's what he does.
[00:38:04.16] KIRBY: What's in it for him? I mean, why—is it just the power of that
position, or does he have to cover his—
[00:38:11.12] KENNEDY: If you’re asking what that position does, he's the most
powerful—in his field, in science, he's the most powerful man in science, in the world. Without question. He controls all that funding. People are begging him for his opinion, for his good will, for his—he’s as powerful as Bill Gates, because he can dictate global health policy. He can tell what study's going to be done, and what study's not going to be done, and what the outcome of that study is. He knows in advance, because he approves the study protocol. He's going to make sure that study doesn’t find anything. So, he's locked into that position because he can't afford to leave it. He's got to stay there till he dies. Like so many of the people at CDC who were involved in the corruption. They can't let somebody come in behind them and say, "Oh my god, look what this guy did!" They need to die in those chairs.
[00:39:11.08] And Tony Fauci is one of those guys who spent 50 years in an escalating—
you know, corruption always is a vortex; it gets larger and larger. And, you know, he may have started off, somewhere, 40 years ago, just doing one crooked study, but now, in order to hold—they have piled fraud, upon fraud, upon fraud, upon fraud, and the structure they have created with their vaccine program is so tall and so unwieldy, if somebody kicks out even a single brick, the whole thing will tumble.
[00:39:47.15] His function is to make sure that brick doesn't get kicked out, you know.
Every little leak in the dam is plugged with one of his crooked studies and that's a full-time job, even when you've got six billion dollars a year.
[00:40:03.05] KIRBY: You mentioned Bill Gates. He seems to have become the, kind of,
defacto global health czar, maybe along with Fauci. How did he get there, and what's his history with this?
[00:40:12.25] KENNEDY: Well, Gates is the biggest funder for WHO; I see a lot of people
saying he's the second-biggest, but he's the biggest. He gives, like, you know, I think 350 million a year. But he also funds GAVI, which, I think, Gates’s total contribution, even without the Rotary International (which is another big funder, which he funds, so he's funneling money through them, too), but just him and GAVI, you know, and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, is 475 million a year, compared to the US, which is the next biggest one, about 403 million a year. So, he owns—and that marginal money is money that can dictate an agenda, you know, because it's the discretionary money. It’s the money that, you know – people have their programs, and then they have what they want to do; and if you want to do something outside of that narrow program which is locked in non-discretionary money, you’ve got to get it from Gates. So, everybody there, he has dictatorial control over world health policy.
[00:41:20.11] What does he use it for? He uses it for, he has certain interests. He has, and
all of his interests are technology-driven: synthetic foods, GMO's, pesticides, agriculture. Agriculture, he has big investments in Monsanto, in making synthetic meats, and synthetic milk, and this kind of stuff, and GMO agriculture, in chemical agriculture. He has kind of a messianic vision that he is ordained to save the world with technology, but it's always in what he calls a "public private partnership." So, he makes partnerships that he has private investments in, like Monsanto—Bill and Melinda Gates [Foundation] has investments in them. And then he's pushing the agenda of those companies through the World Health Organization. And the same, he is investing huge investments in all the pharma companies, and he pushes vaccines.
[00:42:23.12] KENNEDY: Now, if you want to know: did vaccines stop infectious
disease, the mortalities from infectious diseases in the United States, the 80% drop in mortalities from infectious diseases, one of the most momentous developments in human history, in the first half of the 20th century, how much did vaccines contribute to that? Well, the CDC and Johns Hopkins actually studied that issue, because this is a claim that vaccine makers make and its ubiquitous. It's part of the consciousness that vaccines are the thing that eliminated all those mortalities from smallpox, measles, polio, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, scarlet fever, tuberculosis, etc. CDC and World Health Organization actually looked at that. They studied it very, very carefully, in a 2010 study, and what they concluded, was that vaccines had virtually nothing to do with the drop in mortalities, when they looked at the vaccines.
[00:43:33.25] For example, the measles vaccine: the measles mortality had dropped by
99% prior to 1963, which was the year they introduced the vaccine, and it was trending to zero. So, and they looked at all of them, many of these diseases, like tuberculosis in the United States didn’t have a vaccine, a widely used vaccine, scurvy dropped the same time as measles, and polio, and everything else, didn't have a vaccine. All these diseases disappeared, whether they had a vaccine or not. What caused them to disappear (and this is what the study found)? Sanitation, chlorinated water, nutrition, and economic development. Nutrition is very important, vitamin A, vitamin D—the 400 people who were dying each year of measles, in 1963, were almost all black kids from the Mississippi delta, had intellectual disabilities, because they were starving. They had severe malnutrition—this is before we had the poverty programs in our country—they had vitamin D deficiencies. And the World Health Organization has said it is practically impossible to kill somebody with measles, if they have adequate vitamin D. This is the WHO. So, the World Health Organization knew that. So, for years, WHO has been a very, very, good agency on developing and trying to bring economic development, sanitation, nutrition, to, and agricultural developments that would help nutrition, to these remote communities, and to African communities, and around the world.
[00:45:20.01] What Gates did is, he went in there—and Gates has a belief in technology—
and he went in there, and said his belief, which is: good health comes in a syringe. And he doesn’t understand that we already have the best inoculation, the one that god gave us, which is our immune systems and what we need to be doing is bolstering those immune systems. You know, they will never get a COVID vaccine. We've had a flu vaccine since 1930. According to Cochrane collaboration, you need to give 100 flu vaccines to prevent one case of the flu. And the idea that we're going to get a COVID vaccine that prevents 99% of COVID is ridiculous. It's never going to happen. And you know what prevents 99% of COVID? Our immune system. 99% of the people who get COVID either don't even know it, or have very, very mild symptoms. And the WHO knew this, they were putting money into it for years, “this is how we're developing immune systems, and this is how we're going to prevent disease.” Gates comes along, and he says, “No, we're going to take the money away from that,” and now, half the money in WHO goes to one vaccine, which is his pet project, which is a polio vaccine—he promised to eradicate polio by 2002; it turns out that, according to WHO, 70% of the polio in the world comes from Gates’s vaccine.
[00:46:52.25] So, what he's doing is not working. His faith in technology is not bearing
fruit. That's just one story.
[00:47:03.03] KIRBY: Can you tell us the story of the tetanus toxoid in Kenya?
[00:47:09.12] KENNEDY: In 2014, the WHO and UNICEF—which, you know, Gates
has dictatorial control over the WHO, and he also controls UNICEF—they gave a tetanus vaccine, actually five tetanus vaccines, to a million women in Kenya. They were doing a national program to inoculate for tetanus every woman in Kenya, but only women of child bearing years; so, girls between, I think, it was 12 years old and 39 years old, all of them were getting the vaccine. And it was five vaccines. And a lot of doctors started saying, "Wait a minute. We didn't even have a tetanus crisis in this country, Number 1. Number 2, why are they only targeting women? Because men get tetanus, too; and it is only women of child bearing years, but old women and young women get tetanus, too. Number 3, tetanus vaccines last for ten years. Why are we giving five of them?” And so, the Catholic doctor—
[00:48:20.23] And then, they started noticing that women they gave the vaccine, who were
pregnant, had spontaneous abortions; and that women who got the vaccine, who weren't pregnant, were not getting pregnant. And Gates has had a long commitment to using vaccines (and he's said this many times) for population control. And, in fact, his first investments in, I think, 2000, were to use a tetanus vaccine (again, multiple tetanus vaccines) to women of childbearing years, in 57 countries around the world. The Catholic Doctors Association got a whole bunch of the vials of this vaccine, and they had them tested. And they found that they all contained an agent designed to chemically castrate, chemically sterilize, women.
[00:49:20.10] And that the agent required, needed, it was human gonadotrophic hormone,
and it needed a tetanus toxoid to enter the woman. It required a tetanus toxoid. So yeah, there was some tetanus toxoid in there, but it wasn't in there to prevent tetanus. It was there to sterilize those women. And the Kenyan government discontinued the program, and they threw Statens Serum Institute of India out of the country (which had developed the vaccine); but otherwise, nobody went to jail. They harmed a million ladies, and nobody was punished, and Gates never had to explain what the heck was his involvement.
[00:50:12.15] KIRBY: Wouldn't Gates say—
[00:50:13.12] KENNEDY: I'll tell you the worst thing that Gates did in Africa, has done
in Africa, is that he used the diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine, which they give to, I think, they give to a hundred and sixty million kids a year. And that vaccine, they never tested whether it actually—it’s their flagship vaccine. So, the WHO has a real capacity to bully 52 African countries, because the WHO uses all the funds that are given by the European nations and the other nations, to fund the health departments of those countries, and to fund the HIV programs, and those nations would collapse without that funding; but Gates controls all that international funding now, so he can tell WHO: if that country does not comply with the DTP vaccine, and give it to every kid in the country, don't give them their HIV money. So, they bully these countries to make them give this DPT vaccine to all the kids. And nobody had ever actually tested whether the DPT vaccine has a beneficial impact on mortality.
[00:51:31.10] In other words: are vaccinated kids actually healthier and more likely to live,
than unvaccinated kids? Nobody ever did those studies. So, then, in 2017, the Danish Norwegian government, and one of the biggest vaccine companies in Europe, the Statens Serum Institute of Denmark, funded a huge study in Guinea-Bissau. And in Guinea-Bissau, there was, just by coincidence, there was a natural experiment (which is because there was a health clinic in that country, that vaccinated every kid in the country, but they vaccinated them depending on their—depending on their birthdays, essentially, let's put it that way for simplicity’s sake; and, as it turns out, because of their system, half the kids in the country, younger than five months, were vaccinated, and half were not), and it was a perfectly randomized sample, so it was the perfect natural experiment. But nobody had ever looked at the health outcomes in those two groups.
[00:52:37.05] This group that was funded, which included the most important scientists in
the world—Peter Aaby, who has more peer reviewed publications than anybody on African vaccines—they went in there, and they spent a couple of years studying this; and when they came out they were shocked (because they were all pro vaccine, they were all funded by a vaccine company), they came back, and they said, "Here's what we found," and this was published in eBioPharma in January of 2017. And what they found was vaccinated had 10x the death rate of kids who were unvaccinated. And they weren't dying of anything—they weren't dying of diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis—the vaccines protected them against those three diseases. They were dying of malaria, and bilharzia, and anemia, and dysentery—things that nobody ever associated with the vaccine. When the girl died, nobody remembered “this one was vaccinated and this one wasn't.” And it wasn’t until they looked at all the data, and they realized, "Oh my god. The kids who are dying are all the vaccinated ones, and the kids who are living are the unvaccinated ones." And they pulled a five-alarm fire, and Peter Aaby gave a press conference. He begged the World Health Organization, you know, “You need to look at this right away.”
[00:54:04.09] He gave a press conference in which he said, "People think we know what
we're doing; we have no idea what we're doing.”
[00:54:10.24] PETER AABY: I guess most of you think that we know what our vaccines
are doing. We don't.
[00:54:16.07] KENNEDY: That's a quote. And what was the outcome of that? The
outcome was that Gates and WHO went after him and killed his funding. That's what Tony Fauci can do to that kind of dissent.
[00:54:32.19] KIRBY: What—you say Gates and WHO, but what did Fauci have to do
[00:54:37.12] KENNEDY: I'm just illustrating that Fauci funds a lot of Danish science.
That's one—he was funding science in Wuhan. He funds science all over the world. And so, the funders all collaborate with each other and they decide who's going to get funding and who doesn't. And guess who’s not getting funding anymore? Peter Aaby.
[00:55:00.02] KIRBY: Gotcha. Now, let's move on to today.
[00:55:02.11] DONALD TRUMP: Today, I want to update you on the next stage of this
momentous medical initiative: it's called Operation Warp Speed. That means big and it means fast, a massive scientific and industrial, and logistical endeavor, unlike anything our country has seen since the Manhattan Project.
[00:55:22.24] KIRBY: Today the President has announced that his accelerated plan for a
coronavirus vaccine, Operation Warp Speed, would be headed by former GlaxoSmithKline executive, Moncef Slaoui, who had served on the boards of other pharma companies, including Moderna, which now, apparently, has a leading candidate vaccine under development. Also named to the task force was General Gustave Perna; he's a four-star general. This program has been likened to the Manhattan Project, the massive private-public partnership, also guided by the military, to create the Atom bomb. Are there reasons to be concerned about this alliance, between notoriously problematic pharma companies and the military?
[00:56:01.05] KENNEDY: Yeah, it's a science fiction nightmare. I mean, it has corruption
written all over it. I saw the extravagant promises they were making in the press conference today, and how can you say the vaccine is going to be out by January, and it's going to be perfectly safe?
[00:56:18.27] TRUMP: We'd love to see if we could do it prior to the end of the year.
[00:56:23.17] KENNEDY: They don't even know what the vaccine is. Listen, a lot of these
injuries that are caused by vaccines, that we know about, that are well-documented, have really long diagnostic horizons. You do not see the injury for years. And particularly, when you are using an RNA virus, which is designed to change the activation of your DNA, there's—when you start messing with peoples' RNA and DNA, one of the really potential outcomes is cancer. Those are cancers that may not show up for years. With intellectual disabilities, with outcomes like Alzheimer’s, and dementia, and neurodevelopmental problems—that may not manifest for years. And they are going to do all the testing in two months? Three months? And then give them a license? You know, none of these injuries would show up in that time, and then—and they're going to give it to seven billion people.
[00:57:23.29] Well, think about this: Let's say they test it on a thousand people. That means
the most—an injury—you’re only going to see injuries that have an incidence of once in a thousand, and you may not notice that. But what if there is an injury, one that kills one in 10,000 people? Well, if you give that to seven billion people, that’s 700 thousand people who are going to die. And you know, you wouldn’t notice them in this kind of study.
[00:58:07.12] KIRBY: Is that why Gates wants immunity?
[00:58:09.16] KENNEDY: Well, of course. Listen, it's the biggest boondoggle because
not only are they getting immunity, so they don't care if they—if they got 108 vaccines from 108 companies, and it's like a lottery for them. And, by the way: they're not using a dime of their own money. The money is all federal money, so we are paying them to develop these vaccines. We're giving these companies up to a billion dollars to do these studies and develop the vaccines, so they have zero risk. And then, they get a vaccine that they get to play with, and it's like throwing poop against a wall. You know, a couple of them—they throw 108 poop piles against the wall, maybe one of them will stick. Well, what if it doesn't stick? What if it kills hundreds of people? What if it gives cancer to hundreds of people? They don't care. The federal government paid them to do it, and they have zero liability in the end, but it's a lottery. If they get the one that works, then they make billions.
[00:59:18.05] KIRBY: Judy, I think you would be able to speak to this. Haven't previous
attempts at SARS—
[00:59:21.09] KENNEDY: When you put it that way, it's pretty bad, right? That's the truth.
[00:59:24.21] KIRBY: Yeah. Haven't previous attempts at SARS vaccines caused
cytokine storm when the test animals were in the presence of live virus?
[00:59:35.10] MIKOVITS: Correct. And so, I think it's even worse than “only a few
people are going to die.” Because those 25-50 million Americans who got those contaminated vaccines, and absolutely have the XMRVs, and are carrying those, have those cytokine storms now. And we published a paper in 2011, showing it was the exact overlapping cytokine storms, those people will die from that vaccine. It will be like throwing gasoline on a fire. So, you're talking about the most vulnerable. The ones they already injured, those 50 million Americans. And that's why they went back after me, eight years later, giving the same story they gave in 2012.
[01:00:24.06] KIRBY: I know Bobby you've got to go, so I just want to get two last ones
from you before you have to go. First, I guess, the more important one—there seems to be a political dimension to the whole issue of the pandemic, the lockdown, etc. Paul Krugman today quoted Stephen Colbert to the effect that, “Reality has a liberal bias,” and he was quoting that in support of continued lockdown. You come from the most famously liberal family in our country's history, and yet you have questioned the response. It seems to me that we ought to be looking at this empirically—what is the real seriousness of the virus and the sickness that it causes, versus the human cost of lockdown? Are we wrong to be looking at this through a political lens?
[01:01:08.17] KENNEDY: I mean, I think it's really unfortunate that it's become a partisan
issue and both sides are polarized, and in some cases, I think, both sides are not looking at reality. But I think, more so, there is a huge gap in the liberal outlook on reality; and it is very puzzling to me that a guy like Stephen Colbert, who I respect, and normally is a really smart guy, that he doesn't see this. Because we're letting an immunologist, Tony Fauci (putting aside all of his reputational problems, he's an immunologist), he has the capacity to predict, presumably, the level of mortalities given certain scenarios. But, he has no capacity, and no training, and no competency, to predict how many people will die from a quarantine. There are people who are trained to make those predictions, and to model that, and those are economists and social scientists. They're being completely ignored.
[01:02:32.26] You know, the liberals are saying, "Let's follow the science," but they're
saying, "we’re just going to follow one scientist, an immunologist.” And, you know, there's really good studies from the 1980’s, when we had all of these big layoffs in our country, about what happens to a society, about the mortality, the increase in mortality, directly related to unemployment. And the most quoted of those studies, is a study that found that, for every one point in unemployment, there are 37,000 deaths. And those deaths come from heart attacks, they come from strokes, about 900 come from suicide, 9,000 come from heart attacks. In addition to that, there are additional 3,300 admissions to mental institutions for every one point in unemployment, and about 4,000 imprisonments because of unemployment.
[01:03:28.23] And so, if you take that number, 37,000 (and that number is a conservative
number, because those numbers come from 1982, and we've added a third to the population since then), taking that conservative number, 37,000, and multiplying it times 30 unemployment points, which is what we're looking at—they're saying we were at 3.2, they're saying we're going to 35, say it's 30—that’s 1.1 million people dead. That's five times the number of people who they say, “the worst scenario is that we're going to lose 200,000 people from COVID.” This is five times that number. In addition to that, there are other exigencies. For example, the disruptions to the supply chain for food and medicines that is going to cost lives. The deferred medical treatments for people with hypertension, people with cancer, people who have diabetes.
[01:04:34.26] There was a study that came out yesterday in England that said there were
30,000 excess deaths in nursing homes in England; but when they checked, the studies showed that only 10,000 of them were from COVID; the other 20,000 were from people not being able to get to hospitals and get treatment for disease. And the Imperial College of London Johns Hopkins issued a study last week that said from a three-month quarantine and ten months of gradual come back, a three-month quarantine, which is what we're having, that we're going to get 6.3 million extra cases of tuberculosis, and 1.3 million deaths. And then, what we need to be looking at is, what happens when you incur a 4 trillion-dollar debt? All these people unemployed, the deaths from despair, isolation and despair kill people too.
[01:05:42.01] And this is generational. You know, I've been through economic downturns
before, when there were huge amounts of debt, and I see the way that states respond to those things. They respond by cutting school lunches, by cutting healthcare to the poor, by cutting daycare, by cutting all of these programs that enrich our lives, that create a middle class in this country, that create functioning societies, and keep our infrastructure in place. And all of those things, the corroded infrastructure, the injury to our institutions, the dismantling of the New Deal institutions, which the democrats are now—which built the New Deal to take us out of the worst poverty in history, and the worst depression, are now dismantling all the institutions and giving us back to that. So, a hundred years of liberal construction of a vision for America by the liberals is now being dismantled and we are going back into a dark ages.
[01:06:48.29] And nobody is doing that risk assessment. Stephen Colbert ought to know:
it's not a risk assessment if you only—
[01:06:57.20] KIRBY: It was Krugman, it was Krugman.
[01:06:59.06] KENNEDY: Oh, Krugman—but Krugman is quoting Colbert, right?
[01:07:03.18] KIRBY: He quoted—but the quote was from 15 years ago.
[01:07:06.19] KENNEDY: Krugman ought to know that when you do a risk assessment,
you can't just look at one side of the balance sheet. You can't just say, "Okay, the cost of—the benefits of the lockdown are 10,000 fewer deaths." You have to say, "The cost of the lockdown are five million additional deaths.” Somebody needs to be doing that math.
[01:07:32.23] KIRBY: In addition to the dark ages, bobby, before you go, there's these
things like House Bill 6666, the Trace Act, and a whole host of measures that—
[01:07:43.19] KENNEDY: Yeah, well—
[01:07:45.01] KIRBY: Seem to be pushed by Gates, things, you know—
[01:07:47.26] KENNEDY: And that's the other thing is that, what this is going to do for
American society, and to American freedom? It's really the end of constitutional democracy and the introduction of a surveillance state, that is going to be able to—now they have 5G, and the reason they brought in 5G is not—you look at these ads on tv and nobody's thinking about this. You’re seeing these huge ads on tv about Telecom coming and saying, "We’re going to bring you 5G!" Nobody's saying, "Well they're not telling me what it's going to do for my life. Does it mean that I’m going to be able to download my video game in two seconds rather than ten? Is that why they're spending trillions of dollars?"
[01:08:38.24] It's not for you. It's for them. 5G is about surveillance, about control, and
about more than anything, harvesting your data. It is a way that—it’s called, "the internet of things," not of people, of things (that's what Gates calls it.) It connects everything, so, your Apple watch, your microwave oven, your child's diapers, which, now, they have smart device—any smart device—yyour telephone. You know, the biometric facial recognition systems that are everywhere that you're—the Siri that is listening to every conversation you have in the house and recording it. The Alexa, which is listening to your conversations. Your cell phone, even when they're turned off, they're listening to you. And all of that data now is going to be processed and harvested.
[01:09:31.29] KENNEDY: And, you know, Gates is building huge cities. The only
function of the city in Arizona is to process all that data. A billion conversations. Hearing you cough in your house and being able to say whether somebody should be offering you a cough drop or a medication for that. All of that, they—we're all going to be under 24-hour surveillance. And data is money. It's like a gold rush, but it's free. We're not charging them for our data. They get it from us, all for free. And then they're going to use it turn us into, you know, authoritarian control. And perfect consumers. Being able to tell what song they should play in order to sell you what product and to transform you into a—and to enslave you. One of the things Gates is pushing, along with all this, and they've already pushed it in India, is the elimination of cash economies, so that everything will be digital. Every transaction will be digital. What happens when you do that? It means that the banks can make money on every transaction—anything. You make a bet with your friend on the Red Sox game, they can pick up—you know, they can get the friction off of that, and every transaction they get a piece of. Not only that, it gives them total power over your life.
[01:11:06.09] I wrote an article the other day about how Malibu police were ticketing
surfers a thousand dollars apiece for being in the ocean, which is where you want people to be in a health emergency; that's building their immune system, being in the sunshine all day. For being in the ocean, they're giving a thousand dollar fine. Well, imagine a time (and this is now), when the police won't have to go down to the beach at Point Dume, because they'll know from your GPS, they'll know from a chip that they have in you, they'll know from the facial recognition system, that you are on that beach; and they'll just take the money, and notify you that you've been fined, and take it out of your payroll account with digital currency. And, you know, if you get too close to your girlfriend on a social distancing day, they can penalize you, out of your account. It's total control over human behavior. And a lot of people say, "Well, you know, it doesn't matter if we're surveilled, because I don't do anything wrong," but everybody has secrets. Everybody has things that they don't want the world to know—
[01:12:18.23] KIRBY: And if you want to protest, if you want to agitate—
[01:12:21.16] KENNEDY: If you want to go to a protest, and participate in that, they're
going to know about it, and they'll be able to punish you. Not just a little punishment. They'll be able to cut off funding to your account. They'll be able starve you to death. And this is the world that Gates wants us in. And this is a world where we have to stop being democrats and republicans and we need to all say, "It's us against them. And they are going to bury us, if we don't get together and fight back."