July 15, 2025 • 56 mins
In this conversation, Phil Wiseman, a British filmmaker who transitioned from a freelance camera operator to the creator of the documentary The Agenda, shares his compelling journey. He explores themes of censorship, the information war, and the rise of digital ID and technocracy. Phil highlights the importance of critical thinking when navigating narratives around climate change and the broader control mechanisms shaping society. He also addresses the controversial nature of his work and the challenges of bringing these ideas to a wider audience.
More Jerm Warfare: https://www.ukcolumn.org/series/jerm-warfare
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:38):
Full Wiseman, thank you for joining me in the Dringers.
Good to be here, Jen. Feels like a long time coming.
Take me to the background you and of course the creation of
Oracle Forms. So prior to 2020, I was working
as a freelance camera operator, videographer, editor, you know,
because I did some work for production companies and in
(01:00):
commercial space events and, youknow, just nothing remotely
controversial. That was just how I earned
living. And it wasn't super glamorous,
but I enjoyed it. You know, I was able to keep the
lights on and do something I enjoyed.
And then I would say I had a network of freelancers that I
would use to crew up events and things.
And a good friend of mine is a guy called Liam Turner.
(01:22):
And when COVID kicked off, I mean, Liam kind of saw it
straight away. I mean, I'm ashamed to admit
like took me a couple of weeks to sort of do some sense making
and think this whatever this is,we're not being told the truth
of it. And the more that you dug, the
more layers you unpeeled. It's like right, this we're
really not getting told the truth.
(01:42):
Something, something quite sinister appears to be
happening. So the first half of 2020, we,
we sort out dissident voices, people that you, you know, were
sort of resonating with us. And I felt like I was getting a
closer version of the truth from.
And also I, I noticed online that there was like a growing
(02:06):
sort of resistance to this nonsense.
It wasn't big, but there were, you know, people that were
taking to the streets and, and breaking lockdowns and
challenging the coronavirus act in the UK.
And so I sort of had my finger on the pulse of all right, there
are the people that think like this.
And to the point that by around September of 2020, I felt
(02:26):
compelled to go to one of the demonstrations in London.
And, and I've been largely politically apathetic prior to
all of this. You know, I wasn't a political
person, but this felt important and it felt like, right, if
you're not going to pay attention to what's happening
now, then when are you going to pay attention?
So we went to a demonstration and we thought, all right, well
if we're going to go, then we may as well go and shoot it.
(02:47):
So never been to a protest in mylife.
Really naively rocked up with myself, Liam, and another camera
operator. Like we were filming a
conference like 5 cameras, you know, like, and people were
looking at us like who are you guys?
You know, like, who are you working for and filmed that?
And as it happens, just by chance, the the organiser with
(03:07):
that demonstration is an activist in the UK called Fiona
Hein. And she ended up organising a
lot of the big marches that happened in the coming months
and years. But she was going to Berlin in a
couple of weeks from that point to do to record like a press
conference with this group called the World Doctors
Alliance, which was, you know, the sort of consortium of
doctors and lawyers that had gottogether to speak out against
(03:28):
all of this stuff. So just by virtue of going to
that one protest, they saw our footage and they were like, OK,
you guys need to come with us and record this press
conference. So we kind of fell in and and
into this large network of COVIDdissidents and sort of made
ourselves useful, I guess. And what we were putting out
could have fallen on deaf ears. But as it happens, it seems to
(03:49):
have resonated with a lot of people.
And there was no sort of prior plan to what we were doing.
One thing just truly led to another in quite a serendipitous
way. So that one thing just begat
another, really. And here we are.
And sorry, I had my micro on mute and you have just released
(04:12):
the agenda. Yep.
Yeah. So that was effectively, it
sounds crazy when I say it, but it was effectively the best part
of two years of work. Now that's not constant work.
Obviously I'm structuring that around actual paid work and, you
know, family time and actually living a life.
(04:32):
So any spare time that I had. So it was myself and Mark
Sharman, the producer of the film, just not television as he
remembers it by any stretch, putting it together and it
started, Mark went to, you know,in the UK.
I'm sure you may have similar where you are, but there are
sort of local meet meet ups quite often with presentations
(04:56):
and just kind of networking events for like minded people in
our space. And Mark saw a presentation by a
lady called Sandy Adams in 2023 that sort of resonated with him.
And I was around that time, I was, I was reading a lot of
Patrick Wood's work and Mark andI had done a film in 2022 called
Safe and Effective a Second Opinion, which is the first time
(05:18):
that we'd worked together. And that was kind of marks
influence on our work, like trying to do a current affairs
TV documentary sort of take on the vaccine, so called vaccine
harms from the the jabs. And so we I think that it made a
lot of noise. I mean, it got it got near the
(05:39):
million views on YouTube. They got mentioned in Parliament
in the UK and then it got pulleddown as soon as it basically got
got that far. But it's still available in like
lots of places if you know whereto look, as is a lot of our
work. You know, I, I really need to go
out of my way and back cataloguestuff that we've made over the
years because I don't think it actually exists in one place.
I mean, we've got accounts on Odyssey and Rumble and places,
(06:02):
but I think people like yourselfthat knew, knew about us quite
early on, probably seen a lot ofthe older stuff, but I, I
definitely need to go and catalogue it, but I digress.
So yeah, the agenda just sort ofgrew from this idea of
essentially turning Sandy's presentation into like the
(06:24):
cinematic equivalent of a PowerPoint presentation to then
just growing in terms of scale and ambition.
And, and a couple of months later, I saw a presentation by
Aman Jabi at a similar event where he sort of dialled in
remotely and gave a presentationon, you know, digital prisoner
and on all of his areas of expertise.
And just kind of blew my mind because that was my first
(06:45):
exposure to Ananjabi. And man, there's, there's
something here. I don't know what it looks like.
It's like building a million piece jigsaw without a box, But
there's something some way we must be able to pull together
all of these disparate pieces and and put it in a, you know,
like, so somebody like yourself,you know, you're clearly aware
(07:06):
of a lot of big picture of what's happening it.
There's probably not a lot of new information for you in the
agenda, but the goal was to present it in a way that was
like accessible to people who might not have come across this
information before and in one place.
So there's, you know, there's lots of facets to what's
happening around the world, but people don't necessarily
understand where it, where it leads and where it's sort of
(07:29):
where it's sourced from. And it's, you know, you go high
enough up and it appears to all be coming from same place or
certainly the same ideology. Nick Hudson would, for example,
was just by chance. I mean, I, I wanted to speak to
him. Nick's somebody I know.
He's a regular on your show and he's a good friend.
Of mine. Yeah.
Well, he and I obviously didn't know each other prior to this,
but like we maintained contact throughout.
(07:51):
I I, my first exposure to him was I saw the presentation he
did in like March 21, I think. And that again, was like a huge
thing for me. I remember saying to Nick when I
finally met him, like that was the first sort of example of
something where I was like, I could send this to anybody and
you just demolished the narrative in such a measured,
(08:13):
professional way. And I thought it was brilliant.
And I've followed Nick since then.
And, and, you know, we don't speak often, but we maintain
contact. And I consider Nick a friend
and, and he happened to be in the UKI was like, well, we're
working on this film. It's early doors on the UN and
it's quite a broad subject. Would you be interested in?
He's like, yeah, I mean, when weshot something and he was in
London and his interview was, you know, again, just
(08:37):
serendipitously just perfect. I mean, Nick's got a habit of
being word perfect. So like his little monologue at
the end of the film, it's like you just nailed it in a couple
of minutes. Like this, all of this nonsense
that's happening, it's driven ultimately by an anti human
mindset. And, you know, people who are so
(08:58):
hubristic that they've come to see themselves as gods
basically. They think they're entitled to
tamper with the human genome andupgrade humans into human 2
point O. And they feel like stewards of
the earth and they feel like they're entitled to do so.
And that's really, you know, frighteningly, I think that's
the mindset that seems to be running the world.
(09:21):
I play on the whole war theme with with with my show, you
know, battle of ideas joining mein the trenches.
We're in an information war full.
Do you think we are winning the information war?
It's a good question. Censorship is always, to me,
(09:42):
it's been an indication that thefight's not over, if nothing
else, because if where they'd won, like they wouldn't care.
Like what people were saying, like, yeah, go and scream into
the void. We don't care.
Censorship during COVID was massive, which should have told
you that. And it became so obvious, like
you said this thing and now you're kicked off of Facebook.
(10:02):
Like what? Exactly what they didn't want
you speaking about. And so I think they lost, in my
opinion, they lost the information war during COVID.
However, what's happened since is that the censorship's got way
more sophisticated and I think kind of more insidious.
So, you know, Elon Musk reinstates everybody on Twitter
(10:24):
and it's free speech platform now.
Isn't it wonderful? But what's actually happened is
that shadow banning and things are much more prevalent.
So even though everybody feels like they're there and they can
say what they like, you know, intheir own words, you have
freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach.
And so your voice can be dialleddown algorithmically from a
(10:44):
completely centralised position.And I think that's worse because
you aren't even aware that that's happening.
You know, like as I said, duringCOVID, this invoices got de
platformed. And as soon as that happened,
people that sort of clocked on to what was going on thought,
well, I'm going to find out whathe said because you don't want
me to hear it. Whereas now I think the the
(11:06):
censorships are a little bit more sophisticated and, and the
free speech Twitter sign up. I mean, I don't know, you'll
sort of take on the whole thing,but not buying it.
But it also had the other consequence that during COVID, a
lot of alt tech popped up in direct response to all the
censorship. So you had all of these
platforms, I guess, you know, Gab or Parlour or things were,
(11:29):
you know, examples that their USP was we're not going to sense
you and they gained a lot of traction.
But as soon as free speech Twitter comes, it's like, well,
Twitter wins by virtue of the network effect because
everybody's on there and your one USP is now not a selling
point. So all that old tech dies and
all that investment into alternatives goes away.
And it also had that consequencetoo.
(11:51):
And not to mention, I think, youknow, the dissidents are now
corralled onto a platform that is clearly as ties to
intelligence agencies. And it's like I, I, I believe
they're actually stud. They did lose the information
war during COVID, but they're studying how so called
misinformation spreads now and they're trying to come up with
(12:13):
more sophisticated ways to nip it in the bud.
So I think it's ongoing. Are we winning?
I hope so. I hope so.
Another. Big problem is somebody like
Trump who is extremely likeable.However, a pipe piper of note.
(12:35):
Yeah, I mean, it's difficult to put your finger on because
sometimes he'll come out and saysomething that you completely
agree with. It's like, well, I'm glad he
said that. But we have to do with people
like Trump and Elon is actually look at what they're doing, not
versus what they're saying. Because it's very easy to say
something and get people on yourside.
But when you look at their actions, I mean, Elon Musk's
(12:58):
investment portfolio is like a mirror image of the World
Economic Forum's agenda. It's like, just because there's
a different salesperson giving it to you, and I'm doing it
under a libertarian front saying, dude, you're invested in
brain chips and electric cars and, and surveillance grids and,
and all this stuff. It's like it's the same thing.
And you seem to be leading us inthe same direction.
But you're the the sales pitch has changed, but the direction
(13:22):
of travel seems to be the same. And it's, it would be funny if
it didn't appear to be so effective, you know, And I, I
think Trump seems to be much thesame where there's been, there's
go on, no. Sorry, I interrupted, But he can
say, well, we're going to bring digital ID in, but we'll do it
via the border. Now we want to stop those
(13:42):
Mexicans and suddenly millions and millions of people will
suddenly now buy into the idea of digital ID.
Correct. And yeah, again, it would be
funny if it wasn't didn't appearto be working.
I mean, and that's that's a, a methodology that's not exclusive
to the USI mean the UK, we've had a massive illegal
immigration problem that's sort of making headlines now.
(14:05):
You know, Tommy Robinson's been pounding the drum and etcetera.
But it's like this immensely divisive issue, which is a
problem in and of itself, but it's clearly been a crisis
that's been manufactured, it's been allowed to happen from on
high. And this the solution has always
been digital. ID say, well, now we, we need to
(14:26):
impose a digital ID and, and that seems to be happening not
just in America, but around the world.
And you know, people as we stay in the film, you know, this has
to be if if you didn't dig your heels in anywhere else, like you
have to stop before you accept adigital ID.
And I, I know they're going to make it difficult.
(14:48):
I feel like the the vaccine passports during COVID were the
first go around. Well, not the first, but you
know, they were a very obvious attempt to impose some form of
digital biometric system and it didn't, didn't float and people
sported off. But this strategy, I mean, Tony
Blair's emblematic of this ideology where he's for about 20
(15:09):
years, he's been trying to bringsome form of this system in.
These people seem to come like how a shark attacks, right?
So a shark will typically come in and and bite something and
then let it sit there and then attack from another angle.
So we're going like regroup and come and attack from another
side. And I feel like that's how these
people operate where every so often, potentially once in a
(15:29):
generation, we have to fight this madness off.
But what happens in the interim is this huge influx of
indoctrination and propaganda that can convinces people that
it's for their own good. And oh, maybe we do need this
idea or, you know, the manufacturing of problems that
think, oh, that's the solution. Isn't that funny?
(15:50):
But we've got to say no to this digital ID nonsense, no matter
who is selling it to you, whether it's Trump or it's Elon.
Like it's and under a current administration it it might not
be abused, but the potential forsocial control that it offers in
the hands of the wrong person is.
It's not worth any of the selling points they're giving
(16:11):
me. Like you have to refuse it in my
opinion. Andrew Treglia and Larkin Rose
did a great film called The Jones Plantation, and that
really is how how the world around us is.
We are living in the Jones Plantation.
People are choosing their own slavery.
(16:31):
Yeah. And I think that's a long, like
generations long process of engineering people's consent.
And the climate narrative that we, you know, focus is a huge
focus of the film is a great example of that, where they've
conditioned you literally by buying the science.
You know, you go back to the Club of Rome and they finance
(16:54):
computer modelling to say that the world was going to end as we
knew it unless we started serious impositions on people's
lifestyles. You need to manage consumption
and to manage population. And they also identified like
disease, for example. And they basically went looking
under Rockefeller duress for global problems that would
(17:15):
require institutions like the UNto come in and effectively
govern over. So a level of bureaucracy above
the level of nation. That's why they existed.
They were like this think tank to come in and find global
problems to justify their existence.
You know, effectively they were a solution without a problem.
And and climate change was a bigone.
(17:36):
And through that for for decadesnow, you know, it's hard for
young people now who have bought, you know, you accept the
reality that you're bought up in.
And I understand that. And it took me a while when I
started, you know, floating the idea that climate change, a
hoax, like all of it. Yeah, it is.
But you and you can go back in your head like, well, why do I
(17:58):
think it isn't? And it's, you know, it's goes
back to school and teaches and everywhere around you, you know,
all the media that you're presented with goes out of its
way to convince you that we're in a crisis.
And, and, you know, essentially sell you this narrative.
But the narrative ultimately is about restricting as a
(18:20):
restrictions on on your life. But in this, in this very it,
it's just like Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, which is a
parallel that we draw upon. He said essentially you, you
propagandise people to love their enslavement.
And that's what they've done with the climate narrative.
So the point where, you know, maybe 10 years from now, people
(18:40):
will be happy, You know, they'llgloat about the fact it'll be a
virtue signal that I don't eat meat and I don't drive a car, or
I don't own a car or I don't flyon an aeroplane because it's for
the good of the planet. It's this dangerous sort of
collectivist mindset that they've ingrained in people.
And, you know, a few generationsago, it would have been madness
because people saw through it. But it's very deeply entrenched
(19:02):
now. And we've got to call it what it
is, in my opinion. You mentioned Aldous Huxley and
the agenda opens with a quote from him.
The nightmare of total organisation has emerged and is
now awaiting us just around the next corner.
Yeah. And and for the record, I don't
think Huxley was a prophet either.
(19:24):
I mean, you, I don't know if you've gone down that rabbit
hole, but his brother Julian Huxley was the first director
general of UNESCO at the UN. So like, and he was a very open
eugenicist and he was in these circles of people, you know,
Fabian Society, etcetera, that was bringing the stuff in.
So it's like, yeah, Brave New World's a huge sort of red flag
(19:49):
and a, and a, you know, warning manual.
But he knew what was coming downthe pipeline and, and whether it
was a genuine warning or, or something else, I don't know.
I mean, I prefer the writings ofsomebody like CS Lewis from that
time who could clearly see the technocratic.
You know, scientism that was coming in like, not science as a
process, but science as an institution and the dangers of
(20:11):
that. But as I say, you know, it's
there's a tendency, I suppose, when you start researching the
stuff to want to show your work and be like, oh, by the way,
Huxley was this and he was that.But you know, we used the quote
because it is, as it happens, perfect example of what's
happening in the world. What is the agenda?
(20:38):
You mean the film or what is theplan?
The plan the. Plan as I see it, crazy as it
might sound to somebody who's not come across this information
before, is to enslave humanity, to usher them into city centres
(21:01):
where they can be surveilled andsort of cordon off large areas
of the earth. For an entitled few who see
themselves as stewards of the earth and see themselves as
entitled to govern it and best suited, you know, under sort of
a Darwinist, Darwinist mindset, they feel like it's survival of
(21:23):
the fittest. We've accrued all of this
wealth, accrued all this power. It's our duty to use it for the
good of the world as we see it, and they appear to look at
regular people as useless eaters.
I think they've tolerated humanity up until this point in
time because at any other periodin history it would have been
(21:46):
suicide for the few to wage war on the many.
But technology and the digital prison that we seem to have
constructed around ourselves unwittingly is the great
equaliser for these people. And it is now possible under a
digital ID and a central bank digital currency system to
socially engineer people and control them on a mass scale in
(22:08):
a way that's never been possiblebefore.
And so I feel like this transnational ruling class has
put itself on display. You know, it certainly did
through COVID. Like, you know, there was
clearly a level of coordination above the level of nation that
put itself on display during COVID.
And as it gets closer and closerto its end game, I think it's
(22:30):
going to become clearer. So.
So that's the agenda as I see itis total control and subjugation
of of normal people, but at the hands of some megalomaniacs.
I guess in other words, so it's all good news.
Sounds, sounds very positive, yeah.
Yeah. I mean, I guess another way of,
(22:51):
of putting it is technocracy, central control.
I mean, some of the overarching themes of the film are, are
exactly that digital IDs, mass surveillance, the the attack on
agriculture, which is something that many people just don't seem
to talk about. And and of course the idea of a
(23:14):
resource based economy, which was funnily enough spoken about
many years ago. Do you remember a film called
Zeitgeist? Yeah, yeah, it.
Was like this whack job film that came out that nobody took
seriously. Yeah, I, I remember it.
Yeah, it was it like early 2000s.
(23:38):
Yeah, yeah, totally. And I mean, I should have just
said technocracy. If that would have been in a
nutshell, I wouldn't have to ramble on a few.
Minutes. But yeah, essentially, like when
you, I mean, like, like John D Rockefeller is this example,
right? And this was a big, like,
revelation for me when we're making the film.
(23:59):
Like if if you were part of the organisation that ushered in the
Federal Reserve and you knew that the Fiat currency system
was effectively on borrowed timeand you knew it had an expiry
date, right? Like eventually we're going to
hyperinflate ourselves into destruction and something.
So we're, we're on the cusp of amajor financial boundary event.
(24:22):
Central bankers know that beforethey bring that system in.
So we're talking like, you know,essentially maybe a century ago,
they knew this and that researchthat was going on at Columbia
University in search of a new like a replacement of capitalism
in free enterprise. That was technocracy.
I think that was ultimately the purpose of it.
(24:42):
So find a replacement system to bring in when the Fiat currency
system inevitably collapsed. And the resource side of it, you
know, going back to John D Rockefeller, like he clearly
figured out at some point, right.
If if I own oil, if I own a vital resource, it doesn't
matter if we're the currency system in the world is sticks
(25:05):
and stones, I own the oil, right.
So if the Fiat monetary system collapses, it doesn't matter
because they own the resources. And then what we've seen over
the last century is this immenseland grab and resource grab by a
concentrated group of people. And I feel like that was in
preparation for what's coming. The the resource based economy
(25:28):
idea is is actually a lot biggerthan I think we realise.
I mean, the entire UN sustainable development agenda
is based on that. Correct.
Yeah. And the Agenda 21 was a good
example where that was never putto vote to the public.
There was no democratic process.We signed a pledge effectively
(25:50):
or our leaders signed up to it and committed us.
And that's been direction of travel for the UN since its
inception, where bit by bit you erode away at national
sovereignty and inherently acquire more controlling
interests yourself as a supranational organisation.
And if that's the modus operandiof institutions like the UN and
(26:14):
the West, I don't know if you'veever sat down and tried to read
some of these policy frameworks they've put together.
Yes, I have and. It's.
So complicated. But like they're they read the
same. Right, like they're so saying
this. Yeah, so and they use catch.
Phrases, by the way, sorry. Yes, and like all of this
Orwellian doublespeak that we talk about in the film as well,
you know, things like diversity and equity and inclusion, which
(26:36):
sounds so wonderful, but they read almost like they're written
by AI. And I know that's not possible
because it wasn't around when some of this stuff starts, you
know, was being churned out. There's a there's a really good
researcher that you might not come across.
It goes by the name of Escape Key and you credit him at the
end of the film. And as far as I'm as far as I'm
aware, he's like one guy and he is going out of his way to
(27:01):
actually engage with and read this stuff and get AI to analyse
it. And, you know, looking at things
like general systems theory by Jay Forrester and the Club of
Rome and, and how this stuff came about and the on a very
deep level, you know, if you're new to this stuff, it's probably
not for you. But if you're really interested
in looking at the nonsense that these people spout and you don't
(27:22):
want to sit down and read a 500 page policy framework escape
keys doing amazing work. And he's what I found is like,
he's so shadow banned. He's you know, he's just
vanishes from Twitter. And I see like the the social
credit system on Twitter in effect with him.
If I retweet him like my reach is limited, you know he's.
(27:44):
I'm just sorry I've just opened X now and he's banned.
This account does not exist. That that will show him.
But I think he's on sub stack, he's on Telegram and he seems
like a good guy. And you know, again, not not for
the uninitiated, but if you're interested in looking at this
(28:04):
stuff in great detail, he's a great place to to look at.
And there's lots of people doinggood work in this area.
But yeah, I call it like excessive verbiage that these
people use was absolute word salad that makes it almost
impossible to read. And I think that's by design as
well. I think they're writing in code.
There are actual, you know, a lot of the terms don't mean what
(28:26):
they say they mean. And also they just pad it out
with so much excessive verbiage that it's impenetrable to.
Why would an average person sit down and read this nonsense?
Yeah, but they also make it sound good, like they want to
end world hunger. I mean, full.
Do you really want people to starve?
What's wrong with you? Well.
I find it curious that during COVID we found the means through
(28:49):
which to vaccinate billions of people.
And, you know, almost overnight we mobilised the logistics to
get that product or those products to billions of people.
But we haven't been able to feedpeople.
You know, that's just not possible.
The money's not there. But just all showing to the UN
comment earlier, net zero, I mean, carbon net 0 is probably
(29:12):
the foundation of all of these policy frameworks because that
allows them to build digital ID on top of as well as CBDC or
some variant of it. Because people in the Trump camp
now going, well, Trump doesn't like CBDC's, there we go, he's
(29:33):
ended it. But they don't realise that
these agendas don't suddenly stop.
It's ridiculous. Someone.
Someone. Said yesterday, sorry someone
said yesterday he's going to endthe Fed and, and, and you'll
see, I mean. Well, it's like, you know, when
he got in and he started issuingall of these executive orders
and he was rattling them off anda lot of them sounded really
(29:56):
good. It's like, man, this sounds like
he's, you know, he's well intentioned, he's a little bit
wiser this time around. You know, he's getting pulling
the US out of the Hoo and all that stuff.
But what people don't realise isif he's able to do that in the
first few days of his administration, the next person
that gets in just like Biden did, right, can just put you
straight back in. It's if it's that easy to
withdraw, it's just as easy to go back in.
(30:17):
So the executive orders as I seethem, you know, they sound good
and they really make it look like he's doing good stuff.
But there's nothing permanent there and there's nothing to say
that they couldn't be overriddenby his successor, whoever that
might be. I mean, I brought attention a
few days ago to a document by the Trilateral Commission.
(30:38):
So if you go on the Trilateral Commission's website, they have
this document called Capitalism in Transition.
And in that they advocate for all the same stuff.
And they identify that they, they claim that we're a shifting
to a fifth stage of capitalism, which is effectively, you know,
Klaus Schwab's stakeholder capitalism nonsense in different
(30:59):
terminology. And they identify three areas
that are primary focus. And the first is the climate
crisis and how we need to be shifting to a net zero world by
2050, which which again enables total centralisation, you know,
the electrification of the grid,which is, you know, these
(31:23):
technologies themselves aren't inherently bad.
People think that I'm having a go at solar or wind or whatever.
It's like, no, in principle they're fine and solar panels
can be useful on an individual level, but like as a means of
powering the grid, they're not reliable and they're not stable.
And the idea that you can just bin 85% of the world's energy
(31:44):
from hydrocarbon in 30 years andreplace it with that which isn't
stable and it's not, you know, Imean, Spain found out the hard
way recently, right? We were parental blackout and,
and the National Grid in the UK is very open about this, that
we're going to have to control demand by the flexibly pricing
(32:07):
the supply of electricity. So we're, they're telling you we
are going to price you out of using electricity, whether you
like it or not through the use of smart metres, which can do
minute by minute pricing. We're going to determine the
price of electricity. And so we could realistically be
in a position in a few decades where people are like setting an
alarm to get up at 3:00 AM to take a shower because that's
(32:28):
when the electricity is cheaper.Like going back to a pre
industrial age way of living. And, and it's a feudalist system
really. And I think that's how they want
it. You know it's a governing class
ruling over the the useless eaters.
Yeah, and it's based on the myththat humans are warming up
(32:51):
Earth. Yes, it's so stupid as as Alex
Newman says. So as as you're not talking here
in Cape Town, it is 10°C outsideand it is raining.
How's that for global boiling? You could you guys could do with
some boiling over there, Yeah. But ultimately.
(33:15):
People buy into this. That's why I said earlier it's
the Jones Plantation. But it's this process of
creating a crisis. And you know, most people are
well intentioned for a start, sothey don't they don't
immediately assume bad actors. It's only when you've that
switch flicks in your head and you're like, right, these people
are actually not acting in my interest at all, Then a lot of
(33:39):
things start to become clear. But until you look at the world
through that lens and you assumethe best of people, as most
empathetic people do, you'll tryto justify things that they're
doing, you'll rationalise it Well, you know they wouldn't lie
to me on such a scale. Unfortunately they would.
And they're really not acting inyour interest.
(33:59):
This. Is also a good point because
unfortunately a lot of people onour side have become too
blackballed and, and everything is just nihilistic and, and
chaotic. And what that ultimately does on
a personal level is that it putsyou into a into a place of
depression and darkness, and that is the ultimate defeat.
(34:21):
Yeah, you can sort of spiral inwards to a point where, and I
get it, like people's trust has been betrayed on such a scale.
It's like, I don't know who to trust.
And so you're sceptical of everybody, you're sceptical of
everything. And then I watched your
conversation with Zubi a few days ago, which I thought was
really refreshing. And I'm conscious now that I'm
(34:43):
like massively negative. And please don't get the
impression that I'm blackpilled at all.
I agreed with a lot of what you guys said, right?
But you know, equally this isn't, I mean, the agenda is a
lot of things and we've had a lot of compliments on it, but
it's not a pleasant watch. It's a bad situation, right?
It's painting a picture of a pretty bad situation.
But the blackpilling doesn't help because whether you're
(35:07):
afraid of the manufactured crises that they're presenting
to you or you're afraid of what's coming down the pipeline,
you're still living your life infear.
And you're letting this narrative one way or the other
dictate the way you live your life.
So I think like the ultimate point of rebellion is, you know,
be a good father and, you know, spend time in nature and enjoy
(35:28):
yourself and laugh through the nonsense.
And it sounds, you know, like woo woo.
But like, if enough people did that alone, just stop paying
attention to this crap. Stop engaging with mainstream
media and just stop reacting to the news, right?
By all means, watch it, figure out what's going on, but stop
reacting to it. I see that people on our side a
(35:49):
lot where they'll share this headline in outrage.
Can you believe this? Dude, stop giving it your
energy. Stop scrolling.
Yeah, stop reacting to it. It doesn't do you any good.
And yeah, Blackpooling, as I say, I get it.
And we've even had people over the years which when you, if you
(36:09):
could see how small an operationwe are, right.
But people have been like, you guys have controlled that
position you're doing, you know,me and Mark working out of it.
Getting. Shared office space and stuff.
It's in a way I suppose. For lack of what that that that
controlled opposition, gatekeeping, limited hangout
label. It's become the new sexist,
(36:30):
racist climate change denier. In a way, there's a compliment
in there and but The thing is like the more you try to defend
yourself against it, the more you just feed into it.
So unfortunately, you know, it'sunfortunate, but I, I just have
to accept like I understand where people are, right?
(36:51):
Nothing I can say after what's happened in the last five years
can make, can make you trust me.I'm not asking you to.
If you don't want to trust me, don't, you know, go find
somebody else to listen to. I'm only doing what I as I read
it as much as I possibly can. Like I'm not a doctor or
scientist or anything. I'm a camera operator and an
(37:11):
editor prior to this, and I wasn't doing anything remotely
controversial prior to all this nonsense, but I felt compelled
to do something, whatever that looked like.
So that's what I'm doing. And you know, if people don't
like the way I'm doing that, that's, that's fair enough.
But I don't understand the mindset of like trying to cut
down people that are doing stuffproactively, you know?
(37:33):
It's the purity test, you know, if you aren't a mirror image of
that person, then you are a gatekeeper.
Yeah, seems to be that way. And it's very stupid because
because people learn and open their eyes at different paces.
Yeah. I mean, I don't know if you want
(37:54):
to talk about this, but I know like you're a big proponent of
the, you know, the no virus thing, right?
I'm very sympathetic to it. Yes, I I won't make the claim,
but I am sympathetic to it. Well, I mean, I very early on
during COVID, a lot of the distant voices I was hearing
were the likes of Andrew Kaufmanand Tom Cowan and people like
(38:15):
that. And I made contact with Andy
and, you know, Kevin Corbett is another one in the UK.
And I know I did interviews withthose guys and I've got a lot of
respect for them. And, you know, I've not sort of
spoken to them that recently. Kevin would occasionally give me
a smack on the wrist and say, hey, great film, but way to
reinforce the virus narrative. I'm sympathetic to those guys.
(38:38):
And something in me honestly tells me I think they're right.
Like, I think, I think that's how deep the lie goes.
But what I found was like, I mean, I'm in the business of
communication. And as the consequences to what
was happening were getting more severe, like, you know, they
were trying to vaccinate children, for example, I was
(39:01):
banging my head against the wallby leading the argument with
like, well, you know, the virus doesn't exist, right?
Yes, I get that also, and it's it's profound.
Sorry for interrupting you again, but it's profoundly
annoying. You know, I just recently
interviewed Andrew Wakefield, who has done incredible work in,
you know, in vaccines. And he was destroyed by the
Pharmaceutical industry because of a peer reviewed paper that
(39:23):
didn't even make a claim. It just said more research is
needed, right? And then I get comments from
people saying, oh, but you know,he's a shield because he still
believes in contagion. Like, dude, how do we go?
Where do we go from here? I.
Understand people's frustration because it feels like there's
been, I'm not saying that. I'm saying like, from their
(39:45):
observation as I read it, it feels like that view has been
censored. So as I said, Andy Kaufman's
voice was quite loud at the start of COVID.
And I've got a lot of respect for Andy for putting his head
above the parapet. And in my experience, he's a
wonderful person. And you know, he and I have had
good conversations over the years.
(40:06):
But equally, I've come across people that are adamant he's
dead wrong. People like good people, you
know, and, and I'm, I'm, I'm nota scientist.
I'm trying to get to the truth of the matter.
I'm not afraid of that conversation.
But it, it feels like that argument has got a lot quieter
and the same people are banging the drum.
But you know, so I can understand how people feel like
(40:28):
it's being shut out. I think it's more a strategy
thing than like a maligned, you know, as a means of
communication. There are other arguments you
could put forward prior to getting there because, because
that's like, I guess it's on thescale of saying like climate
change is a hoax, right? Like it's a lot of people will
(40:49):
be turned off from the agenda bythe fact that we that's in the
introduction, right? But that was something that we
had to accept. And I've, I've felt for a little
while like the no virus thing issomething I need to do some more
work in. And, you know, I mean, I had a
conversation with Mike Eden recently, who again, you know,
is somebody I met in 2021. And we don't speak often, but I
(41:11):
consider him a friend. And he took issue with certain
things that were in the agenda. But I want to go and speak to
Mike and I want to allow him theplatform to say what he says,
but I don't have to agree with everything he says.
I think there's like this, theseelements of woke culture and
cancel culture creeping into ourside where it's like, if you
don't align exactly. It's ridiculous.
(41:33):
Yeah, it's. Just ridiculous full.
So my philosophy, which I don't often mention on on my show is
is based on something that BruceLee said.
Take that which is valuable, discard that which is not
create, which is uniquely yours.That is how I apply the my
outlook on the world. So I will listen to you and
(41:56):
everybody else, and then I'll take the things that I think are
valuable and I'll dismiss the rest.
I don't. I don't need you to be 100% in
agreement with me. I, I feel like there, there is a
debate there that either should have happened a long time ago or
I mean, some people say it's, it's not the hill to die on kind
of thing. I, I do think those voices are
important. And now I've got a lot of
(42:17):
respect for Andy Kaufman and Kevin Corbett, etcetera.
I do. And maybe I'll do something down
the line, but, you know, I I have to do it because I feel
compelled to. And I feel like there's
something there. Like I'm not, you know, I'm not
doing this for money. Like I'm, you know, I'm not, I
don't want to play to a captive audience, I guess is what I want
to say. Yeah, I want to do something
because I want to go and do it and I'm genuinely interested in
(42:40):
it. So.
But I'm not, you know, I'm not afraid of that conversation.
Why do you? Think the views expressed in the
agenda would be considered controversial?
To a general audience. Yeah, I mean, you mentioned
earlier you you mentioned the word controversial controversy
(43:01):
and I'm trying to think like why?
You know I. Suppose because it's completely
at odds with the official line or like you know, the government
line around the world on some quite important issues.
And as you say, like net 0 by 2050 is a key.
You know, it's been identified by the Trilateral Commission in
(43:22):
the West as how we get to where we're going.
We need to implement this nonsense.
It's justification. It's a means of engineering
people's consent for a control grid to be built around them,
right under the auspices of thisludicrous notion that humans, by
virtue of existing, are destroying the planet we were
born onto. We have to now interfere.
(43:44):
And it's the same hubristic mindset that leads people like
Bill Gates to think I need to change cows because they're
destroying the planet, right? Their digestive system and by
farting they're killing the planet or humans.
Even though we've existed on this planet for however many
years. We need now need to upgrade
their immune systems with this mRNA nonsense.
(44:05):
Because intelligent design is flawed and we can do it better.
Us, us the the technocrats, us the transhumanists, we can do it
better. I think that's such a dangerous
mindset and it's rooted in eugenics.
Ultimately it's rules for you and not for them.
It's A2 tiered society. Like we saw flavours of it
(44:26):
during COVID. That was it kind of rearing its
head. But it's a really dangerous
mindset. So I I only mean controversial
in the sense that it's indirect.It's a direct challenge to a lot
of mainstream narratives. But I don't personally think
they're controversial. Everything that we've said is
rooted in primary source literature and spoken by experts
(44:49):
in their field. And also what you see.
Right. Yeah, the evidence of your eyes
and ears. Yes.
I mean, I mean, when they when they said in 2020 that there was
this deadly pandemic, I saw nothing around me.
I mean, all I saw was billboards.
I mean, it was a massive marketing campaign.
But I mean, I live, I live in Africa, dude.
We have millions of very poor people living in tight compact.
(45:16):
What would you call it? So we called it a Township.
What? What a squatter camp.
All right, there was no mass death anyway.
No ambulances, no mass graves. But dude.
Didn't you see the news? Yes, but the news kept saying
you go to the airport and these announcements are saying as a
deadly virus, you know, please wear your mask, stand 2 metres
(45:37):
away from very healthy people. That was when I started
realising. So I, I admit I kind of bought
into the whole thing in 2020, but I, my position was it's mild
and they're overplaying it. It's just a small, it's like a,
like a type of flute. Nothing to worry about the
Diamond Princess, whatever. Northern Italy.
It was just a minor flu. When they announced lockdowns
(46:00):
and everybody sort of doing the same thing using the same
language, Then I suddenly started questioning everything.
Yeah, I think that's how it started for a lot of people.
I mean, Liam, as I said, it's basically whatever Oracle
became. Liam and I for first few years
just did that between the two ofus.
He saw it right from the start. He couldn't really articulate it
(46:23):
to me in quite the right way. And I'm like, what do you mean
it's a lie? Yeah, all of it's a lie.
What do you mean? And I but I was fascinated by
that idea. And you're right, like bit by
bit you start challenging. And for me it was like once you
realise that they're fudging thenumbers.
And I'm not saying it'd be ethical, but maybe you could
understand a government lying about death figures or mortality
(46:47):
to cheat it downwards to like ease panic and calm people.
Me. I'm not saying that'd be
ethical, but but when you realise they're cheating them
upwards. OK, so you're trying to frighten
people, you're trying to create chaos and you're trying to build
order out of chaos. Clearly, like this is the this
is the agenda. What's that's that's playing out
before us? And as soon as you as soon as
(47:08):
you spot a hole somewhere, it's like pulling a thread, you know,
just keeps coming and the lies get bigger and bigger.
And the PCR test, man, I mean, not enough people like the loud
COVID dissidents in 2025. There's not enough talk in that
area that the test and the wholeidea of the case of COVID case
(47:30):
was nonsense. I saw my first PCR test last
year in 2024. So my wife and I made the
decision that we were not going to even legitimise the system.
We weren't going to get a fake vaccine passport, nothing.
We didn't want any type of legitimacy of the system.
And a friend of mine flew flew over from from Canada and he
(47:54):
brought me APCR test. He said, I know that you haven't
seen one of these. So yes, yes, one just have a
look at just have a look at justjust because I opened this
thing, you know, we were having lunch and I said, oh, it's APC
artist you didn't feel. Compelled to like, wrap it up
your nose. No, but I mean, you're right,
(48:20):
something you said earlier was, was, was I think also very true.
We we mustn't run the risk of just thinking everybody is
stupid. I think that's also an easy trap
to fall into. A lot of people didn't know
better and also don't think critically.
(48:40):
Perhaps like you and I, they, they focus on other things.
And I think it was Peter Bragan who said to me, if you look at
an aeroplane and it says got 180people on board and during COVID
and everybody inside the plane sitting with a mask on, as a
thought experiment, you need to go after each one of those
(49:01):
people and ask them why are you wearing a mask?
And majority of them will have adifferent response.
And that that that really kind of struck me.
Yeah. And I think as you become aware
of the scale of the lies and also the magnitude of the
(49:23):
consequences in the end game people, I see people and I
understand people getting frustrated saying why can't you
see it? Are you stupid?
You know, to people that don't see it at all?
And but you're right, it's it's not about intelligence.
I don't think it's about people an unwillingness.
It's it's weaponized people's good nature, I guess is what I'm
(49:44):
trying to say, where you assume you project your value set onto
people and anybody that's had torun in with like a narcissist
or, you know, maybe even a psychopath in their life, you
know, that they, they're able tooperate and navigate through
life undetected because people don't assume bad things of
people. They don't assume that there are
bad actors in the world until you encounter it, right?
(50:07):
It's in the and then you see it.But so I think it's a
psychological barrier a lot of people aren't willing to cross.
And I was speaking to Bob Moran about this a while ago, that
most people would, whether it's a comfort thing, I don't know.
Like it's, it's a very uncomfortable realisation to to
think that all of these institutions would be that
(50:29):
education, government, the mediathat you've trusted with so much
of your life are, are not telling you the truth and are
not acting in your interest. It's an uncomfortable
realisation, but it's a necessary one because the
alternative is being LED into this digital gulag.
You know that it it's been constructed in the shadows and
(50:49):
this agenda's been allowed to carry on for so long because
they've lied. Not just outright, they've lied
through a mission, they've distorted truths, but ultimately
they've played on people's good nature.
I mean, that was so much of the behavioural psychology through
COVID was you're a good person, aren't you?
Wear a mask then. You're a good person, aren't
you? Stay in your home.
(51:10):
You're a good person, aren't you?
Take a vaccine, otherwise you'rekilling granny.
And most people went along with it because they thought, yeah,
yeah, I am a good person and I care about other people, not
about being stupid, I don't think.
But yeah, I, I, I think more people need to even just go on
that thought experiment of what if, you know, which is what we
(51:31):
tried to do with the agenda. Like, what if the whole carbon
narrative was a lie? What would that mean?
What would it mean for you? And just take the thought
experiment. You know, there's a huge
concerted effort by institutionslike the BBC etcetera at the
moment to stamp out wrong thing and misinformation because they
realise that people taking that journey thought which you're
(51:51):
perfectly entitled to do, like words can't hurt you.
You know, you're allowed to access to information and to
make up your own mind. And it's the people that are
censoring and trying to stamp out opposing viewpoints and
counter narratives that are, youknow, the bad actors.
So sorry there's a long winded answer, but.
No, no, no, I mean just on your point of intelligence and
(52:14):
stupidity. OK, so Africa apparently has on
average the world's lowest IQ. The majority of South Africa is
black, yet it is the black population of South Africa that
overwhelmingly rejected the vaccine.
Overwhelmingly. I think South Africa is one of
the lowest uptakes in the world,less than 1 1/2 percent or 2%,
(52:36):
right? It has nothing to do with
intelligence. And in fact, if you, if you
think about here, at least in mycountry, the the people that I
saw were the most obedient were the white middle class.
Explain that to me. I think part of it is to do with
(52:59):
when the system has served you well.
And particularly if you're an academic and you've risen to
prominence through an, you know,a prominent university or
something, you're far less inclined to speak out against a
system, you know, an academia that has been misled or
researched, that's been LED downthe wrong path because it's,
(53:20):
it's a part of your identity. And to admit that you've been
fooled or to admit that you've been lied to a lot of people,
that's cognitive dissonance. I don't know what that is.
But you're you end up fighting for the system that served you.
Whereas as you say, you know, a lot of working class people, you
(53:40):
know, invited a plumber around your house during COVID, like,
they weren't buying anything, wearing a mask.
They didn't give a shit. They saw right through the whole
thing. Whereas it was, yeah, as you
say, the a lot of the white collar people didn't get it.
And I think part of that is theycan't fathom that this system
that has served them reasonably well, you know, it's screwed
(54:02):
them over in a lot of ways you could point out, but they
couldn't fathom that it's not acting in their interest and
they don't want to move against it.
I think that's the main reason. I'm sure there are others.
There's so much to talk about, Ireally want to recommend my
audience to watch The Agenda. It is, it really is high
(54:26):
quality. It is outstanding.
It's probably one of the best sort of counterculture forms I
have seen in the last five years.
I'm say five years because I'm referring to the sort of the
COVID era. It's really, really good Full.
That means a lot coming from you.
What? What does that mean that?
(54:46):
Wasn't That wasn't sarcasm, Thatwas my English accent.
That's a lot. That's that means a lot coming
from you, yeah. I mean that sincerely.
I mean that sincerely, no. But it really is very, very
good. Where, where can, where can I
not me? Where can my audience watch it?
So we've set up a landing page, which is the Agenda film.com,
(55:08):
which at the moment's got a YouTube embed in it.
We're not anticipating it's going to stay on YouTube
forever, but it's a good place to send people that aren't
necessarily looking for this information.
It's also on Rumble. There's a direct upload on X.
There's at the same landing page, the Agenda film.com.
You can download a copy of the film, take it offline, do what
(55:29):
you like with it. It's all free.
I don't want your email address.There's no paywall.
Just if you think it's importantand it's going to help you
communicate and articulate some of these ideas, then yeah, take
it and and run with it. And there's an option to donate
through Buy Me a Coffee on theirwebsite if you feel compelled
to. This doesn't come natural to me
(55:50):
or Liam, you know, like we're just introverted camera nerds
for all of this, you know, so the public speaking side of it
isn't something we've gravitatedtowards.
And we've never like put ourselves at the forefront of
what Oracle is. But a lot of people have said
like you should do it more because, you know, maybe I think
people have a more of a rapport with you and you know, perhaps
(56:13):
even just trust you a bit more because then otherwise it's like
who are these guys, these Oraclefilms?
And that's where these ideas that like with some, I don't
know, nefarious actors or whatever, it's literally 2 Dick
heads from England. You derailed my my atro full
Wiseman. Thank you for joining me in the
trenches. Thanks, Jim.
(56:33):
Good to see you mate.
Full Wiseman, thank you for joining me in the Dringers.
Good to be here, Jen. Feels like a long time coming.
Take me to the background you and of course the creation of
Oracle Forms. So prior to 2020, I was working
as a freelance camera operator, videographer, editor, you know,
because I did some work for production companies and in
(01:00):
commercial space events and, youknow, just nothing remotely
controversial. That was just how I earned
living. And it wasn't super glamorous,
but I enjoyed it. You know, I was able to keep the
lights on and do something I enjoyed.
And then I would say I had a network of freelancers that I
would use to crew up events and things.
And a good friend of mine is a guy called Liam Turner.
(01:22):
And when COVID kicked off, I mean, Liam kind of saw it
straight away. I mean, I'm ashamed to admit
like took me a couple of weeks to sort of do some sense making
and think this whatever this is,we're not being told the truth
of it. And the more that you dug, the
more layers you unpeeled. It's like right, this we're
really not getting told the truth.
(01:42):
Something, something quite sinister appears to be
happening. So the first half of 2020, we,
we sort out dissident voices, people that you, you know, were
sort of resonating with us. And I felt like I was getting a
closer version of the truth from.
And also I, I noticed online that there was like a growing
(02:06):
sort of resistance to this nonsense.
It wasn't big, but there were, you know, people that were
taking to the streets and, and breaking lockdowns and
challenging the coronavirus act in the UK.
And so I sort of had my finger on the pulse of all right, there
are the people that think like this.
And to the point that by around September of 2020, I felt
(02:26):
compelled to go to one of the demonstrations in London.
And, and I've been largely politically apathetic prior to
all of this. You know, I wasn't a political
person, but this felt important and it felt like, right, if
you're not going to pay attention to what's happening
now, then when are you going to pay attention?
So we went to a demonstration and we thought, all right, well
if we're going to go, then we may as well go and shoot it.
(02:47):
So never been to a protest in mylife.
Really naively rocked up with myself, Liam, and another camera
operator. Like we were filming a
conference like 5 cameras, you know, like, and people were
looking at us like who are you guys?
You know, like, who are you working for and filmed that?
And as it happens, just by chance, the the organiser with
(03:07):
that demonstration is an activist in the UK called Fiona
Hein. And she ended up organising a
lot of the big marches that happened in the coming months
and years. But she was going to Berlin in a
couple of weeks from that point to do to record like a press
conference with this group called the World Doctors
Alliance, which was, you know, the sort of consortium of
doctors and lawyers that had gottogether to speak out against
(03:28):
all of this stuff. So just by virtue of going to
that one protest, they saw our footage and they were like, OK,
you guys need to come with us and record this press
conference. So we kind of fell in and and
into this large network of COVIDdissidents and sort of made
ourselves useful, I guess. And what we were putting out
could have fallen on deaf ears. But as it happens, it seems to
(03:49):
have resonated with a lot of people.
And there was no sort of prior plan to what we were doing.
One thing just truly led to another in quite a serendipitous
way. So that one thing just begat
another, really. And here we are.
And sorry, I had my micro on mute and you have just released
(04:12):
the agenda. Yep.
Yeah. So that was effectively, it
sounds crazy when I say it, but it was effectively the best part
of two years of work. Now that's not constant work.
Obviously I'm structuring that around actual paid work and, you
know, family time and actually living a life.
(04:32):
So any spare time that I had. So it was myself and Mark
Sharman, the producer of the film, just not television as he
remembers it by any stretch, putting it together and it
started, Mark went to, you know,in the UK.
I'm sure you may have similar where you are, but there are
sort of local meet meet ups quite often with presentations
(04:56):
and just kind of networking events for like minded people in
our space. And Mark saw a presentation by a
lady called Sandy Adams in 2023 that sort of resonated with him.
And I was around that time, I was, I was reading a lot of
Patrick Wood's work and Mark andI had done a film in 2022 called
Safe and Effective a Second Opinion, which is the first time
(05:18):
that we'd worked together. And that was kind of marks
influence on our work, like trying to do a current affairs
TV documentary sort of take on the vaccine, so called vaccine
harms from the the jabs. And so we I think that it made a
lot of noise. I mean, it got it got near the
(05:39):
million views on YouTube. They got mentioned in Parliament
in the UK and then it got pulleddown as soon as it basically got
got that far. But it's still available in like
lots of places if you know whereto look, as is a lot of our
work. You know, I, I really need to go
out of my way and back cataloguestuff that we've made over the
years because I don't think it actually exists in one place.
I mean, we've got accounts on Odyssey and Rumble and places,
(06:02):
but I think people like yourselfthat knew, knew about us quite
early on, probably seen a lot ofthe older stuff, but I, I
definitely need to go and catalogue it, but I digress.
So yeah, the agenda just sort ofgrew from this idea of
essentially turning Sandy's presentation into like the
(06:24):
cinematic equivalent of a PowerPoint presentation to then
just growing in terms of scale and ambition.
And, and a couple of months later, I saw a presentation by
Aman Jabi at a similar event where he sort of dialled in
remotely and gave a presentationon, you know, digital prisoner
and on all of his areas of expertise.
And just kind of blew my mind because that was my first
(06:45):
exposure to Ananjabi. And man, there's, there's
something here. I don't know what it looks like.
It's like building a million piece jigsaw without a box, But
there's something some way we must be able to pull together
all of these disparate pieces and and put it in a, you know,
like, so somebody like yourself,you know, you're clearly aware
(07:06):
of a lot of big picture of what's happening it.
There's probably not a lot of new information for you in the
agenda, but the goal was to present it in a way that was
like accessible to people who might not have come across this
information before and in one place.
So there's, you know, there's lots of facets to what's
happening around the world, but people don't necessarily
understand where it, where it leads and where it's sort of
(07:29):
where it's sourced from. And it's, you know, you go high
enough up and it appears to all be coming from same place or
certainly the same ideology. Nick Hudson would, for example,
was just by chance. I mean, I, I wanted to speak to
him. Nick's somebody I know.
He's a regular on your show and he's a good friend.
Of mine. Yeah.
Well, he and I obviously didn't know each other prior to this,
but like we maintained contact throughout.
(07:51):
I I, my first exposure to him was I saw the presentation he
did in like March 21, I think. And that again, was like a huge
thing for me. I remember saying to Nick when I
finally met him, like that was the first sort of example of
something where I was like, I could send this to anybody and
you just demolished the narrative in such a measured,
(08:13):
professional way. And I thought it was brilliant.
And I've followed Nick since then.
And, and, you know, we don't speak often, but we maintain
contact. And I consider Nick a friend
and, and he happened to be in the UKI was like, well, we're
working on this film. It's early doors on the UN and
it's quite a broad subject. Would you be interested in?
He's like, yeah, I mean, when weshot something and he was in
London and his interview was, you know, again, just
(08:37):
serendipitously just perfect. I mean, Nick's got a habit of
being word perfect. So like his little monologue at
the end of the film, it's like you just nailed it in a couple
of minutes. Like this, all of this nonsense
that's happening, it's driven ultimately by an anti human
mindset. And, you know, people who are so
(08:58):
hubristic that they've come to see themselves as gods
basically. They think they're entitled to
tamper with the human genome andupgrade humans into human 2
point O. And they feel like stewards of
the earth and they feel like they're entitled to do so.
And that's really, you know, frighteningly, I think that's
the mindset that seems to be running the world.
(09:21):
I play on the whole war theme with with with my show, you
know, battle of ideas joining mein the trenches.
We're in an information war full.
Do you think we are winning the information war?
It's a good question. Censorship is always, to me,
(09:42):
it's been an indication that thefight's not over, if nothing
else, because if where they'd won, like they wouldn't care.
Like what people were saying, like, yeah, go and scream into
the void. We don't care.
Censorship during COVID was massive, which should have told
you that. And it became so obvious, like
you said this thing and now you're kicked off of Facebook.
(10:02):
Like what? Exactly what they didn't want
you speaking about. And so I think they lost, in my
opinion, they lost the information war during COVID.
However, what's happened since is that the censorship's got way
more sophisticated and I think kind of more insidious.
So, you know, Elon Musk reinstates everybody on Twitter
(10:24):
and it's free speech platform now.
Isn't it wonderful? But what's actually happened is
that shadow banning and things are much more prevalent.
So even though everybody feels like they're there and they can
say what they like, you know, intheir own words, you have
freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach.
And so your voice can be dialleddown algorithmically from a
(10:44):
completely centralised position.And I think that's worse because
you aren't even aware that that's happening.
You know, like as I said, duringCOVID, this invoices got de
platformed. And as soon as that happened,
people that sort of clocked on to what was going on thought,
well, I'm going to find out whathe said because you don't want
me to hear it. Whereas now I think the the
(11:06):
censorships are a little bit more sophisticated and, and the
free speech Twitter sign up. I mean, I don't know, you'll
sort of take on the whole thing,but not buying it.
But it also had the other consequence that during COVID, a
lot of alt tech popped up in direct response to all the
censorship. So you had all of these
platforms, I guess, you know, Gab or Parlour or things were,
(11:29):
you know, examples that their USP was we're not going to sense
you and they gained a lot of traction.
But as soon as free speech Twitter comes, it's like, well,
Twitter wins by virtue of the network effect because
everybody's on there and your one USP is now not a selling
point. So all that old tech dies and
all that investment into alternatives goes away.
And it also had that consequencetoo.
(11:51):
And not to mention, I think, youknow, the dissidents are now
corralled onto a platform that is clearly as ties to
intelligence agencies. And it's like I, I, I believe
they're actually stud. They did lose the information
war during COVID, but they're studying how so called
misinformation spreads now and they're trying to come up with
(12:13):
more sophisticated ways to nip it in the bud.
So I think it's ongoing. Are we winning?
I hope so. I hope so.
Another. Big problem is somebody like
Trump who is extremely likeable.However, a pipe piper of note.
(12:35):
Yeah, I mean, it's difficult to put your finger on because
sometimes he'll come out and saysomething that you completely
agree with. It's like, well, I'm glad he
said that. But we have to do with people
like Trump and Elon is actually look at what they're doing, not
versus what they're saying. Because it's very easy to say
something and get people on yourside.
But when you look at their actions, I mean, Elon Musk's
(12:58):
investment portfolio is like a mirror image of the World
Economic Forum's agenda. It's like, just because there's
a different salesperson giving it to you, and I'm doing it
under a libertarian front saying, dude, you're invested in
brain chips and electric cars and, and surveillance grids and,
and all this stuff. It's like it's the same thing.
And you seem to be leading us inthe same direction.
But you're the the sales pitch has changed, but the direction
(13:22):
of travel seems to be the same. And it's, it would be funny if
it didn't appear to be so effective, you know, And I, I
think Trump seems to be much thesame where there's been, there's
go on, no. Sorry, I interrupted, But he can
say, well, we're going to bring digital ID in, but we'll do it
via the border. Now we want to stop those
(13:42):
Mexicans and suddenly millions and millions of people will
suddenly now buy into the idea of digital ID.
Correct. And yeah, again, it would be
funny if it wasn't didn't appearto be working.
I mean, and that's that's a, a methodology that's not exclusive
to the USI mean the UK, we've had a massive illegal
immigration problem that's sort of making headlines now.
(14:05):
You know, Tommy Robinson's been pounding the drum and etcetera.
But it's like this immensely divisive issue, which is a
problem in and of itself, but it's clearly been a crisis
that's been manufactured, it's been allowed to happen from on
high. And this the solution has always
been digital. ID say, well, now we, we need to
(14:26):
impose a digital ID and, and that seems to be happening not
just in America, but around the world.
And you know, people as we stay in the film, you know, this has
to be if if you didn't dig your heels in anywhere else, like you
have to stop before you accept adigital ID.
And I, I know they're going to make it difficult.
(14:48):
I feel like the the vaccine passports during COVID were the
first go around. Well, not the first, but you
know, they were a very obvious attempt to impose some form of
digital biometric system and it didn't, didn't float and people
sported off. But this strategy, I mean, Tony
Blair's emblematic of this ideology where he's for about 20
(15:09):
years, he's been trying to bringsome form of this system in.
These people seem to come like how a shark attacks, right?
So a shark will typically come in and and bite something and
then let it sit there and then attack from another angle.
So we're going like regroup and come and attack from another
side. And I feel like that's how these
people operate where every so often, potentially once in a
(15:29):
generation, we have to fight this madness off.
But what happens in the interim is this huge influx of
indoctrination and propaganda that can convinces people that
it's for their own good. And oh, maybe we do need this
idea or, you know, the manufacturing of problems that
think, oh, that's the solution. Isn't that funny?
(15:50):
But we've got to say no to this digital ID nonsense, no matter
who is selling it to you, whether it's Trump or it's Elon.
Like it's and under a current administration it it might not
be abused, but the potential forsocial control that it offers in
the hands of the wrong person is.
It's not worth any of the selling points they're giving
(16:11):
me. Like you have to refuse it in my
opinion. Andrew Treglia and Larkin Rose
did a great film called The Jones Plantation, and that
really is how how the world around us is.
We are living in the Jones Plantation.
People are choosing their own slavery.
(16:31):
Yeah. And I think that's a long, like
generations long process of engineering people's consent.
And the climate narrative that we, you know, focus is a huge
focus of the film is a great example of that, where they've
conditioned you literally by buying the science.
You know, you go back to the Club of Rome and they finance
(16:54):
computer modelling to say that the world was going to end as we
knew it unless we started serious impositions on people's
lifestyles. You need to manage consumption
and to manage population. And they also identified like
disease, for example. And they basically went looking
under Rockefeller duress for global problems that would
(17:15):
require institutions like the UNto come in and effectively
govern over. So a level of bureaucracy above
the level of nation. That's why they existed.
They were like this think tank to come in and find global
problems to justify their existence.
You know, effectively they were a solution without a problem.
And and climate change was a bigone.
(17:36):
And through that for for decadesnow, you know, it's hard for
young people now who have bought, you know, you accept the
reality that you're bought up in.
And I understand that. And it took me a while when I
started, you know, floating the idea that climate change, a
hoax, like all of it. Yeah, it is.
But you and you can go back in your head like, well, why do I
(17:58):
think it isn't? And it's, you know, it's goes
back to school and teaches and everywhere around you, you know,
all the media that you're presented with goes out of its
way to convince you that we're in a crisis.
And, and, you know, essentially sell you this narrative.
But the narrative ultimately is about restricting as a
(18:20):
restrictions on on your life. But in this, in this very it,
it's just like Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, which is a
parallel that we draw upon. He said essentially you, you
propagandise people to love their enslavement.
And that's what they've done with the climate narrative.
So the point where, you know, maybe 10 years from now, people
(18:40):
will be happy, You know, they'llgloat about the fact it'll be a
virtue signal that I don't eat meat and I don't drive a car, or
I don't own a car or I don't flyon an aeroplane because it's for
the good of the planet. It's this dangerous sort of
collectivist mindset that they've ingrained in people.
And, you know, a few generationsago, it would have been madness
because people saw through it. But it's very deeply entrenched
(19:02):
now. And we've got to call it what it
is, in my opinion. You mentioned Aldous Huxley and
the agenda opens with a quote from him.
The nightmare of total organisation has emerged and is
now awaiting us just around the next corner.
Yeah. And and for the record, I don't
think Huxley was a prophet either.
(19:24):
I mean, you, I don't know if you've gone down that rabbit
hole, but his brother Julian Huxley was the first director
general of UNESCO at the UN. So like, and he was a very open
eugenicist and he was in these circles of people, you know,
Fabian Society, etcetera, that was bringing the stuff in.
So it's like, yeah, Brave New World's a huge sort of red flag
(19:49):
and a, and a, you know, warning manual.
But he knew what was coming downthe pipeline and, and whether it
was a genuine warning or, or something else, I don't know.
I mean, I prefer the writings ofsomebody like CS Lewis from that
time who could clearly see the technocratic.
You know, scientism that was coming in like, not science as a
process, but science as an institution and the dangers of
(20:11):
that. But as I say, you know, it's
there's a tendency, I suppose, when you start researching the
stuff to want to show your work and be like, oh, by the way,
Huxley was this and he was that.But you know, we used the quote
because it is, as it happens, perfect example of what's
happening in the world. What is the agenda?
(20:38):
You mean the film or what is theplan?
The plan the. Plan as I see it, crazy as it
might sound to somebody who's not come across this information
before, is to enslave humanity, to usher them into city centres
(21:01):
where they can be surveilled andsort of cordon off large areas
of the earth. For an entitled few who see
themselves as stewards of the earth and see themselves as
entitled to govern it and best suited, you know, under sort of
a Darwinist, Darwinist mindset, they feel like it's survival of
(21:23):
the fittest. We've accrued all of this
wealth, accrued all this power. It's our duty to use it for the
good of the world as we see it, and they appear to look at
regular people as useless eaters.
I think they've tolerated humanity up until this point in
time because at any other periodin history it would have been
(21:46):
suicide for the few to wage war on the many.
But technology and the digital prison that we seem to have
constructed around ourselves unwittingly is the great
equaliser for these people. And it is now possible under a
digital ID and a central bank digital currency system to
socially engineer people and control them on a mass scale in
(22:08):
a way that's never been possiblebefore.
And so I feel like this transnational ruling class has
put itself on display. You know, it certainly did
through COVID. Like, you know, there was
clearly a level of coordination above the level of nation that
put itself on display during COVID.
And as it gets closer and closerto its end game, I think it's
(22:30):
going to become clearer. So.
So that's the agenda as I see itis total control and subjugation
of of normal people, but at the hands of some megalomaniacs.
I guess in other words, so it's all good news.
Sounds, sounds very positive, yeah.
Yeah. I mean, I guess another way of,
(22:51):
of putting it is technocracy, central control.
I mean, some of the overarching themes of the film are, are
exactly that digital IDs, mass surveillance, the the attack on
agriculture, which is something that many people just don't seem
to talk about. And and of course the idea of a
(23:14):
resource based economy, which was funnily enough spoken about
many years ago. Do you remember a film called
Zeitgeist? Yeah, yeah, it.
Was like this whack job film that came out that nobody took
seriously. Yeah, I, I remember it.
Yeah, it was it like early 2000s.
(23:38):
Yeah, yeah, totally. And I mean, I should have just
said technocracy. If that would have been in a
nutshell, I wouldn't have to ramble on a few.
Minutes. But yeah, essentially, like when
you, I mean, like, like John D Rockefeller is this example,
right? And this was a big, like,
revelation for me when we're making the film.
(23:59):
Like if if you were part of the organisation that ushered in the
Federal Reserve and you knew that the Fiat currency system
was effectively on borrowed timeand you knew it had an expiry
date, right? Like eventually we're going to
hyperinflate ourselves into destruction and something.
So we're, we're on the cusp of amajor financial boundary event.
(24:22):
Central bankers know that beforethey bring that system in.
So we're talking like, you know,essentially maybe a century ago,
they knew this and that researchthat was going on at Columbia
University in search of a new like a replacement of capitalism
in free enterprise. That was technocracy.
I think that was ultimately the purpose of it.
(24:42):
So find a replacement system to bring in when the Fiat currency
system inevitably collapsed. And the resource side of it, you
know, going back to John D Rockefeller, like he clearly
figured out at some point, right.
If if I own oil, if I own a vital resource, it doesn't
matter if we're the currency system in the world is sticks
(25:05):
and stones, I own the oil, right.
So if the Fiat monetary system collapses, it doesn't matter
because they own the resources. And then what we've seen over
the last century is this immenseland grab and resource grab by a
concentrated group of people. And I feel like that was in
preparation for what's coming. The the resource based economy
(25:28):
idea is is actually a lot biggerthan I think we realise.
I mean, the entire UN sustainable development agenda
is based on that. Correct.
Yeah. And the Agenda 21 was a good
example where that was never putto vote to the public.
There was no democratic process.We signed a pledge effectively
(25:50):
or our leaders signed up to it and committed us.
And that's been direction of travel for the UN since its
inception, where bit by bit you erode away at national
sovereignty and inherently acquire more controlling
interests yourself as a supranational organisation.
And if that's the modus operandiof institutions like the UN and
(26:14):
the West, I don't know if you'veever sat down and tried to read
some of these policy frameworks they've put together.
Yes, I have and. It's.
So complicated. But like they're they read the
same. Right, like they're so saying
this. Yeah, so and they use catch.
Phrases, by the way, sorry. Yes, and like all of this
Orwellian doublespeak that we talk about in the film as well,
you know, things like diversity and equity and inclusion, which
(26:36):
sounds so wonderful, but they read almost like they're written
by AI. And I know that's not possible
because it wasn't around when some of this stuff starts, you
know, was being churned out. There's a there's a really good
researcher that you might not come across.
It goes by the name of Escape Key and you credit him at the
end of the film. And as far as I'm as far as I'm
aware, he's like one guy and he is going out of his way to
(27:01):
actually engage with and read this stuff and get AI to analyse
it. And, you know, looking at things
like general systems theory by Jay Forrester and the Club of
Rome and, and how this stuff came about and the on a very
deep level, you know, if you're new to this stuff, it's probably
not for you. But if you're really interested
in looking at the nonsense that these people spout and you don't
(27:22):
want to sit down and read a 500 page policy framework escape
keys doing amazing work. And he's what I found is like,
he's so shadow banned. He's you know, he's just
vanishes from Twitter. And I see like the the social
credit system on Twitter in effect with him.
If I retweet him like my reach is limited, you know he's.
(27:44):
I'm just sorry I've just opened X now and he's banned.
This account does not exist. That that will show him.
But I think he's on sub stack, he's on Telegram and he seems
like a good guy. And you know, again, not not for
the uninitiated, but if you're interested in looking at this
(28:04):
stuff in great detail, he's a great place to to look at.
And there's lots of people doinggood work in this area.
But yeah, I call it like excessive verbiage that these
people use was absolute word salad that makes it almost
impossible to read. And I think that's by design as
well. I think they're writing in code.
There are actual, you know, a lot of the terms don't mean what
(28:26):
they say they mean. And also they just pad it out
with so much excessive verbiage that it's impenetrable to.
Why would an average person sit down and read this nonsense?
Yeah, but they also make it sound good, like they want to
end world hunger. I mean, full.
Do you really want people to starve?
What's wrong with you? Well.
I find it curious that during COVID we found the means through
(28:49):
which to vaccinate billions of people.
And, you know, almost overnight we mobilised the logistics to
get that product or those products to billions of people.
But we haven't been able to feedpeople.
You know, that's just not possible.
The money's not there. But just all showing to the UN
comment earlier, net zero, I mean, carbon net 0 is probably
(29:12):
the foundation of all of these policy frameworks because that
allows them to build digital ID on top of as well as CBDC or
some variant of it. Because people in the Trump camp
now going, well, Trump doesn't like CBDC's, there we go, he's
(29:33):
ended it. But they don't realise that
these agendas don't suddenly stop.
It's ridiculous. Someone.
Someone. Said yesterday, sorry someone
said yesterday he's going to endthe Fed and, and, and you'll
see, I mean. Well, it's like, you know, when
he got in and he started issuingall of these executive orders
and he was rattling them off anda lot of them sounded really
(29:56):
good. It's like, man, this sounds like
he's, you know, he's well intentioned, he's a little bit
wiser this time around. You know, he's getting pulling
the US out of the Hoo and all that stuff.
But what people don't realise isif he's able to do that in the
first few days of his administration, the next person
that gets in just like Biden did, right, can just put you
straight back in. It's if it's that easy to
withdraw, it's just as easy to go back in.
(30:17):
So the executive orders as I seethem, you know, they sound good
and they really make it look like he's doing good stuff.
But there's nothing permanent there and there's nothing to say
that they couldn't be overriddenby his successor, whoever that
might be. I mean, I brought attention a
few days ago to a document by the Trilateral Commission.
(30:38):
So if you go on the Trilateral Commission's website, they have
this document called Capitalism in Transition.
And in that they advocate for all the same stuff.
And they identify that they, they claim that we're a shifting
to a fifth stage of capitalism, which is effectively, you know,
Klaus Schwab's stakeholder capitalism nonsense in different
(30:59):
terminology. And they identify three areas
that are primary focus. And the first is the climate
crisis and how we need to be shifting to a net zero world by
2050, which which again enables total centralisation, you know,
the electrification of the grid,which is, you know, these
(31:23):
technologies themselves aren't inherently bad.
People think that I'm having a go at solar or wind or whatever.
It's like, no, in principle they're fine and solar panels
can be useful on an individual level, but like as a means of
powering the grid, they're not reliable and they're not stable.
And the idea that you can just bin 85% of the world's energy
(31:44):
from hydrocarbon in 30 years andreplace it with that which isn't
stable and it's not, you know, Imean, Spain found out the hard
way recently, right? We were parental blackout and,
and the National Grid in the UK is very open about this, that
we're going to have to control demand by the flexibly pricing
(32:07):
the supply of electricity. So we're, they're telling you we
are going to price you out of using electricity, whether you
like it or not through the use of smart metres, which can do
minute by minute pricing. We're going to determine the
price of electricity. And so we could realistically be
in a position in a few decades where people are like setting an
alarm to get up at 3:00 AM to take a shower because that's
(32:28):
when the electricity is cheaper.Like going back to a pre
industrial age way of living. And, and it's a feudalist system
really. And I think that's how they want
it. You know it's a governing class
ruling over the the useless eaters.
Yeah, and it's based on the myththat humans are warming up
(32:51):
Earth. Yes, it's so stupid as as Alex
Newman says. So as as you're not talking here
in Cape Town, it is 10°C outsideand it is raining.
How's that for global boiling? You could you guys could do with
some boiling over there, Yeah. But ultimately.
(33:15):
People buy into this. That's why I said earlier it's
the Jones Plantation. But it's this process of
creating a crisis. And you know, most people are
well intentioned for a start, sothey don't they don't
immediately assume bad actors. It's only when you've that
switch flicks in your head and you're like, right, these people
are actually not acting in my interest at all, Then a lot of
(33:39):
things start to become clear. But until you look at the world
through that lens and you assumethe best of people, as most
empathetic people do, you'll tryto justify things that they're
doing, you'll rationalise it Well, you know they wouldn't lie
to me on such a scale. Unfortunately they would.
And they're really not acting inyour interest.
(33:59):
This. Is also a good point because
unfortunately a lot of people onour side have become too
blackballed and, and everything is just nihilistic and, and
chaotic. And what that ultimately does on
a personal level is that it putsyou into a into a place of
depression and darkness, and that is the ultimate defeat.
(34:21):
Yeah, you can sort of spiral inwards to a point where, and I
get it, like people's trust has been betrayed on such a scale.
It's like, I don't know who to trust.
And so you're sceptical of everybody, you're sceptical of
everything. And then I watched your
conversation with Zubi a few days ago, which I thought was
really refreshing. And I'm conscious now that I'm
(34:43):
like massively negative. And please don't get the
impression that I'm blackpilled at all.
I agreed with a lot of what you guys said, right?
But you know, equally this isn't, I mean, the agenda is a
lot of things and we've had a lot of compliments on it, but
it's not a pleasant watch. It's a bad situation, right?
It's painting a picture of a pretty bad situation.
But the blackpilling doesn't help because whether you're
(35:07):
afraid of the manufactured crises that they're presenting
to you or you're afraid of what's coming down the pipeline,
you're still living your life infear.
And you're letting this narrative one way or the other
dictate the way you live your life.
So I think like the ultimate point of rebellion is, you know,
be a good father and, you know, spend time in nature and enjoy
(35:28):
yourself and laugh through the nonsense.
And it sounds, you know, like woo woo.
But like, if enough people did that alone, just stop paying
attention to this crap. Stop engaging with mainstream
media and just stop reacting to the news, right?
By all means, watch it, figure out what's going on, but stop
reacting to it. I see that people on our side a
(35:49):
lot where they'll share this headline in outrage.
Can you believe this? Dude, stop giving it your
energy. Stop scrolling.
Yeah, stop reacting to it. It doesn't do you any good.
And yeah, Blackpooling, as I say, I get it.
And we've even had people over the years which when you, if you
(36:09):
could see how small an operationwe are, right.
But people have been like, you guys have controlled that
position you're doing, you know,me and Mark working out of it.
Getting. Shared office space and stuff.
It's in a way I suppose. For lack of what that that that
controlled opposition, gatekeeping, limited hangout
label. It's become the new sexist,
(36:30):
racist climate change denier. In a way, there's a compliment
in there and but The thing is like the more you try to defend
yourself against it, the more you just feed into it.
So unfortunately, you know, it'sunfortunate, but I, I just have
to accept like I understand where people are, right?
(36:51):
Nothing I can say after what's happened in the last five years
can make, can make you trust me.I'm not asking you to.
If you don't want to trust me, don't, you know, go find
somebody else to listen to. I'm only doing what I as I read
it as much as I possibly can. Like I'm not a doctor or
scientist or anything. I'm a camera operator and an
(37:11):
editor prior to this, and I wasn't doing anything remotely
controversial prior to all this nonsense, but I felt compelled
to do something, whatever that looked like.
So that's what I'm doing. And you know, if people don't
like the way I'm doing that, that's, that's fair enough.
But I don't understand the mindset of like trying to cut
down people that are doing stuffproactively, you know?
(37:33):
It's the purity test, you know, if you aren't a mirror image of
that person, then you are a gatekeeper.
Yeah, seems to be that way. And it's very stupid because
because people learn and open their eyes at different paces.
Yeah. I mean, I don't know if you want
(37:54):
to talk about this, but I know like you're a big proponent of
the, you know, the no virus thing, right?
I'm very sympathetic to it. Yes, I I won't make the claim,
but I am sympathetic to it. Well, I mean, I very early on
during COVID, a lot of the distant voices I was hearing
were the likes of Andrew Kaufmanand Tom Cowan and people like
(38:15):
that. And I made contact with Andy
and, you know, Kevin Corbett is another one in the UK.
And I know I did interviews withthose guys and I've got a lot of
respect for them. And, you know, I've not sort of
spoken to them that recently. Kevin would occasionally give me
a smack on the wrist and say, hey, great film, but way to
reinforce the virus narrative. I'm sympathetic to those guys.
(38:38):
And something in me honestly tells me I think they're right.
Like, I think, I think that's how deep the lie goes.
But what I found was like, I mean, I'm in the business of
communication. And as the consequences to what
was happening were getting more severe, like, you know, they
were trying to vaccinate children, for example, I was
(39:01):
banging my head against the wallby leading the argument with
like, well, you know, the virus doesn't exist, right?
Yes, I get that also, and it's it's profound.
Sorry for interrupting you again, but it's profoundly
annoying. You know, I just recently
interviewed Andrew Wakefield, who has done incredible work in,
you know, in vaccines. And he was destroyed by the
Pharmaceutical industry because of a peer reviewed paper that
(39:23):
didn't even make a claim. It just said more research is
needed, right? And then I get comments from
people saying, oh, but you know,he's a shield because he still
believes in contagion. Like, dude, how do we go?
Where do we go from here? I.
Understand people's frustration because it feels like there's
been, I'm not saying that. I'm saying like, from their
(39:45):
observation as I read it, it feels like that view has been
censored. So as I said, Andy Kaufman's
voice was quite loud at the start of COVID.
And I've got a lot of respect for Andy for putting his head
above the parapet. And in my experience, he's a
wonderful person. And you know, he and I have had
good conversations over the years.
(40:06):
But equally, I've come across people that are adamant he's
dead wrong. People like good people, you
know, and, and I'm, I'm, I'm nota scientist.
I'm trying to get to the truth of the matter.
I'm not afraid of that conversation.
But it, it feels like that argument has got a lot quieter
and the same people are banging the drum.
But you know, so I can understand how people feel like
(40:28):
it's being shut out. I think it's more a strategy
thing than like a maligned, you know, as a means of
communication. There are other arguments you
could put forward prior to getting there because, because
that's like, I guess it's on thescale of saying like climate
change is a hoax, right? Like it's a lot of people will
(40:49):
be turned off from the agenda bythe fact that we that's in the
introduction, right? But that was something that we
had to accept. And I've, I've felt for a little
while like the no virus thing issomething I need to do some more
work in. And, you know, I mean, I had a
conversation with Mike Eden recently, who again, you know,
is somebody I met in 2021. And we don't speak often, but I
(41:11):
consider him a friend. And he took issue with certain
things that were in the agenda. But I want to go and speak to
Mike and I want to allow him theplatform to say what he says,
but I don't have to agree with everything he says.
I think there's like this, theseelements of woke culture and
cancel culture creeping into ourside where it's like, if you
don't align exactly. It's ridiculous.
(41:33):
Yeah, it's. Just ridiculous full.
So my philosophy, which I don't often mention on on my show is
is based on something that BruceLee said.
Take that which is valuable, discard that which is not
create, which is uniquely yours.That is how I apply the my
outlook on the world. So I will listen to you and
(41:56):
everybody else, and then I'll take the things that I think are
valuable and I'll dismiss the rest.
I don't. I don't need you to be 100% in
agreement with me. I, I feel like there, there is a
debate there that either should have happened a long time ago or
I mean, some people say it's, it's not the hill to die on kind
of thing. I, I do think those voices are
important. And now I've got a lot of
(42:17):
respect for Andy Kaufman and Kevin Corbett, etcetera.
I do. And maybe I'll do something down
the line, but, you know, I I have to do it because I feel
compelled to. And I feel like there's
something there. Like I'm not, you know, I'm not
doing this for money. Like I'm, you know, I'm not, I
don't want to play to a captive audience, I guess is what I want
to say. Yeah, I want to do something
because I want to go and do it and I'm genuinely interested in
(42:40):
it. So.
But I'm not, you know, I'm not afraid of that conversation.
Why do you? Think the views expressed in the
agenda would be considered controversial?
To a general audience. Yeah, I mean, you mentioned
earlier you you mentioned the word controversial controversy
(43:01):
and I'm trying to think like why?
You know I. Suppose because it's completely
at odds with the official line or like you know, the government
line around the world on some quite important issues.
And as you say, like net 0 by 2050 is a key.
You know, it's been identified by the Trilateral Commission in
(43:22):
the West as how we get to where we're going.
We need to implement this nonsense.
It's justification. It's a means of engineering
people's consent for a control grid to be built around them,
right under the auspices of thisludicrous notion that humans, by
virtue of existing, are destroying the planet we were
born onto. We have to now interfere.
(43:44):
And it's the same hubristic mindset that leads people like
Bill Gates to think I need to change cows because they're
destroying the planet, right? Their digestive system and by
farting they're killing the planet or humans.
Even though we've existed on this planet for however many
years. We need now need to upgrade
their immune systems with this mRNA nonsense.
(44:05):
Because intelligent design is flawed and we can do it better.
Us, us the the technocrats, us the transhumanists, we can do it
better. I think that's such a dangerous
mindset and it's rooted in eugenics.
Ultimately it's rules for you and not for them.
It's A2 tiered society. Like we saw flavours of it
(44:26):
during COVID. That was it kind of rearing its
head. But it's a really dangerous
mindset. So I I only mean controversial
in the sense that it's indirect.It's a direct challenge to a lot
of mainstream narratives. But I don't personally think
they're controversial. Everything that we've said is
rooted in primary source literature and spoken by experts
(44:49):
in their field. And also what you see.
Right. Yeah, the evidence of your eyes
and ears. Yes.
I mean, I mean, when they when they said in 2020 that there was
this deadly pandemic, I saw nothing around me.
I mean, all I saw was billboards.
I mean, it was a massive marketing campaign.
But I mean, I live, I live in Africa, dude.
We have millions of very poor people living in tight compact.
(45:16):
What would you call it? So we called it a Township.
What? What a squatter camp.
All right, there was no mass death anyway.
No ambulances, no mass graves. But dude.
Didn't you see the news? Yes, but the news kept saying
you go to the airport and these announcements are saying as a
deadly virus, you know, please wear your mask, stand 2 metres
(45:37):
away from very healthy people. That was when I started
realising. So I, I admit I kind of bought
into the whole thing in 2020, but I, my position was it's mild
and they're overplaying it. It's just a small, it's like a,
like a type of flute. Nothing to worry about the
Diamond Princess, whatever. Northern Italy.
It was just a minor flu. When they announced lockdowns
(46:00):
and everybody sort of doing the same thing using the same
language, Then I suddenly started questioning everything.
Yeah, I think that's how it started for a lot of people.
I mean, Liam, as I said, it's basically whatever Oracle
became. Liam and I for first few years
just did that between the two ofus.
He saw it right from the start. He couldn't really articulate it
(46:23):
to me in quite the right way. And I'm like, what do you mean
it's a lie? Yeah, all of it's a lie.
What do you mean? And I but I was fascinated by
that idea. And you're right, like bit by
bit you start challenging. And for me it was like once you
realise that they're fudging thenumbers.
And I'm not saying it'd be ethical, but maybe you could
understand a government lying about death figures or mortality
(46:47):
to cheat it downwards to like ease panic and calm people.
Me. I'm not saying that'd be
ethical, but but when you realise they're cheating them
upwards. OK, so you're trying to frighten
people, you're trying to create chaos and you're trying to build
order out of chaos. Clearly, like this is the this
is the agenda. What's that's that's playing out
before us? And as soon as you as soon as
(47:08):
you spot a hole somewhere, it's like pulling a thread, you know,
just keeps coming and the lies get bigger and bigger.
And the PCR test, man, I mean, not enough people like the loud
COVID dissidents in 2025. There's not enough talk in that
area that the test and the wholeidea of the case of COVID case
(47:30):
was nonsense. I saw my first PCR test last
year in 2024. So my wife and I made the
decision that we were not going to even legitimise the system.
We weren't going to get a fake vaccine passport, nothing.
We didn't want any type of legitimacy of the system.
And a friend of mine flew flew over from from Canada and he
(47:54):
brought me APCR test. He said, I know that you haven't
seen one of these. So yes, yes, one just have a
look at just have a look at justjust because I opened this
thing, you know, we were having lunch and I said, oh, it's APC
artist you didn't feel. Compelled to like, wrap it up
your nose. No, but I mean, you're right,
(48:20):
something you said earlier was, was, was I think also very true.
We we mustn't run the risk of just thinking everybody is
stupid. I think that's also an easy trap
to fall into. A lot of people didn't know
better and also don't think critically.
(48:40):
Perhaps like you and I, they, they focus on other things.
And I think it was Peter Bragan who said to me, if you look at
an aeroplane and it says got 180people on board and during COVID
and everybody inside the plane sitting with a mask on, as a
thought experiment, you need to go after each one of those
(49:01):
people and ask them why are you wearing a mask?
And majority of them will have adifferent response.
And that that that really kind of struck me.
Yeah. And I think as you become aware
of the scale of the lies and also the magnitude of the
(49:23):
consequences in the end game people, I see people and I
understand people getting frustrated saying why can't you
see it? Are you stupid?
You know, to people that don't see it at all?
And but you're right, it's it's not about intelligence.
I don't think it's about people an unwillingness.
It's it's weaponized people's good nature, I guess is what I'm
(49:44):
trying to say, where you assume you project your value set onto
people and anybody that's had torun in with like a narcissist
or, you know, maybe even a psychopath in their life, you
know, that they, they're able tooperate and navigate through
life undetected because people don't assume bad things of
people. They don't assume that there are
bad actors in the world until you encounter it, right?
(50:07):
It's in the and then you see it.But so I think it's a
psychological barrier a lot of people aren't willing to cross.
And I was speaking to Bob Moran about this a while ago, that
most people would, whether it's a comfort thing, I don't know.
Like it's, it's a very uncomfortable realisation to to
think that all of these institutions would be that
(50:29):
education, government, the mediathat you've trusted with so much
of your life are, are not telling you the truth and are
not acting in your interest. It's an uncomfortable
realisation, but it's a necessary one because the
alternative is being LED into this digital gulag.
You know that it it's been constructed in the shadows and
(50:49):
this agenda's been allowed to carry on for so long because
they've lied. Not just outright, they've lied
through a mission, they've distorted truths, but ultimately
they've played on people's good nature.
I mean, that was so much of the behavioural psychology through
COVID was you're a good person, aren't you?
Wear a mask then. You're a good person, aren't
you? Stay in your home.
(51:10):
You're a good person, aren't you?
Take a vaccine, otherwise you'rekilling granny.
And most people went along with it because they thought, yeah,
yeah, I am a good person and I care about other people, not
about being stupid, I don't think.
But yeah, I, I, I think more people need to even just go on
that thought experiment of what if, you know, which is what we
(51:31):
tried to do with the agenda. Like, what if the whole carbon
narrative was a lie? What would that mean?
What would it mean for you? And just take the thought
experiment. You know, there's a huge
concerted effort by institutionslike the BBC etcetera at the
moment to stamp out wrong thing and misinformation because they
realise that people taking that journey thought which you're
(51:51):
perfectly entitled to do, like words can't hurt you.
You know, you're allowed to access to information and to
make up your own mind. And it's the people that are
censoring and trying to stamp out opposing viewpoints and
counter narratives that are, youknow, the bad actors.
So sorry there's a long winded answer, but.
No, no, no, I mean just on your point of intelligence and
(52:14):
stupidity. OK, so Africa apparently has on
average the world's lowest IQ. The majority of South Africa is
black, yet it is the black population of South Africa that
overwhelmingly rejected the vaccine.
Overwhelmingly. I think South Africa is one of
the lowest uptakes in the world,less than 1 1/2 percent or 2%,
(52:36):
right? It has nothing to do with
intelligence. And in fact, if you, if you
think about here, at least in mycountry, the the people that I
saw were the most obedient were the white middle class.
Explain that to me. I think part of it is to do with
(52:59):
when the system has served you well.
And particularly if you're an academic and you've risen to
prominence through an, you know,a prominent university or
something, you're far less inclined to speak out against a
system, you know, an academia that has been misled or
researched, that's been LED downthe wrong path because it's,
(53:20):
it's a part of your identity. And to admit that you've been
fooled or to admit that you've been lied to a lot of people,
that's cognitive dissonance. I don't know what that is.
But you're you end up fighting for the system that served you.
Whereas as you say, you know, a lot of working class people, you
(53:40):
know, invited a plumber around your house during COVID, like,
they weren't buying anything, wearing a mask.
They didn't give a shit. They saw right through the whole
thing. Whereas it was, yeah, as you
say, the a lot of the white collar people didn't get it.
And I think part of that is theycan't fathom that this system
that has served them reasonably well, you know, it's screwed
(54:02):
them over in a lot of ways you could point out, but they
couldn't fathom that it's not acting in their interest and
they don't want to move against it.
I think that's the main reason. I'm sure there are others.
There's so much to talk about, Ireally want to recommend my
audience to watch The Agenda. It is, it really is high
(54:26):
quality. It is outstanding.
It's probably one of the best sort of counterculture forms I
have seen in the last five years.
I'm say five years because I'm referring to the sort of the
COVID era. It's really, really good Full.
That means a lot coming from you.
What? What does that mean that?
(54:46):
Wasn't That wasn't sarcasm, Thatwas my English accent.
That's a lot. That's that means a lot coming
from you, yeah. I mean that sincerely.
I mean that sincerely, no. But it really is very, very
good. Where, where can, where can I
not me? Where can my audience watch it?
So we've set up a landing page, which is the Agenda film.com,
(55:08):
which at the moment's got a YouTube embed in it.
We're not anticipating it's going to stay on YouTube
forever, but it's a good place to send people that aren't
necessarily looking for this information.
It's also on Rumble. There's a direct upload on X.
There's at the same landing page, the Agenda film.com.
You can download a copy of the film, take it offline, do what
(55:29):
you like with it. It's all free.
I don't want your email address.There's no paywall.
Just if you think it's importantand it's going to help you
communicate and articulate some of these ideas, then yeah, take
it and and run with it. And there's an option to donate
through Buy Me a Coffee on theirwebsite if you feel compelled
to. This doesn't come natural to me
(55:50):
or Liam, you know, like we're just introverted camera nerds
for all of this, you know, so the public speaking side of it
isn't something we've gravitatedtowards.
And we've never like put ourselves at the forefront of
what Oracle is. But a lot of people have said
like you should do it more because, you know, maybe I think
people have a more of a rapport with you and you know, perhaps
(56:13):
even just trust you a bit more because then otherwise it's like
who are these guys, these Oraclefilms?
And that's where these ideas that like with some, I don't
know, nefarious actors or whatever, it's literally 2 Dick
heads from England. You derailed my my atro full
Wiseman. Thank you for joining me in the
trenches. Thanks, Jim.
(56:33):
Good to see you mate.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.