Interview 1808 – Derrick Broze Interviews James Corbett in England

by | Jun 11, 2023 | Interviews, Videos | 96 comments

via The Conscious Resistance: At the 2nd Better Way Conference in Bath, UK, Derrick Broze interviews James Corbett of The Corbett Report. Derrick and James discuss the changes which have taken place since their 1st in person interview in February 2020, specifically COVID1984 and the rise of the Biosecurity State & Technocracy. Derrick also asks James his thoughts on RFK Jr’s presidential run, germ theory, and the Transgender-Transhuman connection. Don’t miss this powerful interview!



The Conscious Resistance on BuyMeACoffee / Cointree / Telegram / Text list

Derrick Broze Interview James Corbett in Mexico (2020)


    • 😉
      You were right.

      • Homey,good day in Texas. Got a minute and can you answer a few questions?

        Is this an engineers description of what James Corbett has been describing to us for the last 15 years?

        I can’t see any apparent discrepancies in the message of discovery in how the world works. The enemy to freedoms.

        To me this is another way of describing that theat , the same threat James has enlightened us of. Is the Dr. speaking to the US or everyone like James?
        I ask you cause you are from the Midwest, you know TCR as good as anybody. I value your judgement.

          • Dr.SHIVA™: SHATTER THE SWARM. How The Few Control the Many.
            (15 minutes) – Insightful diagram!

            I’m just a west Texas boy, so I ain’t got enought smarts to answer the question.
            However, I loved Shiva’s presentation.
            That’s a keeper video.
            It reminds me of the stock market, and stocks like the trillion dollar company Nvidia (Ai, Ai, Ai – Artificial Intelligence)…everyone knows that a recession is coming and that stock fundamentals suck, but the swarm piles in money rocketing up stock prices because everyone knows that the swarm is piling in rocketing up stock prices.
            Fundamentals and logic don’t count. The “swarm’s marketing” is what counts.

            By the way, Shiva mentions Hollywood. When Corbett wakes up, I’ll have a “Hollywood” series on the June Open Thread.

            • Thanks Homey RS.
              I had forgotten the Good Dr. was married to Drescher at one time.
              Nice Hollywood expose’too. For a West Texan you are too modest. Next you will tell us your hat size is only 7 gallons instead of Ten.

            • For someone who’s running for president, that’s a decent graph. It’s missing some groups (like those actually running the circus) but it it’s still going to fly over the heads of most.

            • Thanks HRS. That was a great breakdown. I think an everyday person could understand what he was saying, especially an average working class person without a lot of college indoctrination. I’ve actually been surprised sometimes at what people actually know.

              In general the reading level is pretty low in America, but many people still know when they are being conned.

        • What is missing is the defacto controller class for the supposed controller class.

          You can know that there is an unknown someone behind Bill Gates because Bill Gates himself could not be more of a farcical vilain. He is a parody of a vilain, right in your face and in the open.

          Plus the apparent fact that this fellow is completely incompetent and likely product of inbreeding.

          Good question would be who is behind him. While difficult to answer, maybe we can know them by their actions. These things they are doing are obviously not being done for popularity nor money. And almost certainly not for personal gain. So their motivation appears to be completely diagonally opposite to mr. Pie to face’s motivation.

          These people are not corrupt, they do not appear to be self obsessed and they are able to carry on their plans for generations.

          • Mkey, nice observation, very normal way of thinking. Find the head and cut it off. What if !?! There is no head and that is why Power hides in plan sight today? Is that what you are saying? Lessons learned from Maio,Stalin,Hitler,Tito.Pinochet. Top down didn’t make it very long. Swarms have no head,but are spontaneous organizations.
            I like the swarm idea more I think about it. I saw a deep sea fishing Boobtube show the other day . A swarm of sharks , might as well been piranha , came into the area and all fishing ceased. Nothing but teeth,a swarm of teeth. No top down organization. We could learn something here about the predator class.
            Observing systems and reverse engineering to disrupt the swarm.
            Has swarms ever been described here James? Does Dancing man lead to swarms?

              • @ Mkey. I can agree Cosmic morality sits squarely on top of the pyramid and is the controller over all.
                I see a lot of convergence here, East,West,North,South,Up and Down.
                Thanks for that input.
                In plain ‘ol American english “A Must Watch”

    • Thank you for the heads up.

    Comparison of anything below ideology is just counting how many angels on the head of your pen. To raise awareness/consciousness from inside out or the outside in? If the ideology has this higher goal how will normies who are not conscious best be educated and woke up. A short sharp shock from outside in ? Or gently from bottoms up from the inside out.
    I don’t see much difference between the two here. Do you? The last stop in this human train ride is principles, freedom,health transparency in associations. Like those written 250 years ago cleaving away free people from central government.

  2. I disagree. He had a great podcast years ago on Rockefeller medicine here:

    This is a historical analysis of fraud in the foundation of western medicine in the US.

    JC comes from the perspective of centralized control rather than specifics.

    The virus issue seems to me to be almost identical to the planes/no planes issue around 9/11. Just my opinion.

    Also, I’m not sure how many here interface with the general public regularly, but I do and there is a substantial gap in general knowledge about basic biology and also basic ideas of freedom. This dumbing down of the population has been going on for decades now, perhaps even longer.

    If someone’s purpose is to try to get people curious about the lies and crimes and literal psychopathy in high places, the conversation needs to be general.

    I think that even from a germ theory perspective it has been shown that lock-downs and vaccines do not prevent or benefit disease. So it doesn’t matter if people believe in viruses or contagious disease.

    Uncovering fraud in many areas and speaking about it is helpful and people can form their own opinion.

    • In fact, I think evidence has shown that lock-downs and vaccines make disease worse and sicken the population. I think this is the goal to make the population sick, depressed, and to kill. But in the killing process the psychopaths want to make as much money as possible. They also want people to want this, to desire disease and death.

      When I consider the agenda/agendas in a general way, not specifically and with minute details I see a sadistic murderer who is paid for this, to sicken and kill humanity. This is what centralized control is about, slavery or death.

      Not only that but the sadistic murderer is also killing off nature as well and turning the earth into a wasteland with the pollution and war and industrialized destruction. It’s good to pan out and see the general picture too.

      It’s great if people want to challenge virology and more generally what science is and how psychopathic interests have corrupted it.

      Reclaiming science is a good idea. People can do that without attacking a person who is trying to wake people up.

      Can people put their differences aside?

    • I agree many western medicine “therapies” vaccines, some pharma drugs, and invasive procedures used inappropriately are very damaging and in many cases lethal. Even outside of the context of “viruses”, western medicine can be lethal or disabling such as removing the wrong limb, being given the wrong drug, having equipment left inside the body. Mechanical ventilation is very invasive especially in persons with damage to lung tissue or who are older. This problem of the toxicity and harm by many “snake oil” treatments in western medicine is not limited to “infectious disease”.

      I agree reducing fear and promoting “love” or rather empathy can have positive effects. Empathy for those who don’t see eye to eye. Active listening and conversation rather than contentious debate when the purpose is to awaken curiosity and conscience.

      Whatever disease is and what causes it, it’s very clear that humanity has survive with it. Invasive treatments especially those that violate informed consent (i.e. not telling a patient that mechanical ventilation may make them worse, including death) and attempting to stop people from seeking alternative treatment and therapies is unethical. “Do no harm” is supposed to be the most fundamental ethical principle in medicine.

      I think there is a way to work in parallel and/or overlap and collaborate on issues around fundamental liberty and natural rights.

      Thanks for sharing the study on mechanical ventilation in NY.

      • Thanks for the clarification.

    • I agree. Well said. What is the death toll of germ theory? I would argue that it’s pretty high, not to mention the fear it induces and the freedoms it removes.

    • I don’t know of any “no virus” people that think that if viruses DID exist, it would be okay for governments to force anything on anyone. We are just saying that it is pointless to discuss the details of something that does not exist. Get to the root of the issue instead of pruning the branches. Viruses are the justification for so much of what the pharmaceutical industry does – especially vaccines. If the rug is pulled out from under the whole mess, a lot will collapse.

      I don’t know of any “no virus” people that say no viruses will ever be found. Although it is doubtful, they/we say that there is no scientific evidence for any, after all these years. The claim is unfounded.

      This is about truth. Does it matter whether viruses exist – or have been proven to exist? If truth matters, yes, it does matter.

      Interestingly, I was just listening to some earlier interviews and the thought crossed my mind – I wonder what James really thinks about viruses since he is so quiet on the topic. Well, I guess I might have a little better idea now.

      No one person can be right about everything. I forgive James for his missing the boat on this … although I wish the thing he was wrong about was something other than something so fundamental – getting to the bottom of such a significant, world-changing issue.

      (I stopped listening at the very end due to crude language.)

    • I agree – not needing to fear the invisible boogeyman is life-changing and freeing. How can the truth not matter?

  3. James does not have to fill your life view point.
    You are just groupies fighting for daddy’s attention.


    Dawn Lester & David Parker
    What Really Makes Us Ill, Germ Theory, & The Four Factors

    In 10 years of research they found no scientific studies proving contagion provable. Yes, in a family some kids or one of the parents may get sick together, but not ALL.
    – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
    The “COVID” cult is an irrational superstition based on nothing but theoretical, make-believe viral sequences pushed by greedy politicians and corporations and the collusive media. Yet, the real-world consequences for millions who have been thrown into stress, despair, poverty, joblessness, alcoholism and suicide is anything but theoretical.

    Free pdf download with 2 years of research on the COVID lie…

  4. I’m so disappointed. ? James once again fails to address the biggest and most important issue that faces mankind.
    Why can’t he just take a firm stance on this crucial debate once and for all?
    What in the world is he afraid of?
    Surely none of his mature and tolerant audience would be offended whichever side he comes down on.

    James, why won’t you simply come out and declare openly whether or not you believe that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” ??


    What? You thought I was talking about bugs? ?

      • Glad it elicited one chuckle at least. Still, better hold on to my day job. ?

        Though I do honestly wonder how many of those who are seemingly so upset that James isn’t discussing the virus issue to their satisfaction would bristle if he tackled the “faith” question directly.
        I’m guessing quite a few would deem that subject to be wholly inappropriate.
        Yet I personally believe it is there isn’t a subject of greater importance in light of the current world conditions.

    • I was puzzled while reading your comment, as I thought you didn’t have a firm opinion on the virus-no virus issue. When I got to the end, it all made sense … and I was not surprised. 🙂

      I actually had a similar thought. I am very curious about what James believes, but not knowing seems like it might be better than knowing and vehemently disagreeing…

      Does James Corbett talk about the _______ topic? (enough)

      QUEUE to 31:56 to get the context, but by 35:20 James Corbett lays it out square as to what he talks about and why.
      100 Questions! – Questions For Corbett #100

  5. That was such a great interview. Loved seeing you two together. Great questions from Mr. Broze. On the transgender agenda … I think we’ve all been playing nice for a very long time. I guess there are some “haters” out there, but most of us appreciate that people sometimes get off-track or have a genuinely different take on the world. So, that’s my only comment. I think we don’t have to keep walking on eggshells around transgender people. That is not a license to be rude or insensitive … I just think we need to feel comfortable pressing people on their beliefs. Compassion, love — and TRUTH. Truth wins!

    • Yeah and the possible health related consequences of long term cross sex hormones. Also removing parts that can’t be put back in or on can have devastating consequences. There are “de-transitioners” who are trying to speak out about their experiences but MSM is not covering it.

      Transgender (i.e. gender dysphoria) people used to be a very tiny percentage of the population and now it’s encouraged.

      Also, the promoting of sexually related material in public libraries does seem to be a type of grooming. If adults don’t understand that that is inappropriate I really can’t relate to that. I don’t think all transgenders think that is normal.

      It’s biologically impossible to change ones sex and this is a fact. A person can change characteristics to look like a different sex and take cross sex hormones but it’s artificial. Not only that but changing physical characteristics may not have the affect a person believes it will, like with any plastic surgery.

      But I think the way people say things can impact the way it is received. I like how Mr. Broze approaches the topic by asking people what they think. It starts a dialogue. Instead of saying “you should” he says “what do you think”. If a person wants to get behind walls people put up, this is an excellent approach for some.

  6. Re: James stance on viruses Why care what he thinks on this issue?. He is not some omniscient all-seeing God. What’s the point in trying to see what he thinks? I think that is a bit intrusive. And talk about freedom, why is he being chewed out in some comments for not taking a public stance? Can’t he be free to focus on what interests him? Corbettreport is his creation. He can do with it what he wants.

  7. I really enjoyed this video. You both have a great rapport.
    I agree with all the subterfuge going on in terms of division. I guess it is to be expected. But once we know where we stand individually it beecomes easier to navigate the different schools of thought.
    I get dismayed when things turn ad hominum or when certain groups/cultures/etc are vilified.
    Thank you both for this interview and for all the work you have done and are doing.
    And for what it’s worth, James, I LOVE the shirt and tie. You and Bobby Kennedy, Jr. Love it.

  8. Excellent interview, very interesting and informative…..the only problem was the choice of location – very noisy with all that traffic! Bath is a lovely city with lots of beautiful and more quiet spaces for a conversation, but maybe they were both strapped for time? Thanks anyway, I really enjoyed your chat!

  9. James- I love your thinking- and the voluneerism part is great as a philosophy- not sure how it will help when the troops come knocking out the door with their jabs- we live in countries that are full of predators- set up by the ‘rulers’ if we call them that- the mafias, the cias, somehow i don’t see them honoring a philosophy – i think we need to band together like never before- i’ve met bobby- been following his career for years- i am going to help him in his campaign- in fact- i am actively doing so- i hope you come up with something that makes more sense in terms of actually dealing with the bs– the bad guys are dissolving what passed for governance and things are going into chaos in every town and city i’ve been to- they are letting the roads go to hell, the food supply etc- how you think volunteerism is going to address this- well i’m still waiting for you to explain that — thanks again-valeri

    • It works out in such a ways that you and your family, friends and neighbours band up, prepare and get ready to give hell to any order followers that come to your or any of your cohort’s doors.

  10. Nice to hear that James doesn’t talk much about “work” with his wife.

    When the scandemics started I remember I was in shock and agitated discovering all the lies… I pushed my wife to watch How and Why Big Oil Conquered The World and I realised a while after that it wouldn’t work. I thought it was a curse not being able to onboard my life partner in all this important issues.

    Now days I tend to appreciate all the positive things that come with having a space with my family where I can forget about conspiracies and just relax and enjoy life.

    Anyway, she is interested in many topics that are the same of the “solutions” series: p2p economy, creating community, freedom of education, healthy food, etc. So we can do many cool things together in spite of our differences.

    Also probably thanks to our differences it rendered practically impossible my fantasy of escaping society and going to live in the forest in Paraguay or the mountains in Bolivia during the heist of my panicking period 🙂

    Still from time to time the fantasy resurfaces haha.

    • It’s was interesting to hear that. My husband was not really into this type of stuff until the scamdemic. I had started watching JC in late 2016. My husband was more into Jordan Peterson at that time and learning more about the “woke” nonsense. But when the scamdemic went down, my husband independently looked up an opposing opinion on Covid. That’s when my husband started learning more about how the government really worked and all the other stuff. My husband never takes flu shots and isn’t a germophobe so he wasn’t paranoid about the nonsense by the MSM. I could tell that this was not what the MSM was saying it was just by looking with my own eyes since I’m in health care.

      Anyway, we now discuss more of this type of stuff together which is nice. Although if he wasn’t into it as long as he wasn’t trying to get me to take the jab or anything that was against my fundamental morality it would have been fine. There’s no way I could have been in a relationship with someone who was onboard with the scamdemic. No judgment about anyone who stayed in such a relationship, but for me it would have been a deal breaker. It would have been similar to being in a relationship with someone who went along with the Nazi’s. It wasn’t as bad as that, but similar to me. So anyway, I’m glad my husband turned out to have more commons sense than I expected. In fact, he was much more outspoken than I was and even lost his job in part because of that.

    • Great point from Corbett:
      A government (and anyone else) should not violate your Bodily Autonomy

      We also saw the violation of all Nuremberg codes.

    • From my interpretation of what the statement “viruses do not exist” means is not that the particles are not real physical entities, but they have been mischaracterized as pathogenic entities.

      I think the objection “team no virus” has is that because Koch’s postulates have not been met in many cases fails to prove these structures are pathogenic. I also interpret that because several biological materials are mixed it’s hard to know what substance is causing what.

      Some of the cell lines used in virology experiments (in my limited understanding) are not fully understood, i.e. their genetics. So this potentially adds another degree of freedom to the mix. Also, our bodies are vastly more complex than anything reproduced in an experiment because our immune system is dependent on hormones and also input from gut bacteria in which there are billions of species interacting. Also our local environment varies and everything we are exposed to, food, water, air, stress level, and genetic variability may influence our state of health moment to moment.

      I think what they are also saying is that it’s impossible to pull out Sars-Cov-2 from lung fluid and purify it directly from the source, but it is sequenced using whole genome sequencing technology and the definition of it being a pathogen is assumed. They have also said that antibodies are not specific. Both of these topics (for me) need to be researched more thoroughly to understand it better to even begin to have an opinion on the matter. I don’t know much about whole genome sequencing technology or antibodies and the idea of non specificity is new to me. When I get the time, maybe I’ll be able to do this research.

      I will also say though that cell biology and biochemistry is complex and when genetics is thrown in becomes even more complex. It’s like how some physics and math is probably beyond what I could ever learn without actually having someone teach me since I’m not a genius who can just pick up a text book and understand what’s in it right off the bat. Genetics is pretty tough subject if I recall.

      My point is that if someone wants to be fair and look at both sides, they must understand some of this technology, biochemistry and genetics.

      But I will point out that the gist of the argument about causation does make sense to me, that it’s hard to point to a tiny particle and say it is the whole cause. Because life forms have billions of tiny particles, hormones, genetics and various other substances we come into contact with on a regular basis. Anyway, just some thoughts. I really don’t know enough to have a solid opinion on the matter.

      • The experiments around plant viruses (see link) are very well performed.
        I only see evidence for viruses and none against.

        So this means that there are small biological systems that replicate themselves and spread themselves.
        The virus contains some genetic information, RNA or sometimes DNA, to let
        other cells make copies of itself.
        Some are of the size of a cell-organelle and some are as big as a cell.

        And one can make them visible with destructive electron-rays.
        Or one can take them apart and try to decrypt each part of the virus.
        Of course the virus does not function after that.

        One can also print a virus with a DNA printer, and create your own.
        That is how the toxic mRNA injections were made, by making DNA for bacteria.
        And these were put into some viruses for some injections.

        The only question is how much damage a virus can cause to a plant
        or to a human.
        And that is all very dependent on health and circumstances.
        Indeed a very complex thing.

        Generally it seems that viruses are not very deadly,
        but there may be circumstances in which they can be very damaging.
        Age seems a very important factor. Vitamin-D, food, stamina.
        And Big Pharma are clearly making viruses scarier than they are.

        The “no-virus” crowd argument seems like:
        “Many people did not get sick, so viruses do not exist.”
        That is not reasoning, but denial.

        A bit like:
        Most houses do not burn due to lightning strike.
        So lightning can not burn a house.

        • I’ll have to do some research on replication capable particles in plants and amoeba (often defined as viruses). I think the issue with viruses being debated has to do with Koch’s postulates. In my research, very few studies meet these criteria. The reason many researchers state is that a virus cannot be isolated in pure culture so must be grown or cloned.

          I agree the fear generated is used to control people and to generate profit for big pharma and the vast majority of disease is related to poor nutrition, pollution, stress, etc. All of these things are ignored and much research is focused on “virus hunting” (Peter Duesberg even mentioned this). Most of the money is used for research that promotes a certain agenda and profit for pharma and medical industrial complex.

          I’m not saying viruses do or don’t exist, but a person can determine how funding is used to control the narrative. JC has documented this how science has been corrupted and how Rockefeller influences infiltrated western medicine.

          Not all therapies are snake oil but many are and many treatments are needed because people are very unhealthy. So they cause the disease and then sell the treatment. Very psychopathic business model. This is common sense people would understand. JC documents this very well and a broad audience can start to understand.

          I think many people have not full understanding of how complex biological science is and how it’s not really a “hard” science like physics for example that studies inorganic material. It’s very different and very difficult IMO. So when people say they totally get it, I don’t think they really get it. Because if a person doesn’t appreciate the complexity then they are missing something.

        • zyxzevn, did I miss the link you mentioned or did you forget to include it? Can you please repost? Thanks.

          PS The existence of marine algea viruses does not in any way indicate the existence of any other virus.

          • link in first reply.

            There are many different viruses, and every virus can only
            infect one or a few species. Because the virus is just a small
            cell component.

            In similar sense the DNA in Pfizer’s mRNA shots could be
            considered almost a virus. Because it replicates after
            injection in the human cells, together with the human DNA.
            So it stays inside the body.
            It does not spread much though.

            • Thanks. I quickly looked at that before and thought I noticed nothing there that in anyway shows that viruses exist. I will look at it more closely, but this seems like the same old, same old, “assumptions prove conclusions” and “saying makes it so” habits of common scientific error.

        • The issue vith viorology is with the assumption that whatever is seen to be near a destroyed cell under the electron mycroscope is actually exiting the cell. The “budding virus”.

          Even if you put a gun to their head, these people will keep repeating their mantra. They are the experts so we have to trust them, even without evidence. This is what the guy said at Lanka’s trial.

          They will also claim there are exosomes, extracellural corpuscles that cells use to share information. How would they differentiate between the two? To me it sounds like the matter of conducting a training excercise on 9/11.

          Another gaping issue is one of “isolation” in which it is assumed that whatever is added to a mixture of very specific cells is not what ends up killing the cell, but what ends up killing it is the “infectious” specimen. Why are they not doing control experiments?

          Another gaping issue is the matter of purification. Why is it later assumed that “sequencing” of the whole mixture will then yield the “virus'” genome while everything else will be ignored? Why do they have to compile genome sequences to get the “virus” genome? This very process is a matter of opinion, not science. They get a bunch of sequences and then use consensus to obtain the genome? Science does not work like that.

          The obtained genome ends up being used in PCR as a primer, which is yet another can of worms. Stands to reason that if you look for a nonspecific sequence in people and attribute it to a “virus” you will cause mayhem.

          FDA explicitly stated in their documents that they used sequences that have been obtained in vitro. The whole thing is artificial and unnatural.

          • Lanka is very much biased towards his own theories.

            And certainly there are exosomes that look very similar.
            In history they have certainly been mixed up,
            and we probably should revise some old virus theories.

            In my first reply I have a saidit link that contains
            articles about the difference between exosomes and viruses.

            Exosomes are even produced by the body after injection
            of Pfizers mRNA poison, because the cells can not get
            rid of it in other ways.
            If these exosomes also had replicating capabilities,
            they would be a virus by definition.

            This means that an artificial virus can exist due to the mRNA vaccines.
            It is like the self-spreading “vaccine” that was
            in the news a few years ago.

            If an artificial virus can clearly exist, it is very likely
            that natural viruses can exist too.
            Nature is so far ahead of human capabilities.

            • Lanka theories != “expert’s” statement during trial

              There is no connection between the two. I have not stated anything about Lanka’s theories, in fact I do not know them. There was a court case, there was an “expert” who claimed that microbiology is not an exact science and that people basically have to believe experts because they know better.

              Nothing to do with any theories, until disputed I will consider this to be a historical fact.

          • Stefan Lanka did the control experiment (everything except the sample) and got the same result. Whatever is causing the disease is in the substances (and there are many) that are added to the sample.

  11. If I may.

    James is outraged that the establishment usurped our bodily autonomy rights for the past three years. That’s his beef. To him it’s not important whether viruses exist or not.

    On the other hand the Terrain Theorists ™ are outraged that the world was turned upside down for three years due to a bogus pandemic.

    If there are in fact no viruses, then both beefs are totally legitimate.

    And one can’t say who has the right to be more outraged.

  12. Nick,

    If we take James for his word, all you have to do here in the comment section is the following.

    State clearly that if communicable diseases do in fact exist, that does NOT give the government the right to violate your bodily autonomy!
    James has agreed to talk about the details of how disease works once you have made this statement.

    Good luck!

  13. James states in the interview:

    “It is not an answer to that fundamental problem to say, oh, but that communicable pathogen doesn’t exist, therefore… , no, you have to attack the base philosophical issue.
    If there are communicable diseases, does that give the government the right to violate your bodily autonomy?”

    I agree with James about what the core issues are with the scamdemic, bodily autonomy etc.

    But that doesn’t mean that everyone must share his opinion on this.

    Some terrain theorists may think that:

    a) had the public known beforehand that viruses don’t exist, the entire scamdemic would never have taken place. And it follows, bodily autonomy would not have been an issue (at least for the time being).

    b) if the public can be educated now about the non-existence of viruses maybe we can preempt the “next pandemic”.

    • He didn’t go into why it’s wrong to violate bodily autonomy though. That would have been the more interesting exploration in my opinion. Why is it wrong?

      I have violated someone’s bodily autonomy before at work. I’ve helped hold a patient down and inject them with sedatives so that they wouldn’t run outside and kill themselves. I’ve helped sedate patients that could not provide consent at the time in order to attempt to save their lives. So none of these people could have provided informed consent but as part of a medical team we did violate their autonomy. Was that wrong? Am I evil for doing so? Should I be arrested and put in jail?

      In every case, what we did was to protect the life of the patient and make them feel better. All of the medicines were fully approved by FDA and had a known toxicity profile and all of the patients survived. But I did violate their autonomy though.

      Is it wrong to stop someone from jumping off a bridge? What if it’s a kid, a suicidal teenager? No, I don’t think it is. But is that what the government was doing? No it’s not what they did. Why? What’s the difference? I think it has to do with informed consent and depends on the cirumstances. When I used to counsel suicidal people on the phone and the policy was to respect someones autonomy. But I sure would try everything to get them to reconsider.

      • When does someone have a right to violate bodily autonomy? Is it never? Should we let suicidal people go out and kill themselves instead of sedating them and giving them time to reconsider? Or how about someone who can’t give consent and comes into an emergency room bleeding to death or is on a toxic drug cocktail who needs intubation for airway protection? Is saving someone’s life worth the breach of ethics or is it a breach of ethics?

        Are we actually violating their bodily autonomy? A few people have said thank you later on. So maybe it isn’t a violation. I’m not sure.

        • cu.h.j you have asked excellent questions here and in the post above it.

          In most/all of the cases you mentioned I think people do have the right to violate a person’s bodily autonomy. However these are very special circumstances.

          I can’t speak for James but he may not have considered these circumstances when he made his declaration about bodily autonomy or was simply thinking about the general population and situations such as lock downs, masking, jabs etc.

          There will always be exceptions and you happen to work in a field that often necessitates quick decisions to help save a person’s life. Often these decisions need to be made when the person is not lucid. It can certainly be tricky at times.

          • I think it’s hard for people to understand the broad range of circumstances that others may find themselves in.

            I think ethics are important and yet not always black and white, or rather there are sometimes exceptions.

            I’m not arguing for moral relativism but ethics involve nuance.

    • I will say that though that I very carefully consider what medicines I’ve given to people and know what I am doing ethically and to me there is no question in many situations. I have no moral reservations in most circumstances.

      On the other hand, I have performed painful procedures on the elderly who’s family were decision makers that were at times in my opinion futile and potentially traumatic. For this I do feel I was wrong and what we did was wrong. There are many areas of western medicine that are wrong. And autonomy and do no harm should be the guiding principals for anyone in the field.

      There is also a grey area or some nuance regarding what bodily autonomy actually is. To me it means that someone who can give consent has the right to decide what they do with their body. But if someone is not able to consent a health care provider or bystander has an ethical obligation to try to save a human life because life is precious especially the very young. People may disagree, but this is what I think.

      • There’s also the topic of abortion that I shouldn’t even mention because it’s very polarizing but it crossed my mind. When does the rights of bodily autonomy conflict with one another? Does a fetus have the right bodily autonomy?

        When the life form can live outside of the mother, it does have rights, but not before IMO. But that decision is often made lightly with lack of informed consent.

        I think most abortions are done out of convenience, a form of birth control without considering what life is.

        Maybe bodily autonomy just means a person’s physical space should not ever be intruded upon by another in most circumstances. But there are circumstances in which a person cannot act in their own interest in order to preserve life that is irreplaceable.

        A lot to consider philosophically and many ethical considerations.

        • So, this comes back to the original point that JC mentioned “if a pathogen existed, does anyone (namely the government) have a right to violate bodily autonomy?”

          Why or why not?

          If I have violated someone’s autonomy to help save their life, how is that different?

          I’ll have to think about that.

          Is the principal of freedom more valuable than life itself?

          • “Is the principal of freedom more valuable than life itself?”

            This is what it all comes down to!
            This is the argument that governments and health authorities want to make.

            They say, absolutely “No, freedom is not more valuable than life itself.
            Especially the lives of thousand or millions of citizens.”

            And of course all of this is cloaked behind a wall of deception.
            Lives themselves were never in danger, the magnitude we were told.

        • Once again you bring up excellent thoughts concerning bodily autonomy.
          There are so many grey areas, including the rights potentially of even a fetus.

          James may have opened up a can of worms when he chose those words.
          I’m sure he will clarify what he meant in the near future and whether he believes
          there should be exceptions.

          • Maybe I’m over complicating the matter. But as you say governments have and will use that idea above to justify tyranny.

            This is why I think it’s important for people to think about it and why liberty is important and really flesh that out.

            JC mentioned way back 3 years ago, Far’s law regarding pandemics:


            I also think the problem has to do with centralized control and people who do things not for the benefit of people, but to exert power over others.

            There would never be a pathogen that could wipe out humanity. It could not exist. We would have been dead a long long time ago, extinct thousands of years ago.

            So, the reason does not exist even if someone believes in germs. Terrain is real and it protects us from this issue, extinction. That is the wisdom of nature, life “wants” to survive and is very good at it.

          • He may or may not. I think I understand what he meant. Certain natural rights are self evident and need no explanation.

            I believe empathy is “hard wired” into most human beings and this is nurtured with good upbringing and mentorship. Government has tried to subvert common sense.

            An intervention to attempt to save the life of another human being or give them a chance to be able to make informed decisions and have real autonomy should not include government and centralized authority.

            “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” to me is basic common sense.

            • “I believe empathy is “hard wired” into most human beings and this is nurtured with good upbringing and mentorship…”

              As you probably know not all health care workers are angels.

              My father might have still been alive today had his bodily autonomy not been violated in hospital.

              Unnecessary and harmful injections were administered to make life easier for the health care workers, without his consent.

              • I’m sorry to hear about your father. One of my loved ones died about a year ago due to neglect in a nursing home. If I could go back in time, I would have taken her home with me.

                Standard western medicine has become a borderline psychopathic institution.

                I hope that within the next several years I am able to work in an alternative modality.

            • I”’m sorry to hear about your father. One of my loved ones died about a year ago due to neglect in a nursing home. If I could go back in time, I would have taken her home with me.
              Standard western medicine has become a borderline psychopathic institution.
              I hope that within the next several years I am able to work in an alternative modality.”

              Thanks cu.h.j.
              In my father’s case it was one medical mistake on top of another on top of another and he was gone in just one week.
              The week before he was out to dinner with friends, everything was normal.

              Good luck with your career ambitions.

  14. With all due respect, I think the “No virus” theory shouldn’t be so blown off. Change the topic to climate change or 9-11 and it seems ridiculous to talk about it the way it was in this conversation. I can understand being frustrated with people who assume you are a shill for not discussing it but I think it requires a deeper dive and more respect. It is not simply due to a freedom of information request not having information that people assume viruses aren’t real. The burden of proof that it exists, like climate change, is on those who say this is a threat to us, and I do agree that much of this red tape would disappear if it could be shown that no proof exists to show such a threat. It may not cure all ails but it would cure that one and all the mess that goes with it. I look to you for your brilliance and ability to investigate. Don’t disregard this topic so blatantly please. It is worth more of a look.

    • I think this is outside of JC’s scope of expertise to be honest. He’s probably have to look deep into an entire field of study that would divert his attention away from topics that are within his scope of expertise. Some people are good at analyzing certain topics, have different interests, etc.

      He doesn’t know everything and no one can be an expert on every single topic. On the other hand if two respectable and honest researchers debated this may give the public more information.

      JC doesn’t know about how cell cultures are grown and the properties of the solutions used or the equipment and such. I’m not sure he’d want to learn that stuff. But in order to state with unequivocal confidence what he thought was true would require him to do so IMO.

    • jnetr, I agree 100%. The FOIA work of Christine Massey is very telling and not at all trivial because it does not stand alone. No one that I’ve seen on Team No Virus is claiming the FOIAs alone prove anything. Derrick and James are uninformed.

      It’s not important to me whether Derrick and James understand the Team No Virus evidence or if they come out as on the Team. Frankly, I’d prefer since they don’t understand it, they admit it (which they sort of did) and completely lay off the criticism of what they don’t understand (which they sort of didn’t do).

      • The Team No Virus position is actually very easy to understand. Here it is: there has never been the proper control experiments performed that demonstrate the existence of pathogenic viruses. The experiments in the scientific literature are all improperly performed without controls and specifically in the case of SARS viruses, no one even tried to show that their improperly “isolated” viruses causes disease in human.

        I can go on and on about the bs from the so called “scientists.” The subterfuge is so ridiculous it’s actually rather juvenile.

        Germ theory and terrain theory are NOT the same as James claimed. Terrain theory does not hold that viruses and other pathogens won’t infect you causing disease if your terrain is healthy. What they say is that pathogenic viruses are unproven to exist and that bacteria are not the cause of disease but their proliferation is result of an existing diseased state. The bacteria are not invaders from outside but live in and on us at all times. This is not a trivial distinction and clearly has implications in medicine.

        • If people understood that there are no pathogenic viruses, the whole edifice of One Health global control grid would have been impossible to construct. It’s only because of the germ theory supported by shoddy science, and its vaccine hockum that should have died an ignoble death in the 80s that the covaids fear porn worked.

          Yes, we can reason with people saying they have no right to invade our bodily autonomy, but there will always be the socialist/communist masses who think it’s my job to keep them and their Granny safe by following idiotic government dictates. I see absolutely no advantage to James’s argument over Team No Virus.

          • I don’t see that one position invalidates the other. Why not use both arguments and support each other?

          • Blind trust in authority, the expert fallacy and the blind belief in moral superiority of the majority is at the root cause of everything.

            All of these “bodies” only issue reccomendations which are then later used by “authorities” to justify whatever they think they can get away with.

            Today it’s the germ theory, yesterday it was the communists, tomorrow it’s going to be about massive forrest fires or CO2 or Nitrogen or aliens.

            When these morons issue warnings, reccomendations or threats, the common reaction by the people should be: so what? I will be the one in charge of my own risk assessment.

            This is at the root of the matter, germ theory is just a strawman.

            • mkey says:
              “Blind trust in authority…This is at the root of the matter.”

          • It’s not only because of germ theory though. There is profound fraud when wealthy interests fund research because they decide what gets studied and what does not. They also can manipulate results.

            Furthermore, “germ theory” as far as I know has never excluded influencing factors of state of health (internal and external terrain). Similarly, the idea of being exposed to some diseases in the past has been encouraged to build up immunity.

            Even if germ theory is flawed, these other mitigating factors have been largely ignored. Like locking people in their homes, closing gyms, gmos in food and other straight up poisoning of the population. They have targeted our biological terrain and hyped up potential risk.

            Many people really were not afraid of this in the beginning before the MSM started blaring on about it. People were assessing their own risk and going on about their lives until the government locked people down.

            Having said that, I do think that debate in science good and that people should be able to perform research and present their findings. Wealthy interests are monopolizing scientific study and warped it into a way to attack individual liberty.

            There are so many toxic therapies in western medicine now and other ideas have been stifled. This harm is not limited to germ theory. I thought JC’s work on Rockefeller medicine was very illuminating for me in particular.

            But JC never said people should not talk about it. Both JC and DB said it is the way people were talking about it. I suspect there are agitators who try to make people fight with each other. Or maybe even bots.

          • @ ccuthbert2000

            I’m unqualified as a virologist but I do observe things. Light and optics. A brilliant inventor, scientist
            Raymond Royal Rife was not a soddy virologist. I can’t help but view this argument through his brilliant work damn near 100 years ago. His optical inventions are still revered today. He worked with viruses. What could he have painstakingly
            Isolated if not viruses?.

            • Maybe,as most things are now upside-down. The definition and terminology has changed.
              Seems all Rife’s recordings are behind a paywall. I’m unable to share them here.

      • Yes, exactly. Better to say nothing at all than the things that were said in this interview.

        There is plenty of information available for people to inform themselves if they so desire.

        David Crowe podcast – The Infectious Myth (a Canadian, by the way)
        Stefan Lanka
        Andrew Kaufman
        Sally Fallon Morrell
        David Parker
        Dawn Lester
        Mark and Sam Bailey
        Jerneja Tomsic
        Shimon Yanowitz
        Christine Massey
        … and more …

  15. “On July 11th there will be a launch of a free 90-part educational summit called The End of COVID that will address the many problems of germ theory and “virology”.”

    Does ‘The End of COVID’ educational summit begin on July 11 or June 20th?

    • Thanks.
      The reason I asked was because when I visited the link you posted above a few hours ago, it showed a date of June 20th, the same date that is still mentioned in the trailer.

  16. What I can’t figure out is how those Brits can survive without pickup trucks! Didn’t see a one drive by in the entire video.
    Maybe they’ve been outlawed already.

    • Pickup trucks are not a common vehicle in EU as we have been thouroughly indoctrinated into thinking as (and being) mostly incapable of resolving any issues. Can do mentality has been bombed out of existence. Food comes from the stores, you have to ask permission for everything and you have no chance to do anything on your own. Because you are stupid, incompetent, disarmed, unarmed, bendover prone and inane.

      • My, that seems a rather harsh evaluation. ?
        But I suppose that explains the lack of pickups.
        And here I was thinking that the government had created some sort of legislation that made it difficult to obtain one.

        • Not sure what’s the latest word on that one, but diesel engines are on their way of becoming illegal. There are all sorts of penalties imposed in diesel drivers/owners so only professionals and those who travel long distance see economic benefit from driving a diesel. Most pickups will certainly be diesels, so that will play a role, too.

          • Carpentry is practically dead here. Vast majority of building is done with brick and mortar.

            The permitting I reffered to is on the other end: property owners have to jump through all sorts of loops do anything on their property. In most areas permits take years to obtain. There is a lot of shoddy so called architects, people who are churning out “projects” and actual contractors.

            The whole process is against innovation and expensive. Usage of “new” materials (such as strawbale) is illegal. All building materials must have certificates. Same is true for basically all parts used in construction, including valves, pipes, switches, etc.

            At the same time, these experts/inspectors will allow building to initiate on a concrete foundation after leaving it to cure for less than a week.

            I could go on and on. What I want to do is build a small woood house. To do so is illegal in many ways, if you start from scratch. If you are “remodelling” then nobody cares.

          • Hardly any pick-ups are diesel here, as far as I am aware. Tractors, semi-trucks, and a rare truck run on diesel.

    • You’re probably going to have to hire a boat mover for that big of a boat.
      Get some stands and blocks and a couple of big hydraulic jacks and then off load it at your property.
      Then reverse the process when you’re ready to splash again.

      Unless you can find an old low flat bed trailer and build a cradle.
      Even then it would probably cost more than just paying a mover and buying some stands. Plus you’d be stuck with the trailer.

      • I hear you. I’m thankful to be done with the marine industry.

    • Insure & sink? If someone asks, we were playing cards till wee hours in AM.

Submit a Comment


Become a Corbett Report member