Bret Weinstein: “I will be vindicated over Covid”

Posted on by

This is fantastic. It’s Bret Weinstein analyzing the past few years on Covid, Vaxx and policy.

While much, if not most of the material on this site you might not want to send to “normie” friends and relatives, this is a safe and digestible analysis of why no one should have ever taken the vaxx, presented in a way anyone can understand. The link is here if anyone wants to send it as a YouTube link rather than a link to this post on this site.

John Campbell has another brilliantly sarcastic video on Vaxx damage Stats from Swindon. It appears that Swindon is the only place on Earth with no increase in heart damage after the vaxx rollout. And they only managed to correct the statistics on that, a few hours after the original FOIA data was deemed in error and new stats where produced. Once the original data hit a half million views.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

10 Replies to “Bret Weinstein: “I will be vindicated over Covid””

  1. Vlad, there’s a commenter on the Bret Weinstein video that PERFECTLY mirrors what my opinion about the interview is:

    I don’t see Freddie being objective at all. He’s using the same techniques I’ve heard NPR interviewers use – When the answer for your question comes back with undesirable responses, re-ask the question with a different angle, but with the same implied bias in an effort to block the person into a corner that might elicit the desired answer. And this was evident TIME AFTER TIME.

    After a while, you see Bret calling the interviewer out for even asking some of the questions.

    • “Happy New Year.”
      “Thanks. Same to you. Hmm, 2025. Hard to believe,” Liz said putting on her seatbelt. Her colleague, Ron, started the car to head downtown. In a few minutes they were on Washington street. “Oh, there’s another one,” she said pointing past Ron. “It’s everywhere now.”

      He looked to his left, trying to keep one eye on the traffic. He caught a flash of light and movement on an alleyway wall. “You mean back there between those two buildings?”

      “Yeah. I find it so distracting and you see it more and more. I hate it. It turns everything into a screen.” Liz pulled the visor down to check her lipstick in the mirror. “I mean, I don’t mind as much when the government uses it, but for graffiti? And I’ve seen that same video like ten times already. Somebody’s got money.”

      Liz referred to the famous Brett Weinstein video interview made in 2023. It became one banner among many of the counter-revolution after its banning by the Department of Disinformation. It was highly regarded in the underground for Weinstein’s virtuoso handling of the most dangerous of subjects, while being interviewed by the most dangerous of “journalists”. It would made him infamous to the mainstream.
      “Yeah,” said Ron, “It costs like ten grand a gallon.”
      “What do they call it again?”
      “Nanopaint. Doesn’t matter if you make a single dot or cover a whole bridge with it. Every molecule is programmed to play the same thing.”
      “It’s weird how it makes sound, too.”
      “I know. I don’t know how they get their hands on it. Imagine risking prison for graffiti.”
      “–For their stupid Samizdat. Well, it’s like the modern version of having a gun, right? And why him? I wish they could catch these fanatics. You’d think with all the cameras around we could track them down.”
      “They shoot it from drones.”
      “–And paint THEM with their own bullshit. Head to toe!”

      Ron and Liz broke out laughing. They were almost there. They pulled up to a red light. The same video played on a garbage can on the sidewalk just a few feet away. They ignored it but could hear the audio. Weinstein never spoke to motive, no matter the prodding. This was key. To do so was to fall into the speculative trap that drew immediate cancellation. It deprived the enemy of the opportunity to brand you a conspiracy theorist. He had identified this nuance and had taught others by example. Dr Peter McCulloch did the same, and was also part of the graffiti landscape. He had appeared for three weeks in the Ted Williams tunnel before authorites found a way to cover the whole hundred feet of it.

      The strengthening underground had learned quickly that nothing stuck to nanopaint better than truth, and more nanopaint. Official diktats were tagged regularly.

  2. I sincerely hope that I can get both erroneous and corrected information when I next apply for a FOIR, so helpful…..

  3. I really think that you should put a date on the videos you put up.

    The one with Weinstein appeared recent to me until they started talking about monkeypox at 39 minutes, I then checked the link to YouTube and found that it was uploaded some 7 months ago.

    It was still interesting but I do think it should have been presented as «this is from may or june 2022.»

    Btw and if I may dare: a HAPPY NEW YEAR to all of you.

      • Exactly, you did not.

        I think you should put a date on the videos if you can, whether they are a year old or a week old can be somewhat important and I would like to know before I start to watch.
        It was interesting but suddenly they talked about monkeypox and I thought «this cant be recent».
        Thank you anyway…

        (Campbell just got a video removed from YouTube, with more than 500 million views total they are somewhat hesitant to remove his whole channel, but they forced him to remove that one even as it just cited public sources. It is still on Rumble.)

      • I think that’s their complaint, in that there’s nothing indicating what the date of the interview was.