The Real Deal with Dr. Katherine Horton

Video Transcript:

This is Jim Fetzer, your host on the real deal, where I'm very, very pleased to have in this studio with me today from Switzerland. Dr. Catherine Horton, whom I regard as one of the world's great experts on international intrigued on the use of secret societies and agencies by the UK, the US, and other agencies. The only person to have ever sued MI6, Catherine. I'm so glad to have you here with me in Beijing, Louis today. Thank you. It's an honor to be here, Jim. You've got to tell our audience for that intro, a little about your lawsuit against MI6. Oh, yes. So this is now my second lawsuit against MI6. It will be taking place in the royal court of Justice and London on the 12th of December 2019. And curiously, it's set to be exactly on the day of the general election. So I don't think this is a coincidence. I also would like to point out, you know, that we're talking about secret societies and, you know, global conspiracies that the 12th of December, so 12.12 actually adds to 3.3, so 33, which I don't think is a coincidence. I don't think that my lawsuit being set on the 12th of December is, it kind of creeps up on me to suspicion that it's not by coincidence that all these data, you know, all these these events are set on the same day. And my remarkable coincidence, that's the final day for the lawsuit. Leonard Posner brought against me for defamation over Sandy Hook for describing the desert if it get each shared with my colleague, Kelly, what is a fabrication? Where it turns out that although some of the reasons I gave in the book for concluding it was a fabrication where wrong, it is indeed a fabrication for even better reasons, including that it has no state or town certification and no file number where my Connecticut law not even a parent is allowed to have an uncertified death certificate of which this was an example which makes it a fabrication on its face. And where prior to the summary judgment in my case, I was able to solicit the expert opinions of two documents, forensic document examiners, both of whom concluded not only was that that certificate of fabrication, but three others that had surfaced during the course of the case were also fabrications with the judge in this case simply set to the side as someone else's opinion when he was not permitted by the protocols for summary judgment to render a summary judgment unless there were no disputed facts which obviously wasn't the case here. That case, of course, was then turned over to a jury of 12 from Madison, one man, 11 women all under the age of 30, each of whom insisted they never heard of Alex Jones if you can believe that, but who brought in an absurd verdict of $450,000 for these few sentences describing the death certificate as a fabrication which is I've explained turns out to be true and where the final rendering of my case will be the same day as yours. Exactly. So it's a 12th of December's a very meaningful day for the Mason's, I think that's what we can take away. So the British general election is very important to them. Your case is obviously very, very important to them and so is my lawsuit against British intelligence. This is the second lawsuit I bring against him. The first one was in 2016. Katherine, I'm just so impressed with the work you've done here, frankly. No one else in the world has done what you have done here and it seems to me of enormous importance. And having you here, I want to benefit from the opportunity of getting your assessment and how we can figure out what's going on with these events, Paul's flags, intelligence agency moves, stage court cases, even in some cases assassinations. I want to draw on the breadth of your experience to give kind of an introduction or primer for our audience today. So I mean, you would like to have a general background of how I came to be involved in all this research. That would be excellent as a beginning yes. So I'll try to condense it down. There's a lot more information on me at my website stopw7.org. So you can find out in the about section who I am and I've also listed all my qualifications and what I did. But in a nutshell, I started off as a particle physicist and I did my undergraduate, my PhD at Oxford and then I became a research fellow also at Oxford and I was set to have a very boring life with a very academic, you know, classical career. And then I decided to leave particle physics and do something else after very short stint in medical physics. I changed to the analysis of what the rather the physics of complex human systems and I started analyzing cases. I had a case case study in the English legal system and I started to be overtly stalked by MI5 and for very long time, I thought that is the beginning of my targeting. So from the year, but pretty much from November 2011 to this day, I have been stalked by MI5. Stalked and I had frequent house breaking, secret service, that's when they don't steal anything of value. There would be, you know, the entire point of a burglary, but they come in and they gaslight you. They try to psychologically terrorize you by letting you know that they've been there. Rearranging objects on the grass. Rearranging objects. You're likely of bringing objects that are not yours, taking your objects away, making them reappear in crazy places, you know, this sort of stuff. But I've seen all this before because I grew up in communist Romania where my family was terrorized and harassed by the Romanian secret services who use exactly the same methods as Western secret services. So I've seen, I always say I've seen this movie before. I just didn't, I couldn't figure out what the entire purpose of it was and my first instinct was to ignore it. So for an entire year in the United Kingdom, I ignored the MI5 shenanigans around me thinking, oh, this will stop when I go back to Germany to join my husband again. So, you know, we moved to, or I moved to Germany to join him and then the stalking and the house breaking continued in Germany and I launched, I wanted to launch a startup and that entire business endeavour of mine was obliterated by all this. And so I briefly had a stint in finance and I was trying to make ends meet and trying to figure out what was going on and eventually we moved to Switzerland after to wrap up my company in or the company attempt rather in Germany. And in Switzerland, we had another house breaking after Christmas, 2000, about 2015, we came back in the new year of 2016. There was another house breaking with a piece of something left in our home that was an hour and I said to my husband, right, that's it. I had enough. I'm going to the police. This was a Sunday evening. I said, I'm going to the police on Monday morning and I'm going to tell them everything how I've been harassed by the secret services for years and it just doesn't stop. It followed me from Britain to Germany and now it's here in Switzerland and they just don't let me be. And when I said I'm going to report this to the police half an hour later, we went to bed and for the first time I was assaulted in bed with a directive in Geweapon. I was burned by a microwave weapon. And I figured out during the attack that it was a beam coming from my neighbor, I could reach into this painful beam that was burning on the palm of my hand and I could literally map out where this beam was. And I realized, oh, it's some sort of painful burning beam coming from my neighbors. This could only be in microwaves. And from that day onwards, which was the 10th of January, 2016, to this day, I have been assaulted, not just daily, but around the clock with direct energy weapons. And after about five months of this, or four and a half months of this, I went to court in London and I applied for an injunction against British intelligence. So it's MI5, the domestic British intelligence, MI6 foreign intelligence, which MI6 covers the globe really. And GCHQ, which is the British version of NSA. And my court case started off really well. I had two judges who were supporting me. I think they were of high integrity. And then my case, it wasn't struck out. It was terminated by the third judge. And in the meantime, my husband and I survived an assassination attempt. And it was all very, very intense. But it was after that, after a brief phase of trying to ignore these people and realizing that they do not stop attacking me, I have decided to devote myself full time to figuring out what's going on and stopping these people and trying to save my life and that of other victims. So pretty much since I would say, well, the end of 2016 was when I cracked and I thought I cannot hold back anymore. The attacks are so intense on me, I have to go public. And I went public first on the Richie Allen. Shoritchie Allen was the first and the only person from big mainstream alternative media to actually ever get back to me and say, yes, come on my show. We want to hear this. And after that, I was put in touch with other people. I found the little investigative team of five people in total and we investigated Secret Service Criminality for a year and a half. And since then, I've also been doing consulting and counseling to other victims and through that work over the last three years. I spoke to a lot of people. I discovered that a lot of people are being assaulted with directed energy weapons and fancy modern technology. And this goes from up to the highest levels. So we are talking about, I spoke to judges who were assaulted, other professionals, lawyers, anybody you can think of, IT professionals. And there's this silent weapon system being deployed based on directed energy weapons that is now operational across the entire US. In Canada, all the countries of Europe, Australia and New Zealand. And they also attacked that I've heard about in China and Russia. So we're talking about a global directed energy weapon system. And that's what I'm fighting. Well, Catherine, I think the very important reason why you were able to sort this out is your background in particle physics. Not only that, but certain analytical techniques that are used in particle physics to synthesize evidence. Have been applicable by you to the desperate data points you have about the operations of these intelligence communities and the techniques they're using. It seems to me you have become a devastating instrument of exposure for what's going on here, particularly by your study of the templates, the patterns, the way in which they're replicating their approaches to solving what from the point of view of the deep state or the crown as you refer to it, are problems. They want to solve problems. Sometimes it can be by lawsuits, sometimes it can be by targeted attacks using electromagnetic weapons, sometimes it can be by assassinations. So I'm very interested in your addressing that issue of how you have come to put together the patterns or the templates they're employing and how it leads you to work your way up the ladder to determine who at the top is calling the shots. Yeah, I started doing this when I was trying to make sense of all the targeting cases. So my own targeting case and that I really only managed to map talking to other victims and realizing, oh, we're all reporting the same stuff. So I spent the last three years mapping the cases of targeted individuals. I made a huge... Actually, David Template that summarizes on 94 pages, the typical criminal offenses committed by the Secret Services. It incorporates all the direct-identity weapon attacks, house breaking, hacking, neuro-tech attacks, non-concentral implanting, anything, and of course murder of family members, you know, threats, anything at all. And I discovered that when you can map, so you can... And when you compare individual cases and you put them next to each other, you can see that the same templates are being used, the same program is being deployed. And when you are a victim, you are being hit with a very large number of offenses and you are facing a very large group of co-concertors. And it can be overwhelming. But when you spot the pattern, you can predict what they will do next or what will be the typical things that they will do to you and your family. And once you know, I mean, first of all, you can... Well, you can't really guard yourself against it. That's the problem because they can circumvent whatever you do. But you can map out who is doing it. Because at that level of complexity and with that involvement of manpower, it can only be a national secret service that can pull something like that off. And I discovered that it's not just a national security services that do that. There's a superstructure that makes every Secret Service act exactly in the same way, lockstep. So they are all deploying one big program at the same time in identical fashion. And what I did for the targeted individuals, mapping this out, you can transfer to any other whistleblower situation and you can take all the cases of past whistleblowers and past truth tellers and say, what exactly happened to them? Did they get any sort of really rare cancers of perfectly timed car accidents or anything? You can look at diseases, accidents, misfortune, general devastation of their finances and their life and you can map it. And then you can say, oh, hang on a second. It looks like they are all being taken down by the same template. You know, it's like, you can't really say what exactly is going to hit them. But after the fact, you can just tabulate it and say, hang on a second. That looks like again, another CIA type down or MI6 type down. It looks like, oh, house breaking was involved. Tacking was typically involved. Oh, look, his dog died. That's also a typical thing. And then look, then his partner or his aunt died exactly on his birthday. Almost as if somebody wanted to send him a warning. These are the typical things that happen all the time. So what I want these whistleblowers and truth is to understand is that you will be overwhelmed if you are alone. But when you group together with all the other whistleblowers, if something happens, you can say, oh, look, this happened to all of us. It could only be our intelligence agency in this country. Let's take them to court. Let's force them to stop this nonsense. So this is my goal now. I'm talking, this is also what I'm talking to James Hetzel about, is how can we stop state criminality? How can we stop secret service criminality? How can we investigate it? Prosecutors and how can we just jail these bastards? And one of the most serious aspects you encountered when the third judge has missed your case, you had two judges who were supportive, who were receptive to your evidence, listening to the testimony you were inducing, and the third who dismissed, which is indicative of the more general problem, that the intelligence agency appears to have infiltrated the judicial system, not only in the UK, but in the US, and no doubt in other countries, abroad, which tremendously strengthens their power to manage outcomes and poses additional challenges and obstacles for citizens who are seeking justice for their own maltreatment by their own government. Exactly. And now in this particular case of the corrupt judges, you can do the following. First of all, you can identify the pattern of corruption. There are certain court cases that have a very high likelihood of being dealt with in a corrupt way, where if evidence is ignored or evidence is not admitted, and there's an entire pallet of the typical, you know, crooked actions that the judge can pull and would pull in this case, that he would never pull in any other case. So there's a certain class of cases, there's a certain pattern there, and then you can also start comparing countries. For example, in the United States, the journalist Janet Fellon did amazing research. She uncovered them of one mechanism through which judges are being bright. See, she looked at the mortgages these judges had and discovered that they were taking out vast mortgages for very few number of years. She would take out a huge multimillion mortgage and paid back within two years. So that is highly unusual. It's not possible on the salary of the judge. And if the mortgages repaid super fast and it kept being done, that is indicative of money laundering. In other words, a bribe is laundered through a supposedly, well, legitimate are looking mechanism. It looks like somebody took out the loan and paid it back, but you wouldn't pay back the loan that fast naturally. So somebody else paid it back. In other words, you got the money. Somebody else pays it back. So through a little roundabout, you ended up with millions. And she said to me that two out of three judges she investigated had financial transactions of this kind, typically involving mortgages indicative of money laundering. Now, when you map that for the US court system and you found this really successful template of paying judges millions and bribes, you can be sure that the same scheme or very similar scheme will have been deployed in the United Kingdom. You can bet because it's so successful. So what I'm trying to say to people is that I want you all to move from the individual case, one level up and analyze the templates and the business plans. And then think, OK, I moved from the individual case up. I recognize the business plan and then go back down to another case and say, I'll see, can you find evidence for the same business plan being used or the same attack template? So in the case of secret service criminality, you look at one whistleblower and you say, for example, you know, oh, look on the day of, I'm just making this up. These are not your cases, but just as an example. On the day of his court hearing or his whistleblowing meeting, he had a mysterious car accident when he nearly died. And a week later his dog died and then he ended up with cancer. And then you go to another whistleblowing case and you look, was there any statistically unlikely misfortune, you know, beforeling this whistleblower? Yes, no. If there was, then you think, hang on, it looks like a template. If it is a template, which you can prove with statistical methods, who has the power to pull off these events, who could stage them? And typically there's only one, you know, answer to that. And that is your national secret service. Only they have the manpower and only they combine the skills of hacking and staging car accidents and so on. So this is how you can hop from one individual case up to figure out the template in the business plan and then hop back down to all the other whistleblower cases and see how many fit the pattern. And when you have a group of whistleblowing cases that fit the pattern, well, these guys could start the class action against, for example, the secret services. Now, in your case, where you're dealing with a judge who has come up with the most extra ordinary, you know, steps and decisions and, you know, are probably judgements by the end of it. You can look at other similar cases of maybe, you know, current very odd court cases happening, you know, we could probably name a couple and see, is the judge behaving in a very odd, maybe highly unlawful manner? Is he completely ignoring process? And then the question is, if he is, does it fit the template? Yes, no. If it fits the template, who could possibly be controlling both judges? Typically you end up with the same answer, maybe your secret service could. They could they could bribe both judges, right? But then you have suddenly kind of ganged up on the secret service. You have collected instead of just being an individual victim, you gang up together and you suddenly think, hang on a second, let's just all turn around and figure out who could have done this to us. And let's go after them as we seem. Well, just for those who may have missed the memo, in my case, there were a number of abnormalities, including the initial complaint, to which was attached, state certified, town certified, a copy of a death certificate that had a file number, in which the complaint asserted that the death certificate that I published in the book, which had no file number, no town certification, no state certification, was not materially different from the attached death certificate. And therefore, I committed a defamation by describing it as a fabrication. When obviously the difference in the file number, the town certification and the state certification were material differences. This means the complaint was a legal absurdity, and ought to have been dismissed on its face more over, as a case progressed toward dispositive motions, summary judgment motions, where a judge in a case is only entitled to a render of verdict, if there are no disputed tax, where the central issue in my case was the authenticity of the death certificate, not only did it turn out to be the case that, according to Connecticut law, not even parents are allowed to have an uncertified death certificate, which was a fabrication on its face, but I secured the expert reports of two forensic document examiners, both of whom affirmed not only was a death certificate that I published in the book of fabrication, but three other death certificates that had surfaced during the course of the case, were also fabrications. One, Larry Wicksstrom from Minneapolis told me it was mind-boggling to him, how the state of Connecticut was issuing fabricated death certificates in even different fabricated death certificates to parties to the same litigation. The second document examiner, Ash Robertson from California, not only confirmed Wicksstrom's conclusions about the four death certificates, but had taken a look at the NOAA posthumous security number, and concluded that it also was fake and observed in passing that he felt any reasonable person looking at the features of the death certificate that had struck me at the time, including the missing file number, the fact that it had a wrong estimate and time of death at 11 a.m. when the shooting officially took place between 9.39 and 9.40, the fact that it had different typefaces and fonts distributed through it, that it had a textured background in the bottom two thirds and different from the top, suggesting to me that it might have been the combination of the bottom half of a real desert, with a top half of a fake, never the last set those expert opinions to the side is just somebody else's opinions and rendered a verdict in spite of the fact that the summary judgment protocols preclude doing precisely that. And then it was sent to a jury for a determination of the amount of damages, and they had an expert witness who testified via video that while he had never met Mr. Posner, he had nevertheless diagnosed him based upon a phone conversation and information he had been given by the plaintiff's attorneys and by Mr. Posner himself, which included false information that I'd harassed Posner, which I'd never done, that I said he did not have a son, which was not true either, rather my argument was that the photograph of Noah appeared to be made up from photographs of his purported older brother Michael Vabner when he was a child, where other students of Sandy Hook have concluded that some of the parents even use photographs of themselves as children, where the claim was made that I'd harassed the plaintiff, which I'd also never done, and most especially that I had asserted that he had fabricated the desert advocate. On the basis of this, the psychiatrist reason that he argued that Posner would have recovered from the death of his son in this mass shooting at Sandy Hook, which he took for granted was authentic. But he suffered a relapse. He would have come out of the post-traumatic stress and had a relatively normal life, but for the few sentences in my book, believe it or not, although my attorney properly argued that they had established no causal relationship between the sentences in the book and the plaintiff had acknowledged he himself had never read, and the alleged effects, which he quite startling, all things considered the jury, of 12, of Madison residents all below the age of 31 men and 11 women, each of whom professed and never heard of Alex Jones, came in with a damage award of $450,000. Now, we are going to appeal this award, but in a post trial motion, my attorney has observed that they never actually satisfied the elements for my being liable in the first place, because they never established that I'd done anything wrong. It's a statute in Wisconsin, you cannot have liability without fall. In other words, they had to show I was at fall, which they had not done. They did not show in particular that I was negligent, and it would be very difficult to do that, because I brought together 13 experts, including six pH-dees, we had a study in the case rather extensively and concluded the school, but closed by 2008. There were no students there, and that it was a female exercise for which we even had the manual in events on the ground in support. Evidence that the judge had precluded my introducing much earlier in the case, which had done found in me, but even though attention was focused solely on the desertific, between the Connecticut statute and the expert document examiner's reports, there ought to have been no question that it had to go to a jury. If the case is now reversed, I will have the opportunity for that trial, and to produce the evidence, I was denied the opportunity of presenting at the time. I'm very interested, Catherine, in just your assessment in general, what was going on here, and how you would work your way up the ladder to figure who might be pulling the strings behind the scene. I mean, just looking at objectively, I've heard, I mean, of course, we discussed the Sandy Hooker incident, which we both agree as a false flag. I'm not sure if it was a false flag, right? But that aside, if we just take the odd things that happened in your court case, just as an objective person, wasn't there just taking these facts and what went wrong, I would say that the judge acted so highly unusually that he was not acting as a normal judge. There seemed to be an ulterior motive to basically subvert the legal process. I would say, I mean, just looking at what you presented to me, that the judge perverted the course of justice. Now, what I would say just as a, this is my conclusion based on the evidence, right? So let's assume, okay, let's assume I'm right, you really did pervert the course of justice just to the sake of this argument. If he did so, he would not have spontaneously done that because he doesn't know you, right? He doesn't know you, he doesn't know the other side. That's the basic hypothesis, right? So what motive did he have? He wasn't acting in your favor. So either he knew the other side or there's a higher entity that's the connection between Posner and the judge. Okay, so either there's a direct personal connection, he via its cousin, you know, could be, but if it's not his cousin, if there isn't a personal direct relationship, the only other explanation for his behavior and perverting the course of justice is that he was either threatened or blackmailed or bright or whatever by somebody else who is above Posner and him. And again, that has to be an entity or a group that can, you know, bring a judge to pervert the course of justice in his own court and bring a guy, you know, to start a lawsuit against you on a nonsense basis, right? So again, the question is which entity possibly has the power, the money, the time and the incentive to pull that off? And then you can say, okay, what was the whole purpose of Sandy Hook, this false flag, right? It was, you know, as he said, a FEMA drill, right? So who controls FEMA? How could FEMA control the judge? Why would FEMA control the judge? It's obviously not FEMA. There's an entity above all these. So we're looking for an entity that can control the judiciary, can control FEMA to pull this off. And then we can look at what was the purpose of Sandy Hook and its gun control, right? Or gun confiscation rather, you know, or put another way, the purpose is to remove all the guns to leave the Americans defenseless. That's another way of putting it, right? So we're looking for an entity, this was a quiz question to our audience, right? Which entity are we looking for that can corrupt the judiciary in America, can control FEMA, and would like to remove all the guns from the Americans to leave them defenseless? Well, I guess it's fair to say that we're looking for an extraterritorial entity, right? Because we're looking for something that would weaken America and its defenses by definition looking for foreign power. So which foreign power or foreign entity could possibly pull off us off? Now, I'll leave it, you know, as an open mic question, I think people know my answer to that. Well, what would you say, you know, saying? Well, this was a classic slap suit strategic lawsuit against public participation intended to punish me for bringing together these experts to expose the corruption of the deep state as we usually refer to it and to set an example for others that if they were to follow my lead, they would find themselves subjected to similar treatment. In fact, it's fascinating. During the course of discovery, it emerged that during a blog exchange between the plaintiff and a commentator, he'd been confronted with the claim that he had lost the lawsuit with Wolfgang Halvig, another student in the Sandy Hook, whom he'd sued for invasion of privacy, to which the plaintiff responded, well, actually, no, he won because the objective had been to have him take down his Sandy Hook justice website and to set an example showing other people that if they do as he did, they'll be dragged into court in the last a long time. I even presented that as evidence of the court that exposing the real motivation here. And in fact, this man, when her posse is filed numerous other lawsuits related to Sandy Hook as well, including his involved in one with Alex Jones, who has been on both sides of the issue and who like the plaintiff has denied ever having read the book. I found it most curious, happened how the plaintiffs never having read the book would have even been aware that they were these few sentences buried in chapter 11. And then he cited as a fourth beyond the three sentences from the book, a sentence from a memorandum I've written in 2018 for Robert David Steele, who did a Sandy Hook memorandum, a series from the President of the United States, which is the latest update on research about Sandy Hook. So then in 2018, we had about 30 contributors to the Sandy Hook memorandum for the President of the United States edited by Robert David Steele that supported and substantiated the claims we made in the book. Or there's no reason to believe we had anything significant wrong. We did have the date of a photograph that's a particularly damning photograph because you have a SWAT vehicle already in the parking lot before the event has occurred. You can tell because there's a string of four windows in classroom 10 that are undamaged after the event may be shot out. So it's before the event you go down the flagpole and there's a familiar figure lean in grants of wall with his arms folded, Wayne Carver, the medical examiner, apparently awaiting the arrival of his portable mortuary tent. There's crime scene tape up for a crime that is yet to be committed. We in the original book that it was taken the morning of the 14th, but it actually turned out based on shadow analysis to be taken the evening of the 13th. And indeed, if I were to edit a third edition of the book, I'd make the clarification. Some of the reasons I gave for the concluding it was fabricated were wrong. It turns out there three different parties, the medical examiner on the cause of that, the funeral director about the burial and then the town registrar, which accounts for the difference in typefaces. It turns out the original version of a death certificate has a shaded portion for the medical examiner, but I would then explain in the third edition that we have even better reasons because by Connecticut state law, not even apparent is allowed to have an uncertified death certificate. And then I had two, the reports of two expert document examiners, which I would even include as new appendices now in the third edition of the book. So I'd be perfectly willing to get things right where I have the opportunity. But I think you've done a very nice job of spelling out that there appear to be broader considerations at work here. In fact, there's a whole pattern of cases that appear to be directed to stamping out public access to information about Sandy Hook because they want to continue to promote their aggressive gun control agenda and where Dave Hodges of the Common Set Show among others has observed that during the 20th century there were 19 demo sites, slaughters of all societies, each of which was preceded by gun confiscation. And we don't want America to become number 20. Yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly. And I mean, I published, you know, in my own broadcast, the research of the investigative Ryan Zimmerman, he published the genocide plans, right? I mean, he drew attention to the published genocide plans. That's what I wanted to say, right? I mean, they are published genocide plans for the United States that predict the death of 227 million Americans within five years. So it very much looks like the plans for genocide are there and now the mechanisms are put in place to enable this genocide. Catherine, we can't finish our conversation with that elaborating. There's this major entity known as D-Gulp that has published these projections for population and there's a stunning decline in about five years period from the US population by more than a half. I mean, what in the world is going on here? I think any American who are to hear this information would be taken aback. They would be floored. So we need a bit more elaboration. Well, we need, I mean, if I'm not sure if you can share the screen and actually show this because people, you know, have a much better time knowing what we're talking about than you actually see it for yourself. But what this is is that, as I said, this is this research Ryan Zimmerman published the link and the description of what he found, which is a website. And it's a very peculiar website. I would personally say it's a front for a major global intelligence agency because it calls the information on all the weapon sales, including missiles, tanks, warships, anything for every country of, you know, on planet Earth. Now which entity would possibly have all the information on these weapon sales and, you know, publish it on a website? I mean, it's the go-to source if you want to find out what the weapons cash of every country is. I mean, that to me sounds like am I six or the CIA, right? So I, for this reason, I call this the CIA front website, okay, and it's spelled digldea.gov.com. And you can go to digl.com and type into the search bar the name of any country. The first page, result page that for me, you will say we're sorry, no results found, but don't be fooled beyond the equipment tab. That is misdirect you, you know, nothing to see here, you know, move along. No, no, no, you have to click on the country tab and then you will see the country file and there's a country file for every country and it has at the top a population. So it's kind of pretty much like a Wikipedia entry. It lists the country, the population, the square kilometers of its area and some other parameters. But at the top it lists population for 2017, which for the US is 327 million. And then at the bottom it has something called forecast 2025. And the forecast for the population in 2025 is 100 million. So the question is where do 227 million Americans go over the next five years? Do they leave the country? Well, if 227 million Americans go to Mexico or Canada, right? I don't think that would work. They are not enough houses. So it very much looks like these 227 million Americans are expected to somehow puff into thin air over the next five years. In other words, they are expected to die. Right? So the question would become of what cause and it could be a multiplicity that it become activated here, including 5G, which turns out to be a killer mechanism. I cannot believe any sane society would allow 5G to be distributed because we have multiple indications of the dramatic effects. These are killing machines. I'm stunned by what I've learned about 5G. Yeah, but it's basically, you know, when you see these results, the first gut instinct is, oh, it must be a spelling mistake. But then you realize that every country has something similar. So Germany is to be reduced by over 50% the UK similarly. And Switzerland is to lose half its population or more. And then you realize, oh, my goodness, this is not a this is not a typo. This is a program that they are leaking here that they're showing in our face. And by definition, if you want to kill that many million people, you are looking for weapons of mass destruction. And then you can list all the weapons of mass destruction known to man. And you have to be creative to maybe think of ones that maybe you don't know about because they're classified. And they would be deploying all of them to pull off this amount of killing and that's short amount of time. Profoundly disturbing. I cannot conclude without mentioning that I'm engaged in a Titanic legal battle here against forces that are very much against the best interests of the United States. Anyone who would like to support my fight for the first amendment, they have frozen my website. They're interviewing with electronic mailing, even ordinary mailing. The best way appears now if you're inclined to join the fight is actually right to me directly to the James Fetzer legal defense fund at my home, 800 violet lane Oregon. That's the name of a village south of Madison, Wisconsin, 53575, but male is disappearing. Male is disappearing. Make sure you do it by some method that provides tracking or even insurance for what you're sending here. Everyone who donates will receive a formal acknowledgement from me within days. So if you send me a donation and within a week of the expected time of arrival, you haven't heard from me. Check something may be wrong. You are welcome to call me at home. 608-835-2707. I can't thank Dr. Hartman for being here today. I regard her as the world's leading expert in this field and it's a tremendous boon to have her here present for the workshop we're engaged on here in Bay St. Louis. Thank you, Katherine, for joining me today. Thank you. It's been nice. It's number.