Dr David E. Martin - Interviewed by Graham Hood & John Latter - PART TWO

23 January 2025, David Martin was interviewed LIVE by "Club Grubbery" Founders, Graham Hood and John Latter. This interview is HUGE because David outlines the path we MUST take if we want to pursue justice AND get justice, on all things Covid-19.

Here is the transcript of Part TWO.

Graham: Well, hi everyone and welcome to part two of our Club Grubbery interview with Dr. David Martin. John, the first hour was sensational and we're in for a ride in the next hour, I'm sure. Yeah, put on your seatbelt. Fasten your seatbelt. If oxygen is required, a mask will drop from the unit above your head. Let's get into this, David Martin. You hit us both barrels with an inconvenient truth that we have been desperate. the Australian people to understand for a while. As I said earlier, we are trying very hard on this podcast to provide an opportunity for people who are just waking up to wake up as gently as possible without being scared back into sleep again. But we've got to the stage in our history globally with everything that's going on in the world and politically it's just going nuts at the moment. We're seeing a radical shift from far-left wing. It's obviously going to swing back pretty far to the right. A lot of people want to catch the pendulum as it comes through and hold it for a while. So, I want to unpack some of that stuff as it's unfolding in the USA in particular. And what a blessing it is that of all the times we've wanted to get you on, we get you on the day after Trump bags the World Health Organization and Biden pardons Fauci, which is an admission of guilt. So, let's get right into this. John's got a whole bunch of questions. Johnny, take it away.

John: Thanks guys. Well look, I think it would be remiss of me not to ask this question, David, just given my history with New South Wales Ambulance, which was one of the biggest ambulance services in the world. A lot of people lost their jobs, whether it be in the police, the fire, ambulance, cafes, you name it, teachers, it was just a terrible time in Australia, down under. President Trump in his executive orders has reinstated those military officers that were sacked and given them full pay. I mean I personally know that the ambulance service back in 2021 in August issued a clinical safety notice on myocarditis and pericarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and that came from the Clinical Excellence Commission. Now that was issued ONE Month before Brad Haddard, the Minister for Health in New South Wales demanded that all health care people have two vaccines. We subsequently took them to the Supreme Court in New South Wales and Kerry Chan, Dr Kerry Chan, gave evidence to say that the vaccines were safe and effective and that they stopped transmission, and the judge subsequently said that she couldn't allow me to go back to work unvaccinated because I was a wolf in sheep's clothing.

David Martin: Yeah, so let's unpack that. Pfizer and Moderna both knew in 2018 that the injections as they formulated those injections were going to create myocarditis. They knew that they were going to create the unleashing of rapid cancers, which we now call turbo cancers. They knew that. And, the doctor you gave reference to perjured themselves in front of your Supreme Court. That's perjury. That's a crime, because the evidence that was available at the time was unambiguous and absolutely certain. So, it's important for us to understand the first part of your question, John, is there's a civil action about perjury, and that's something that needs to be taken up right away. That must be prosecuted because the health care system cannot be allowed to say they did their best when their best was wilfully ignoring published science and the wilful publication of science that is ignored, which we now know in the hospital protocols where they used remdesivir (NOTE: Marketed in New Zealand as Veklury) we know that in 2017 and in 2018, the World Health Organization knew that remdesivir had a higher incidence of fatality in Ebola patients than Ebola had. It had a 53% mortality rate. 53% mortality for a drug treating a disease that didn't have a 50% mortality rate. When the treatment is more deadly than the disease, you've got a problem. That's published data. When we know that the pseudo-uridine that was included in the Pfizer and Moderna shots, we know that the pseudo-uridine was a pro-cancer agent. We know that the spike protein ever since 2002, in fact, we could argue if you go back and you look at Ralph Barric’s paper from 1996 and again in 1999, he proved that the spike protein as modified would hit inflammation in the cardiac cells of any vertebrate that actually it was exposed to, so much so that in early clinical trials, every single patient animal died from heart failure and from heart inflammation. That was all published, and that goes back to 1999, John. So, your physician who you just referenced wilfully lied to the court. This is where I talked about in the past, we need to really understand what's the crime. The crime is perjury. The crime is a judge who probably was not independent. I hate to break it to you, but the judiciary in Australia, just like the judiciary here in America, is not free, fair, and independent, and it's highly likely that somebody actually got to the judge, but the prosecution of that case is now available for appeal, because we know the evidence is that the expert witness that formed the judge's opinion actually perjured him or herself. That's a crime. And so, what I would do is I would start with making sure, and this is what I've advised people all across the world, start with the crimes that you know are crimes. The problem, John, is that most lawyers, most barristers in Australia don't know the facts. And so, what they'll do is they'll turn this into a labour case. John should get his job back. Well, here's the problem. That's a subjective call, because the judge is going to say, well, I was doing the public service interest by making sure that we didn't have unvaccinated people doing the thing. Now, the facts are that we also have another crime, and the other crime is deceptive medical practice The passing off of a thing as a vaccine that we knew was an experimental gene therapy that we knew was going to harm and kill people. That's a civil anti-criminal act in Australia. And there's a thing in the Commonwealth, and I know it sucks when a bow tie wearing American tells you about Commonwealth law, but strap in, like Graham said, here's some turbulence coming. The fact of the matter is you have a provision in your laws that we don't have in America called fraudulent inducement. And there's a very particular position inside of fraudulent inducement that every Australian should know about today. So, this is … can we go into law school 101 just for a second? And by the way, there's not a law school in Australia that'll teach you this, so you're only gonna get it from a bow tie wearing Virginian. You have a principle in Commonwealth law called fraudulent inducement. And what that means is that when you are actually coerced or manipulated into doing a thing, when the person advancing that cause is willfully committing fraud, meaning that they are actually misrepresenting the facts or incompletely representing the facts. So in fraudulent inducement, it's both. It's you're either lying or you're omitting things that would otherwise inform a person, both of those things. The cool thing about that particular legal standard in the Commonwealth is that you are required to restore people to their pre-injured state. You hear what I just said? You have to return them to their pre-injured state. That's an interesting and very tough call. But the first case in Australia that brings fraudulent inducement is going to melt down your public health service. And the reason is because we know that they knew, or they had ample reason to know, that what they were promoting was in fact a fraud. And by the way, that's not my opinion. That's published data that goes from 2018 all the way back to 1998. So, no one can actually say this was not knowable and known. But what we do is we take a fraudulent inducement case forward and John, guess what that does? That means that they not only have to reinstate you, but they have to put your reputation back. They have to give you back your credentials. You know, Graham, when you get removed from a cockpit or you know, Qantas does whatever it does, you have to restore a person back to their pre-injured state. That means rank, that means position, that means reputation, that means economic loss, that means all those things. And do you realize that I have not heard a single Australian ever use that terminology ever? But it's your law. We don't even have it here in the United States. You guys have it. All across the Commonwealth, you have it. Every Commonwealth country could use this.

Graham: Wow.

David Martin: And so, what I would do is I would pick on things that we know work. Because that way, it doesn't become a “he said, she said”, “I was doing my best”. No, you weren't. You were perjuring yourself. You were wilfully supplanting facts that you knew would go against your argument. You knew you were doing this. And that's why I said before. You know, when somebody like Dan Andrews gets up and says, “well, we're doing our best”. The only thing he was doing his best at was covering evidence so that the public would be misinformed. That's what he did well.

Graham: Yeah.

David Martin: But we need to go after the real crimes, John. That's how we get that justice served.

John: It seems so difficult to get the justice system, the police, anyone in Australia to take any... to take this seriously. I've been to the police station, I don't know how many times, numerous people have made complaints. There hasn't been a successful lawsuit, really.

David Martin: That's a great point. And let me jump in, John, because you just touch a raw nerve. So, I'm gonna just hop on that one for a sec. Here's the problem. We talked about this in that first hour conversation, guys, but we talked about the fact that, you know, there is a complacency and ignorance kind of harms us because we're not fully informed of the facts. And that's true. That's true globally. That's not an Australia problem. That's not an American problem. That's a world problem. But I'm dealing with a very tragic case right now in Oklahoma. I'm going to just unpack it a little bit because it's important to point this out. In Oklahoma, there's a particular family. The family had a 17-year-old daughter who, against parents' wishes, without informing them, pressured by friends, went and got the jab one, and then turned 18, and a couple weeks into her 18th year, got second jab, died two weeks later. So that's the facts of the case. It's a tragic story. The parents are devastated, but they're fighters. And they've decided that they are going to fight for the life and the legacy of their daughter, Trista. Okay, so that's the facts. Now, here's the problem. The problem is a bunch of well-meaning attorneys have tried to talk to them about what they can and can't do, but the problem is the attorneys they've talked to don't know the law. So, what they do is they go, well, this feels bad. This feels wrong. We should do x, y, or z. But here's the problem. The problem is if you don't understand the legal principles that are at play, you are going to bring a case that is going to prejudice the outcome. And in all likelihood, you're going to lose because you argued the wrong case. It turns out in the same jurisdiction where the crime took place, we happened to have a sheriff. We happen to have a prosecutor who I was able to speak to during the pandemic, who actually believes in enforcing the law. But what did we have to do? We had to get the parents, and we had to get the prosecutor and the sheriff to actually understand the common principles of law that they had to pursue. Because all of us have a gut feeling. And by the way, every Australian listening to this has a gut feeling they were duped. Everybody knows that. And everybody knows that somewhere somebody, there's a bad guy that did it. Everybody knows that. We're not debating that. But what most people don't know is how do you present an argument that has a chance of surviving? If you go to a police station, if you go to a prosecutor, if you go to court, how do you make sure you make an argument that has the chance of succeeding? And this is tragically the case in Australia as it is in America, where hundreds and hundreds of well-meaning people have gone, this feels wrong. They're right. It does feel wrong. But then they argue a case that has no ability to succeed, which then defeats them morally on a second level. They're already injured. And then they're failed by a justice system. But they're failed by a justice system because they did not understand how to prosecute the case. And that's why I'm saying that what has to happen across the world, this is not unique to Australia, but uniquely Australia and the Commonwealth have tools that the United States doesn't have. And that's why I'm saying there's a really compelling argument that can be made to say, let's put the evidence of perjury in front of the court. That's an open and shut case. Did this doctor lie? The answer is objectively, yes. That's a great case, because you don't have to do discovery. You look at their words, you look at the facts, you go, one of these things doesn't match. Done. We can go to the public health service. We can say, did you know on April 20 of 2020 that this was an experimental gene therapy? And did you know that you called it a vaccine when it didn't meet the legal standard of what a vaccine is? That's an open and shut case. We have to argue cases that can win. And tragically, one of the greatest sufferings in COVID is we've been convinced that the judiciary has failed us, and that's not entirely true. We have failed in using the judiciary appropriately, and as a result, it has failed us. That is true. But we need to inform ourselves, and that's why conversations like this are so critical.

John: And I think our health system, our health providers have failed us. I mean, in Australia, the regulator, David, has essentially censored physicians from talking out. The TGA have failed to recognise people that are vaccine injured. I mean, even in America, we find out, you tweeted only a couple of weeks ago that there's a liability on the numbers that can be. I mean, it's horrific, isn't it?

David Martin: It is, and you're bringing up a very important point. But once again, and by the way, let's just pause for a second. Thank you both for doing this interview. I know I'm kind of too hot to handle for some people. And I'm super grateful that you're taking the time to do this. But it's really important to understand that once you have a command of the facts, then the actions you can take are actually informed. As you pointed out, when the National Vaccine Injury Prevention Act or Compensation Act happened in 1986, people didn't realize that there was a financial incentive put into the law so that injuries wouldn't be reported. They literally incentivized people to lie. It's in the law. Now, if the public had actually seen that before Reagan signed it into law, if anybody had ever bothered to point that out before it was signed into law, people would have lost their minds. But it was done under the cloak of darkness. Nobody actually got to see it. And not unlike what happens in your parliament. I mean, listen, Canberra can decide to change a law in the middle of the night one night, and the public didn't even know it was up for debate. I mean, they can just go up, change the law, right? The vigilance that is required here is critical. The literacy that's required here is important. And shows like this and conversations like this highlight for everybody how little we actually know about the tools that we do have at our disposal. We don't know what they are because we've never been informed. So it's a great point, John, you're absolutely right.

Graham: Keep going, John.

John: It's an interesting concept, the fact that Trump and RFK are likely to make some sweeping changes in relation to health. I mean, what do you think that that's gonna do in the playbook on vaccines in their entirety, not just the mRNA ones?

David Martin: Yeah, well. Now, I'll kick another hornet's nest. Why not? We've got every other reason to. Let's go ahead and kick this one. Half of the problem is solved if we get rid of the World Health Organization membership. The other half of the problem is we need to have a disclosure of what exactly happened when Janet Reno, our U.S. attorney general, signed the classified settlement agreement with Bill Gates, which suddenly became the basis reputation laundering exercise called the Gates Foundation. Turns out that the Gates Foundation is, I think the fifth in total dollars, the fifth largest sovereign contribution to the World Health Organization. Now, the reason why I call it a sovereign contribution is for the simple reason that while I do not have, because I cannot have, because this entire investigation was sealed, I do not have the information about what Janet Reno actually signed after Bill Gates was found guilty of being a monopolist, a racketeer, and an antitrust violator, which let's call him what he is. He's a criminal, so every time everybody celebrates and fawns all over Bill Gates, every time he travels around the world, you're celebrating a convicted criminal. Let's get really clear on that. It turns out that he was so good at racketeering and he was so good at antitrust violations, guess what they allowed him to do? They allowed him to set up a money laundering exercise in the form of the Gates Foundation, which conveniently provides money for, oh, that's right, Gavi, the vaccine promotion platform, and the World Health Organization, and all kinds of other things. And the fact of the matter is, that's why I said in the previous hour, we've got to celebrate the fact that Anthony Fauci's pardon gives us ammunition now to start going after the Gates Foundation and the Welcome Trust. Equal opportunity. Jeremy Farrow is every bit as corrupt as Bill Gates, and he was every bit as bloodthirsty as Bill Gates on the vaccine side for the Welcome Trust. So we got to put both of them on the block together. But the fact of the matter is, we have a situation where we have two organizations, the Welcome Trust and the Gates Foundation, which are driving the interests of all the public decisions that are being made and we have to make sure they go down too. So Bobby Kennedy and President Trump can do all the things they're doing with the World Health Organization, and by the way, I commend them for that. But until the Gates Foundation is shown for what it is, which is a money laundering exercise that allows the profiteering for the dissemination of public policy driven injections, which are harming, killing and maiming populations around the world until they're held to account, we don't have any chance of ending this tyranny. And let's get very clear on why I call them the criminal organization that they are. When the World Health Organization was established, in its founding charter, it gave itself absolute immunity from all forms of criminal prosecution. Hey, guys, have you ever woken up one day, just kicked out of bed and gone, I'm just going to give myself blanket immunity from every crime that I could ever commit without first thinking about the crimes that you're going to commit. You think that if you gave yourself blanket immunity from prosecution, it might be because you fully intended to have things done that might be prosecutable? Now, I don't know, Graham. When you were up in the cockpit, I don't know if you got crazy sometimes and just flew the plane sideways for the fun of it, but the fact of the matter is, and I don't know how you did with your ambulance, I only want to ask, you probably had photo cameras that you ran through without putting your whatever identity up. I don't need to know these things, but what I'm going to tell you is you don't have to give yourself immunity if you don't intend to commit a crime. And you don't have to give yourself absolute immunity from investigation and prosecution unless you intend to commit a crime. And as I've said about the World Health Organization from its foundation, because people seem to forget the fact that the World Health Organization is the rebranding of the Standing Commission on the opium trade. That's what it was before it was rebranded the World Health Organization. These were drug dealers running a drug cartel. And it turns out that it's bad for a brand to say that you're the drug dealers running a drug cartel. So what you do is you call yourself the World Health Organization, but it is the same organization. It just got a new brand and it got a new office in Switzerland. It's still a criminal drug cartel. And the Gates Foundation is the prop up. that is going to be the end run that is going to be used to finance the same campaigns of terror, which is the reason why we have to make sure the Gates Foundation is blown up and shown for what it is as well.

John: How do we shut them down?

David Martin: Well, the good news is once an antitrust racketeer, I think always an antitrust racketeer. The fact of the matter is there is in the United States two antitrust laws, the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act. And the Clayton Act is a particular law that very few prosecutors in the United States understand, but the Clayton Act makes it illegal to do what's called interlocking directorates. Let me put that into kind of plain English. What that means is that directors of competing corporations and competing economic interests cannot sit on a common board. The reason is because obviously that is going to harm competition because you're going to have insider information that those entities are going to have about each other's activities. And the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board, which is an arm of the World Health Organization, it's the organization that said on September 18, 2019, that they were going to have an accidental or intentional release of a lethal respiratory pathogen so that the world would accept a vaccine by 2020, that organization is a violation of the Clayton Act. It is an illegal organization. Giant shock, are you ready for who's on that? Dr. Elias from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Anthony Fauci, Dr. Gao from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Jeremy Farrer, who is the head of the Welcome Trust. These are all illegal actors sitting in an illegal board doing illegal actions, admitting to the release of global terror on the earth so that their commercial interests are served, guys. This is not for any other reason. And I know it's so hard for people to wrap their head around this. But the fact of the matter is, if you guys didn't have the reliance on the Commonwealth drug cartels in the form of Burroughs Welcome and in the form of AstraZeneca and in the form of Pfizer and in the form of other drug cartels that run Australia, if you were not in the stranglehold of the drug cartels, you would actually have a government that might work. But the Australian government covered, you remember this, and the New Zealand government covered the contracts, which are supposed to be daylight contracts. They're supposed to be public documents that the public can see and the public can hold to account. They did secret agreements so that the terms and the conditions of the contracts were hidden from the public because they knew they were breaking the law. Why do you do that? You do that because you're a criminal, that's why. And these are laws that must be upheld in the Commonwealth and across Australia.

John: How significant is it that the Clayton Act and the foundation of the World Health Organization happened within seconds of each other virtually? I think it was 1913, wasn't it?

David Martin: Yeah, now, that's a great point,

Graham. And I find it so fascinating that when you actually look at the foundation organizing efforts in these areas, it is absolutely the case that we have a world filled with these ironic coincidences that are not ironic and they're not coincidences. Just like we didn't have, you know, October event 201 where we actually had coronavirus, allegedly in a tabletop exercise, which happened to match exactly the events that happened three months later. Those things don't happen in real life. This is all planned. This is all an act of conspiracy and it's all a crime. But the fact is that when we go back and we look at what started off back then as a series of public health measures, we'll see that there's common fingerprints. The Rockefeller Foundation, which became very instrumental in setting up the American Cancer Society. Giant shock. A public foundation to cover for, oh, that's right, the cancers that the Rockefeller's drugs we're actually initiating in the human population. Isn't it fascinating? We create a charity to mask the fact that we're creating a disease. Does that sound familiar? We create a charity called Gavi to mask the fact that we're killing people with vaccines. Giant shock. It's the same playbook over and over and over again. And what we have to do is understand that these roots and these foundation elements are so vital so that the public doesn't believe the nonsense, which is the propaganda nonsense, that this was an accidental global pandemic that happened in 2019 going into 2020. That was not the case. This was an orchestrated terror campaign for the purpose of advancing a vaccine initiative using a gene therapy that was going to harm, maim and kill human beings.

John: The US exiting the WHO, David, what do you think the ramifications of that are? I mean, it obviously leaves a void there of funding, but is it possible that the WHO could become more of a mischief?

David Martin: Well, so let's kind of take this step kind of one step at a time, right? If you go back to the 1950s, late 40s, early 50s, when all these multilateral organizations came out of the Bretton Woods Conference. What you know is that the United Nations and all of its affiliated organizations, and all of them, World Health Organization being just one of them, all of those organizations actually rely heavily on two different funding arms, and most people don't know this, but the United Nations and all of its derivatives … if you go to the financial statement of these organizations there are typically two lines. There is actually the contribution from a government. And then right below that, there's another contribution that's listed, which is the corporation for America, the corporation for Great Britain. There are two different funding sources and nobody has had transparency on what exactly the top line versus the second line is in all these contributions. Ironically, nobody bothers to ask the question because they never bothered to look at the financial statement of the World Health Organization. So we could technically pull out of the World Health Organization as the United States of America, but the corporation for the United States of America could still be funding it. That's why I want to make sure we're clear on this. Same thing happens in Australia, same thing happens in New Zealand, same thing happens all over the place. Where you have these two different line items, and that is for the lack of transparency that it provides. Because remember, these crimes all happen only because they're hidden from the public. If the public knew these things, they would never stand for it. But they don't know it, which is why they're allowed to perpetuate. And so, what we don't yet know, guys, is whether or not that true exit from the who is for both of our institutions or if it's just for the United States of America. And if you read the executive order, it is just for the United States of America right now. So, we need to understand that. We also need to make sure that the conversation that Gates and Trump had a couple of weeks ago at Mar-a-Lago doesn't turn into the side deal that Janet Reno cut with Gates back when the Gates Foundation was set up to launder his reputation. Because the fact of the matter is, I'm still worried that the Trump administration may not have taken seriously, the criminality of Bill Gates. And certainly, if you read the transcript of his comments after his meeting with Trump, it's not overly optimistic. It does look like there was some interest on their parts to work together. So, I don't know the outcome there. What I do know is that the more we have these conversations, the less the likelihood is that they can continue to act with impunity when it comes to the way they're treating their sense of obligation to transparency to the public.

John: And that is very important, obviously, to get that message out to everyone, because, I mean, we've got these institutions here in Australia that seem to have popped up out of nowhere as well. And they're all fuelling the same message, like the Burnett Institute headed up by some Professor Crab that keeps turning up on the ABC and everywhere else saying, oh, get the jabs and get this. I mean, it's all the same playbook, it's just the scale of it, I suppose.

David Martin: Correct. And I think it's worth pointing out, John, that if we go back and we look at this playbook, there's no difference between this one and what happened with Anthrax. There's no difference between this one and what happened with the first round of SARS that happened with the bird flu, that happened with MERS, that happened with the next bird flu, that happened with swine flu, which happened with mad cow disease. The playbook is exactly the same. You create a pathogen, scheduled pathogen. That pathogen is allegedly unleashed on the population. The population must clamour for a vaccine because that's the only programming that's allowed to be discussed. And the minute the public clamours the vaccine, we mysteriously already have it made. Right, we had a whole bunch of it sitting around for the thing that nature just came up with a couple of weeks ago. We already have it made like that mysterious Sequoia Pharmaceuticals case where the day after the CDC patent was filed on SARS, they had a vaccine for it, the next day. Those kinds of things are happening over and over again, and that pattern is back to our conversation in the previous hour. That pattern is what needs to be the subject of an active criminal investigation because the complicity of Australia, just like the complicity of the United States, was that the public was harmed because the public servants and the public sector failed the public.

Graham: David, clearly this whole thing could progress a whole lot further and we can get a lot more done if Trump actually admits that warp speed was a failure and that he made some critical decisions back then which didn't serve the globe very well at all. I don't see that as likely to happen anytime soon. What do you think?

David Martin: Well, so if you look at his statement around leaving the WHO, he did say that the reason why he was pulling out in part was their mismanagement of the pandemic. That's certainly the first indication that I've seen coming out of him at all, that there was any mismanagement of it. So, I would say that is a glimmer, maybe, maybe a glimmer of hope that the story may start falling apart. I also think that the absence of a pardon of Alex Azar, the then Secretary of Health and Human Services, put as solely responsible for misleading Trump in the early days, and this goes back to September 19th, 2019, when Alex Azar got President Trump to sign the executive order for DNA-based vaccine production during a period of time when there was no reason to do that. So, we know that he was getting the ground ready for what became Warp Speed, and I've said many times that Alex Azar was in fact the traitor that got Trump to sign away the death warrant, which ultimately became the death warrant that killed so many people. Alex is certainly a main character in this problem, and we don't talk about him. You don't hear his name mentioned hardly at all, but he is actually a protagonist in this story that needs to be held accountable. And not surprisingly, guys, I know this is going to come as a shock after all of the stuff we've been through, but Alex Azar, when he was appointed to becoming Secretary of Health and Human Services, was under investigation for what? Oh, that's right, antitrust violations for his job at a pharmaceutical company where he was price fixing the cost of diabetic medications for poor people in Mexico. A crime for which they were ultimately found guilty. Did you hear what I just said? We got a colluding, price fixing, antitrust monopolist. to come into the Health and Human Services Department so that he could do what? Run a price fixing, monopolist, racketeering exercise when he was the Secretary of Health and Human Services. I mean, at least give him credit for getting a credentialed guy, right? If you want a crime done, hire a criminal. That worked. But all kidding aside, we have to understand that this fundamental issue, and guys, we've been going for a while, but remember what's the point of all of this. The point is that the public can only start holding people accountable if they are informed of facts that they have not been able to access. And these facts are not because Dave Martin has great recall. These facts are because this information was hidden from the public intentionally so that the domestic and international terror campaign could prevail. If any of this information had been in the common conversation in New South Wales or in Queensland or in Victoria … if any of this information was publicly known in 2020, we would not have the injuries and deaths that we now have across Australia.

John: Well, it's across the world, isn't it? I mean, I've seen reports from you, David, saying that this is World War III, that there's going to be-

David Martin: There's no question.

John: Three, is it two billion you're estimating?

David Martin: Well, I've said, yeah, I mean, if you look at their official numbers and their official statistics, I've said that two billion people will ultimately be affected. And what that means is that is going to be the death and disability of a lot of people. But remember that every person- who has an individual who becomes a caretaker for a disabled parent or child or loved one or neighbour or whatever else, every person who now has full-time care of a person who's no longer capable of operating as a healthy individual, that person is equally out of the workforce. That person is equally out of the economy. That person is equally impaired. So, it doesn't matter whether you die or whether you survive in life support. The fact is that you're not just taking yourself out, you're taking out you plus all the carers that have to be aligned to that person's care. And that's where, John, to your point, my concern for healthcare workers, ambulance workers, everything else, the likelihood is that we will have a net short supply of nurses and doctors and healthcare providers and ambulance drivers and everything else. Why? Because we incapacitated them too. It turns out that doctors and nurses and ambulance drivers and everybody else and pilots, these individuals, when they become incapacitated, don't just take themselves out of commission. They take out the part of the economy, the part of the vital services, the part of the social fabric that they contributed to. And losing those individuals and their function has a cascading effect. So yes, when I've said it's a 2 billion number, it's because. that was derived from two reasons. One was the actual forecast that Bill Gates and the Decade of Vaccine publication in 2011 suggested, which was somewhere between a 17 and 20% reduction in the world's population, which I don't know how you feel about that, but I feel like that's probably a bad objective to put in writing. And certainly a bad objective to put it out in the public speech, but that's exactly what they did. And the fact of the matter is, guys, I know we've gone a long time, but I just want to make sure that we all are clear on the fact that in two hours, we can't go through the 3,000 plus documents that I have as evidence going back to 1996 in this particular case, going back to patent records from 1990 from Pfizer. We can't go through all of it. But what we have to do as a global society, is we have to realise that unless we inform ourselves, to Graham's earlier point, we're gonna be victims of this all over again.

Graham: So David, let me summarise, because we do need to let you go shortly. The way I see it, and I'm utterly convinced that you're right on target. You are definitely right on target. Every fact that you lay out on the line is verifiable. There's no doubt about it. So, we're looking at a manufactured release of a virus, which was a bioweapon.

David Martin: Yep.

Graham: And we're looking at the release of the mRNA vaccine as a countermeasure.

David Martin: Which itself was also a weapon.

Graham: Which itself is also a weapon, as any countermeasure is. We are led to the conclusion that our governments are complicit in the murder of their citizenry.

David Martin: That's correct. Let me end with a really chilling story, Graham and John. I can only imagine that you can only imagine that sometimes I stir the pot and sometimes I get in trouble. But I was in the barracks in Victoria in Melbourne with a Brigadier General during the land vehicle acquisition that Australia was making to allegedly get armoured vehicles. for the Australian military. And I walked into this Brigadier General's office with information which showed that the specifications for the land vehicles that the government of Australia had chosen to purchase, the armour on those vehicles had already been counter measured with fin-stabilized rounds that could go through that armour and blow up the occupants on the inside of the vehicle. And because the government of Victoria wanted to create a new automotive sector because the Holden and the Toyota factories in Melbourne were being closed down and they wanted to build land vehicles there, they decided to build armoured vehicles and I want you to hear exactly what I'm saying … they wanted to buy armoured vehicles where the armour on the vehicle had already been shown to fail. Let that sit just for a second, which means that Australian men and women in the armed forces would have been told to enter into a “coffin on wheels”. The land vehicle procurement that Brigadier General and the entire Canberra Defence infrastructure had chosen to purchase was a counter measured land vehicle, which a fin stabilized round from Eastern Europe or Russia, could penetrate and kill the occupants inside that vehicle. And I said to the Brigadier General, I said, it is absolutely unconscionable that you are promoting the purchase of this because young men and women in Australia are gonna come back with flag-draped coffins because in your office today, you are willing to purchase a vehicle which you know is going to be a death trap to men and women of the Australian Armed Services. And having said that, the Brigadier General looked at me in the eyes and he said, “you and people like you are the problem”. That death is the cost of maintaining the Westphalian system of government. That's a quote. And I want you to hear what I just said. I had a Brigadier General in the Victoria Barracks who was willing to put the lives of future men and women of Australia into a moving death trap known to be fully counter measured, and he was willing to do it to advance what he called the Westminster system of government.

John: Wow.

David Martin: Now, people don't like when I say that out loud. I'm criticized because I say things like that, but I've got some bad news for you. If you think that a government can sit with absolute complicity and say, I'm gonna send our men and women to fight in foreign wars and I'm gonna put them in a vehicle that we know is going to be their death trap, is it any wonder that they can line children up at a stadium and inject them with a lethal pathogen? Australia needs to wake up. This government in Australia has failed its public interest. It has failed its sovereign duty and it must be held accountable for that. Because the fact of the matter is, the minute you tell me that a form of government is more important than the lives of young men and women sworn to protect the country, then you have failed your role as a public servant and you do not deserve to be in power.

Graham: You're the problem.

David Martin: And I was told I should watch my back because people like me get silenced … from a Brigadier General in the Australian Army.

John: Our generals have failed us. They have been very, very weak during this entire plandemic and they haven't spoken up and they should have. And that story should send shivers down people's spines in Australia about what's going on. We've got a former Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, that was at the helm of all this mess that is now working in defence.

David Martin: And by the way, Scott Morrison has the briefing on what I just showed you. I have a copy of what he said was sent.

Graham: Good grief. And they have the heart to turn up at Anzac Day presentations. Big bastards they are. Look, obviously the people in control of all of this will do anything they can to distract us and we know all about false flag operations. There seems to be a whole bunch of them all lined up ready to go.

David Martin: Yep.

Graham: You've got what's going on in the Middle East, in Gaza, the intensity with Israel and Iran. You've got, what's going on in Europe. There are two wars ready to happen right there. All somebody has to press the button on them. Do you think they are deliberately set up in order to be enacted? Should this all get too hot about what's going on with these biological weapons?

David Martin: Listen, every single World War we had started with a public inquiry into something else going wrong. So, the fact of the matter is what we're doing right now is our patriotic duty, not to our countries, but to humanity. Our patriotic duty is to make sure that the public hears as much of this as possible, so that the lies and deceit and corruption don't have a chance to land on the fertile soil of minds that are uneducated.

Graham: Well, there you have it. How much would you love to be wrong?

David Martin: You know, every day, every single day, I would love to wake up and go, I got it all wrong, but guess what? I keep things like this around to remind myself that I'm the only person that has that, which means to him who's been given much, much is required.

Graham: Is Iran the enemy?

David Martin: Nope. Remember, we made that one too. We made that one in 1977 and 1978 when we decided to prop up the Shah. And we didn't pay attention to the Iranian people and we didn't pay attention to what BP had done to the country for its oil considerations. We didn't pay attention to any of that. So is it any wonder that a bunch of extremists took over? Nope, not a surprise at all. If we look in the mirror, I'll tell you what guys, the speck in our eye doesn't hold a candle to the plank that's also in our eye. We have to start owning responsibility for being uninformed.

Graham: We have no moral authority, that's for sure. I wasn't gonna go there, but I feel I need to. I think it's really interesting at the moment that we're seeing the rise of certain issues in our societies around the Western world that bring down the lightning and thunder on us if we even mention them.

David Martin: Yeah.

Graham: And I'm going to preempt this, David, by telling you that I have a beautiful son-in-law who is Egyptian, Muslim. He married my daughter in Egypt. I went over there, I met his family. The wedding took place in Egypt and he and my daughter have given me three of the most beautiful grandchildren. They are incredible. They were here visiting me not long ago, just a week ago. They look for all the world like Palestinian children. If they were in Palestine visiting friends or relatives, when I saw some of the imagery coming out of Gaza, it sickened me to think that my grandchildren could have been caught up in that.

David Martin: Yeah.

Graham: Yet, David, in the society we live in today, if I say that sickens me because I don't agree with geopolitical Israel on the extermination of nearly 50,000 innocent people, which I don't agree with, no matter what their reasoning. Even Jesus said he abhorred the blood of the innocents.

David Martin: Yeah.

Graham: And yet if I even mentioning this now, I know I'll be branded an anti-Semite.

David Martin: Yeah.

Graham: This is all part of the whole setup, isn't it? To discredit people who might have an opinion that could shed a little truth. What's your thoughts?

David Martin: Well, one of the things that I've been committed to my whole life, and I will continue to be committed to, until my last breath is I made a commitment early in life to be boots on the ground and make sure that I was not dependent on somebody else's information to inform my experience. And I'm very grateful that I was in Central America during the Nicaraguan War. I'm very grateful that I've been across the Pacific during civil wars on places like Bougainville, Papua New Guinea. I'm grateful that I've been in conflict zones all across Africa and South America and Eastern Europe. And I'm grateful for that experience because what I have found is that, Graham, to your point, I'm going to say something that is equally controversial, and that is humanity is good. Humanity is good. The weaponization of humanity is evil in every form it takes.

Graham: Yeah.

David Martin: The minute you allow an ideology to stand in the way of your humanity, You are no different from what Jesus said to the Pharisees. You're a bowl of vipers, right? A bowl of filth. Here's the thing. The thing is ideology cannot ever, ever take superseded position over your humanity. I don't care what tradition you come from. I offend people all the time by reminding them that the Abrahamic blessing was bifurcated. It was on Isaac and Ishmael. Last time I checked, God didn't edit that story and he didn't go, oh, sorry, there's a whiteout, we gotta go white it out. No, the Abrahamic blessing is equivalently delivered on Isaac and Ishmael. I don't care whether you like what I said, it's actually true. That's the truth of the story that you build all of your belief system on. So, news flash, wake up. Because if you fail to understand what I just said, you're telling me that your belief is God is wrong and God made mistakes. Okay, take that and see how far you go with it. My point is a simple one. We've decided to allow polarity between humanity based on ideological manufactured illusions that have no basis in reality and no basis in truth. And if we go back to the root, we find out that the truth is uncomfortable. There's a reason why Jesus said, who is my neighbour? Well, it's who is your neighbour, not who's the neighbour like me, not who's the one that goes to the right church or the right synagogue or the right mosque or the right this or the right that. Nope, sorry. It's the person who you walk past and you know, that they are in need of something you have. I'm very proud of ancestral lineage that includes St. Martin way back. And St. Martin, one of the most interesting characters, the first non-martyr saint in Christendom. And I love the fact that I bear that name, but I love even more the fact of his sainthood, which is what? He was coming through what is now modern Slovenia. He saw a beggar freezing in the snow on the side of the road and he cut. His royal cloak of his Imperial Guard of Rome. He cut it in half and he gave half of it to the beggar, and by defacing that royal cloak, he was committing a capital crime. But his act of charity and kindness was actually relayed back to the Emperor of Rome, and the Emperor of Rome actually gave him a discharge, which then allowed him to pursue his faith and ultimately became what we now know as St. Martin. What's that about? Did he check out to see whether the beggar was the right faith? Did he check out to see whether the beggar was the right socioeconomic, the right nationality, the right whatever else? No. What he did was he saw a person in need of something, and he took the action he could take. What does that tell us all? That tells us all that we each have a cloak that can be cut for the person who's beside the road. And it doesn't matter who the person is, and it doesn't matter their ethnicity or their preferences or their birth or their nationality, we have a cloak, cut it in half, and make sure the person doesn't freeze. That's the answer. And that's the answer in every instance. We've got a better humanity to manifest and it's incumbent on us to do exactly that. And it is my honor to stand with the two of you gentlemen and hopefully throw a switch in somebody's mind to go, hey, there's more to look at. So thank you for having me on.

Graham: Well, don't you go just yet. Yeah, we're gonna let you go in a second, but John, final comment from you?

John: Well, look, war and conflict have no friends anywhere and we are in a war here. It's a terrible scenario. Thousands and thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, millions of people are affected by these COVID mRNA issues, and likely vaccines for many, many years in one form or another. And I think as David has tried to point out, I think the point is here, people need to rise up. They need to educate themselves. Just trigger something in your mind that makes you go and have a look. And hopefully, we're doing that in some small way here today to excite somebody to, to look at the way they're doing things. I mean, I think back to Professor Angus Dalgleish, somebody who's dedicated his entire life to saving people. And he said on our program that, what's gone on here will make Thalidomide look like a pimple on your bum. Now, if you can't take note of somebody of his ilk saying that, I mean, I don't know what to say.

Graham: Well, I want to say, I want to say this that, um, never in never ever in the endeavours of humankind has there ever been a greater need for us to pull together. Now there are those of us who have been spruiking from the rooftops for a while now and John and I just babes in arms at this, we've only been doing it for four years, but boy do we cop it and, but we're used to that now, like we're on that, we're on that side of the fence where we're used to feeling hand grenades and we just throw them straight back. It just, it matters not. But there is going to come a time, and I think more likely that this is going to happen, where people are going to have to look at us and look at our past episodes and say, these guys were right. I don't want to be right because if I'm right, I cry for my children and grandchildren. I don't want you to be right, David. I would love you to be a hundred, 150% wrong. The thing is the only way we're going to combat what's going on in the world at the moment is for the people to come together as one. Now that means that we are going to have to embrace those people who brought down the thunder on us because we have to love them. Now scripture is clear. Jesus said himself, love the Lord your God with everything you've got and love your neighbours, you love yourself. Not your neighbour who lends you your lawnmower every time yours breaks down, but the bike you have at the back that throws empty beer bottles over your fence. We have to love each other and we will not heal our society, we will not heal the planet and we will not get the justice that we deserve by being passive and just putting our heads in the sand. I'll say it clearly, John, I think you agree. We are in the middle of World War III. These pathogens and the genetically modified organisms that are being pushed on us are weapons. They are weapons. And I hate to come back to this point, David Martin, but we can only conclude after four years that our governments are either wilfully blind to the fact or complicit in the fact, which is true either way and they are murdering their citizenry.

David Martin: That is correct.

Graham: My God. My God. So this is incumbent on you, the people watching this, to share this message, and it is incumbent on you to get studied up. Understand what's going on, get involved in getting the right people into government. I would love to facilitate a meeting on air with you and some of our politicians. A panel. I think that would be very fruitful. What do you think, John?

David Martin: Yeah. That'd be wonderful.

John: Well, let's work on that. And let's do that soon because there are things happening politically around the world. They're incredible. We could talk for another two episodes easily, David Martin, but firstly, I want to thank Kim for being the kind of lady, an Aussie lady, we must say. You married a lovely girl who has impressed you so much to dress so impeccably well every time you appear on camera. She must be a very impressive lady. I'm sure I probably flew you on a Qantas jet several times while you were out here.

David Martin: There you go.

Graham: So who would have thought, mate, who would have thought that we'd be in this in this trench together. But all I want to do now is just close with a prayer.

David Martin: Yep. Perfect.

Graham: Father in heaven, vengeance is yours. What is important for us at the moment is to get out of your way and let you do your job. It's your job to do your job. And it is our work to do your work, whatever you give us to do. And at the moment we need to love each other more than ever before. And people say that, oh, Hoodie, you're being too passive. Tough love is part of the love package. And we need to practice tough love. And that means we need to stand up on the wall and be prepared to be shot at and be prepared to say what needs to be said. But there are things happening in this world that need a spotlight put on them because innocent people are dying. They are dying in category four wars around the world. and they're now dying in category five wars. And it all happens, Father, because we step away, because we comply. If we're not part of the solution, then we are part of the problem. So, empower us not to be passive, but to be strong in our faith, to be alive with compassion, and to be filled with your wisdom, Father God. We pray this in Jesus' holy name, amen.

David Martin: Thank you, gentlemen.

Graham: David Martin, thank you so much, and we'll be in touch with you. Thanks to Adrian McCrae for setting this up. Of course, Adrian goes without saying one of Australia's favourite sons at the moment. Great to do, and we'll talk to you very soon about getting a panel together. Johnny Lardy, you've often …

David Martin: Very good.

John: You just couldn't make this stuff up.

Graham: You couldn't make this stuff up. Stay out of the trees, everybody, and don't forget, if you love somebody and you haven't told them, make sure you do. David Martin.

David Martin: Indeed.

Graham: Thank you from Australia

David Martin: Thank you very much, guys.

Graham: Bye bye for now.