Until today it was everybody's guess why the AfD party in Germany may have censored Mike Yeadon. Now a recording has been leaked which point in a certain direction.
I have just spotted this very interesting article.
It’s worth reading the article before the partial transcript
The partial transcript is VERY partial. It was a 20 minute speech. These clips are not incorrect, but shorn of their contexts, I think they’ll sound ridiculous to many.
It’s very important that the longer speech for Croatia is made available. That’s very similar to what I said in Germany.
One thing is for sure: the authorities in multiple countries do not want you & your families, friends and colleagues to hear what I’ve got to say.
Fundamentally, I show by reference to others excellent work that there never was a pandemic & no public health emergency.
Consequently, there was never the faintest reason to rush an inherently dangerous “vaccine” at the whole population.
I further show, drawing on 30+ years experience of rational drug design at high levels within the pharmaceutical industry that these constructions were designed intentionally to cause multiple harms, deaths and to damage fertility.
I close by joining the dots. Lockdowns were known to be all costs no benefits, intended to destroy the economy and financial system, particularly the sovereign currency of every major country.
We see digital ID being imposed, when it is completely unnecessary except to exert totalitarian control.
Numerous countries are trialling CBDCs, which Richard Werner and Catherine Austin Fitts say are also completely unnecessary, unless totalitarian control is your objective.
The WHO pandemic treaty will cede world control powers to hidden individuals who can require you to be injected with mRNA, or face exclusion from society & even life.
I think I mentioned that factories to manufacture billions of doses of mRNA are being built & every government has agreed to buy sufficient for ten doses per citizen. I ask rhetorically what is expected to happen to these ten doses each?
Dr. Yeadon, you are one of the few who NEVER took questionable positions. Too many are half here, half there. I cannot decide if they do so because they are unable to bravely accept the extreme corruption of the medical system they have grown in, or if they just "keep the door open"... Thank you for your courage!
It isn't as simple as resisting at any cost. Scarce resources will allow the beneficiaries of once-abundant resources to impose their agenda merely by allowing all those who submit to access their basic needs (who is going to go offline?) Growth is over, digital controls are intended to ration consumption first and foremost. The shots pushed on affluent citizens are precisely about reducing consumption.
Obviously they should have never asked him to speak (I'm assuming they knew what he stood for) but from my perspective it seems they are shifting to the center to better position themselves for the next election. Much like Geert Wilders did and it allowed him to win the election
Ridiculous, like every single effusion before it. It was confusing enough to follow the logic that the censorship of the one contribution indicated that the AfD was pursuing other (whatever) goals with the symposium, that said censorship had to do with Höcke's comments on immigration in 2015, with AfD not promoting Vera Sharav's documentary and with Alice Weidel calling Kissinger a great statesman. Mike Yeadon has now mutated into a critic of the AfD: "AfD censors its own critics".
This is how politically motivated incitement against the only party (whichever it is) that has taken on the issue of ACCOUNTABILITY works. In capital letters to remind us what it's actually about. Who is interested in compromising a symposium dedicated to this topic? That should be the question. The constant use (or rather misuse) of Vera Sharav's name as a guarantor of trust does absolutely nothing to change these doubts.
Last but not least: this tendentious account is not honest towards Mike Yeadon either. Far removed from the German political landscape, Mike Yeadon cannot discern that this here is an unmistakably politically motivated misuse of the subject.
Dear Dr. Yeadon, I hope you will read this too: Other speakers have clearly stated that there has been no pandemic, that the whole coup is a fraud and a crime, that there was never even emergency approval to the poison and that we are dealing with a medical experiment on billions of human beins. You have been censored - you cannot gloss over that - but not to hide what you have said, rather not to hide what others have said. It is difficult to explain the difference in the context of a commentary, but I will be happy to send you a translation of one or other of the speeches so that you can judge for yourself.
I am sorry. You seem to have blind faith in the AfD. All it took was some "controlled" opposition. And asking some questions. Others they don't even allow.
As I have shown in a series of articles earlier: It is of paramount importance that the people constantly hold those accountable who purport to lead them. Even if it is the "leaders of the opposition". The AfD leadership is censoring a critic of CBDC, therefore of Central Banks power. The Central Banks are for the most part private, oligarchic institutions, who pursue but one interest: that of the oligarchy. For that, they employ even the help of "useful idiots". They financed the Bolsheviks, they financed the Nazis. The were behind the Business Plot to overthrow the US government in 1934. What makes you so sure the AfD is the only opposition that must never be questioned?
I don't have blind faith in the AfD. Nor am I particularly close to the AfD, as you claimed in another comment. I just oppose the fact that the regreatful decision is being misused for political propaganda. That is all. "Controlled opposition" within the opposition has long had the same meaning as "anti-Semite" against the opposition. Thus please...
No, the AfD did not censor critics of the CBDC. Where did you get that from? Speculation. And based on that, here comes another dump of data that has nothing to do with the case, nothing to do with the symposium. Of course the CBDC was mentioned. Please stop distracting from the purpose of the symposium.
The AfD censored Mike, that's true, that's bad. What is untrue is that they did it to hide the content spoken or to stifle criticism of the banks. It is of paramont importance giving fair recognition to other speakers that you do not honor or promote, recognizing the effort to achieve accountability that the AfD alone is making, recognizing the need for the opposition to be united in supporting this effort, recognizing the need to reflect on the vulnerability of the AfD and thus recognizing the need to provide even more support so that the AfD can hold another symposium on child protection.
I never said that the AfD should not be questioned. That is also a false assertion. I said that Höcke's 2015 speech, Gauland's shortcomings, Weidel's admiration for Kissinger (which I strongly criticized on your site), the AfD not promoting Vera's documentary (unlike other parties...), immigration from Africa, Bolsheviks, Nazis and so on have nothing to do with the symposium, nor with the goal, which should also be yours, nor with the censorship of Mike Yeadon.
"No, the AfD did not censor critics of the CBDC. Where did you get that from? Speculation. And based on that, here comes another dump of data that has nothing to do with the case, nothing to do with the symposium."
That's right, they did. I never said otherwise, never. But it's speculation that they did it because of the CBDC. Actually, any conjecture is just that: conjecture, unless you got your knowledge from the AfD itself. "Assume makes ASS of U and ME".
I no longer expect my questions and arguments to be addressed. No further comment. I can't afford any more time for this fruitless effort. Just this one more question:
You show appreciation that AfD is a party that has criticized banks. I didn't notice that you ever acknowledged this or criticized the attacks on the party.
What is it now? No further comment? Or one more question? Eat your cake and have it?
Of course, everything is speculation until the smoking gun is found. But there is speculation which is founded on circumstancial evidence. Whilst the AfD have failed to let us know in what part of Dr. Yeadon's speech they saw reason for concern about a strike for their channel (nor have you pointed to anything of substance), I am suggesting that, indeed, Dr. Yeadon connecting the murderous, genocidal "pandemic" policies, especially the poison death shot, to the "obvious endgame" including CBDCs and Digital ID was something the AfD leadership (who strongarmed the organizers of the symposium) had received orders not to allow. Until you can provide a more convincing hypothesis, I would contend this to be quite plausible. Or, as Dr. Yeandon wrote himself on his telegram: "There is every reason to expect that these evil people intend to kill most of us. Why else install a totalitarian control system, consisting of all but mandatory digital ID & cashless CBDC?" He also endorsed this article as "very interesting": https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel/210
PS: Oh, and as for the AfD being critical of banks. That was BEFORE you became aware of the party. I have been following the party, for professional reasons from 2013 onwards. And I have not forgotten how complicit the present leadership has been in bringing down the original founders. None of them are around anymore. Purged.
https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel
I’ve just put this out on my Telegram channel.
😊
I have just spotted this very interesting article.
It’s worth reading the article before the partial transcript
The partial transcript is VERY partial. It was a 20 minute speech. These clips are not incorrect, but shorn of their contexts, I think they’ll sound ridiculous to many.
It’s very important that the longer speech for Croatia is made available. That’s very similar to what I said in Germany.
One thing is for sure: the authorities in multiple countries do not want you & your families, friends and colleagues to hear what I’ve got to say.
Fundamentally, I show by reference to others excellent work that there never was a pandemic & no public health emergency.
Consequently, there was never the faintest reason to rush an inherently dangerous “vaccine” at the whole population.
I further show, drawing on 30+ years experience of rational drug design at high levels within the pharmaceutical industry that these constructions were designed intentionally to cause multiple harms, deaths and to damage fertility.
I close by joining the dots. Lockdowns were known to be all costs no benefits, intended to destroy the economy and financial system, particularly the sovereign currency of every major country.
We see digital ID being imposed, when it is completely unnecessary except to exert totalitarian control.
Numerous countries are trialling CBDCs, which Richard Werner and Catherine Austin Fitts say are also completely unnecessary, unless totalitarian control is your objective.
The WHO pandemic treaty will cede world control powers to hidden individuals who can require you to be injected with mRNA, or face exclusion from society & even life.
I think I mentioned that factories to manufacture billions of doses of mRNA are being built & every government has agreed to buy sufficient for ten doses per citizen. I ask rhetorically what is expected to happen to these ten doses each?
Best wishes
Mike
Dr. Yeadon, you are one of the few who NEVER took questionable positions. Too many are half here, half there. I cannot decide if they do so because they are unable to bravely accept the extreme corruption of the medical system they have grown in, or if they just "keep the door open"... Thank you for your courage!
Hi Mike, please email me at interim@gmail.com
It isn't as simple as resisting at any cost. Scarce resources will allow the beneficiaries of once-abundant resources to impose their agenda merely by allowing all those who submit to access their basic needs (who is going to go offline?) Growth is over, digital controls are intended to ration consumption first and foremost. The shots pushed on affluent citizens are precisely about reducing consumption.
I'd like to do a podcast with you about this.
I’m personally not convinced by the claims for shortages and even if true, there’s no justification for mass murder.
Finally someone gets it! I thought I was the only one :-)
Obviously they should have never asked him to speak (I'm assuming they knew what he stood for) but from my perspective it seems they are shifting to the center to better position themselves for the next election. Much like Geert Wilders did and it allowed him to win the election
Ridiculous, like every single effusion before it. It was confusing enough to follow the logic that the censorship of the one contribution indicated that the AfD was pursuing other (whatever) goals with the symposium, that said censorship had to do with Höcke's comments on immigration in 2015, with AfD not promoting Vera Sharav's documentary and with Alice Weidel calling Kissinger a great statesman. Mike Yeadon has now mutated into a critic of the AfD: "AfD censors its own critics".
This is how politically motivated incitement against the only party (whichever it is) that has taken on the issue of ACCOUNTABILITY works. In capital letters to remind us what it's actually about. Who is interested in compromising a symposium dedicated to this topic? That should be the question. The constant use (or rather misuse) of Vera Sharav's name as a guarantor of trust does absolutely nothing to change these doubts.
Last but not least: this tendentious account is not honest towards Mike Yeadon either. Far removed from the German political landscape, Mike Yeadon cannot discern that this here is an unmistakably politically motivated misuse of the subject.
Dear Dr. Yeadon, I hope you will read this too: Other speakers have clearly stated that there has been no pandemic, that the whole coup is a fraud and a crime, that there was never even emergency approval to the poison and that we are dealing with a medical experiment on billions of human beins. You have been censored - you cannot gloss over that - but not to hide what you have said, rather not to hide what others have said. It is difficult to explain the difference in the context of a commentary, but I will be happy to send you a translation of one or other of the speeches so that you can judge for yourself.
I am sorry. You seem to have blind faith in the AfD. All it took was some "controlled" opposition. And asking some questions. Others they don't even allow.
As I have shown in a series of articles earlier: It is of paramount importance that the people constantly hold those accountable who purport to lead them. Even if it is the "leaders of the opposition". The AfD leadership is censoring a critic of CBDC, therefore of Central Banks power. The Central Banks are for the most part private, oligarchic institutions, who pursue but one interest: that of the oligarchy. For that, they employ even the help of "useful idiots". They financed the Bolsheviks, they financed the Nazis. The were behind the Business Plot to overthrow the US government in 1934. What makes you so sure the AfD is the only opposition that must never be questioned?
I don't have blind faith in the AfD. Nor am I particularly close to the AfD, as you claimed in another comment. I just oppose the fact that the regreatful decision is being misused for political propaganda. That is all. "Controlled opposition" within the opposition has long had the same meaning as "anti-Semite" against the opposition. Thus please...
No, the AfD did not censor critics of the CBDC. Where did you get that from? Speculation. And based on that, here comes another dump of data that has nothing to do with the case, nothing to do with the symposium. Of course the CBDC was mentioned. Please stop distracting from the purpose of the symposium.
The AfD censored Mike, that's true, that's bad. What is untrue is that they did it to hide the content spoken or to stifle criticism of the banks. It is of paramont importance giving fair recognition to other speakers that you do not honor or promote, recognizing the effort to achieve accountability that the AfD alone is making, recognizing the need for the opposition to be united in supporting this effort, recognizing the need to reflect on the vulnerability of the AfD and thus recognizing the need to provide even more support so that the AfD can hold another symposium on child protection.
I never said that the AfD should not be questioned. That is also a false assertion. I said that Höcke's 2015 speech, Gauland's shortcomings, Weidel's admiration for Kissinger (which I strongly criticized on your site), the AfD not promoting Vera's documentary (unlike other parties...), immigration from Africa, Bolsheviks, Nazis and so on have nothing to do with the symposium, nor with the goal, which should also be yours, nor with the censorship of Mike Yeadon.
"No, the AfD did not censor critics of the CBDC. Where did you get that from? Speculation. And based on that, here comes another dump of data that has nothing to do with the case, nothing to do with the symposium."
It has. They censored Dr. Michael Yeadon.
That's right, they did. I never said otherwise, never. But it's speculation that they did it because of the CBDC. Actually, any conjecture is just that: conjecture, unless you got your knowledge from the AfD itself. "Assume makes ASS of U and ME".
I no longer expect my questions and arguments to be addressed. No further comment. I can't afford any more time for this fruitless effort. Just this one more question:
You show appreciation that AfD is a party that has criticized banks. I didn't notice that you ever acknowledged this or criticized the attacks on the party.
What is it now? No further comment? Or one more question? Eat your cake and have it?
Of course, everything is speculation until the smoking gun is found. But there is speculation which is founded on circumstancial evidence. Whilst the AfD have failed to let us know in what part of Dr. Yeadon's speech they saw reason for concern about a strike for their channel (nor have you pointed to anything of substance), I am suggesting that, indeed, Dr. Yeadon connecting the murderous, genocidal "pandemic" policies, especially the poison death shot, to the "obvious endgame" including CBDCs and Digital ID was something the AfD leadership (who strongarmed the organizers of the symposium) had received orders not to allow. Until you can provide a more convincing hypothesis, I would contend this to be quite plausible. Or, as Dr. Yeandon wrote himself on his telegram: "There is every reason to expect that these evil people intend to kill most of us. Why else install a totalitarian control system, consisting of all but mandatory digital ID & cashless CBDC?" He also endorsed this article as "very interesting": https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel/210
PS: Oh, and as for the AfD being critical of banks. That was BEFORE you became aware of the party. I have been following the party, for professional reasons from 2013 onwards. And I have not forgotten how complicit the present leadership has been in bringing down the original founders. None of them are around anymore. Purged.
May I ask how you know on what basis I was censored?
Even I don’t know, really.
It’s an absurd idea that their censorship of me wasn’t to hide what I had to say.
There isn’t another reason for censorship.
I viewed them as allies. I wouldn’t have been invited had not those involved thought we were on the same side. They knew what I would say, broadly.
I understand it was others who decided what was to be released and what was to be censored.
I have no knowledge of the political details. I know little even about politics of my own country and far less of another country.