Kristina Borjesson of The Whistleblower Newsroom in powerful conversation with attorney Tom Renz.
Lawyer Thomas Renz discusses why he and a group of lawyers have filed a temporary restraining order against various government agencies in an Alabama court to halt vaccinations of children. Among their reasons for filing the order: FDA Emergency Use Authorization in this case is illegal; children have virtually zero chance of getting or transmitting covid; the vaccines are experimental and children should not be experimented upon, the vaccines already have an inordinately high rate of serious adverse reactions and deaths.
Listen to The Whistleblower Newsroom on BitChute or as podcast at PodBean
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, and Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Kary Mullis invented the Polymer Chain Reaction (PCR), and won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his efforts. He attempted to expose Fauci for what he really is, which is not what is presented to the public. The public interest was not widespread, nor were Mullis’s revelations accepted at the time, and just three months before the Covid scam was purposely manufactured and perpetrated against humanity, Kary Mullis mysteriously died of what was said to be pneumonia. This was very convenient for the inventors of this evil and deadly fraud, and Mullis’s invention was intentionally misused for very nefarious reasons that allowed the people to be fooled into believing that a dangerous virus and pandemic would be the death of tens millions. It was all a lie!
This four minute video tells a tale that should be viewed by everyone, and touches on Fauci’s thirty year reign of terror against the innocent. Fauci belongs in prison for life, and so do all those involved in this scam.
In the dark room, he saw a man sitting in a chair and reached for his masks on the night table.
“It’s all right, Anthony,” the man said. “I know you don’t wear them apart from public occasions.”
“Who the hell are you? How did you get in here?”
“It doesn’t matter, Little Anthony. Would you like a banana?”
“What?”
“You’re descending the evolutionary ladder. You’re turning into an ape. You’re losing it.”
“Losing what?”
“The knowledge of freedom, of course, Little Anthony. What it is. How it came to be.”
Fauci stood up, found his bathrobe, put it on, and sat on the edge of his bed looking at the man in the chair.
Recently, Anthony, you expressed annoyance at people questioning you about liberty. You said liberty was not the issue. The issue was public safety and health.
Well, it is. Safety. Freedom from lockdowns is CONDITIONAL. WE, the professionals, decide…
Are you sure you don’t want a banana, Anthony? Maybe a nice peach. They’re coming into season. I think I have a bag of peanuts in my car.
Stop that with the fruit. No one can be free until the virus is under control.
Anthony, remember John Adams? “There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.”
That was in the 18th century. We didn’t have a PCR test then.
How about a bag of grapes or a melon? Adams also wrote, “…mighty struggles and numberless sacrifices made by our ancestors in defense of freedom.” Anthony, you toss aside freedom with a casual shrug—you have no knowledge of the ten thousand years of war fought to achieve even the BEGINNING of liberty—spilled blood, courage…
I’m a scientist.
And that excuses you? Little Anthony, little ape, there is a line that can’t be crossed. You can’t take away people’s Constitutional freedom FOR ANY REASON. You can’t take it away because of floods, earthquakes, volcanos, war, disease, terror attacks.
We did. We did take it away. We imprisoned millions in their homes.
Yes. And you have great confidence as you swing from branch to branch in the trees. But freedom and liberty are on the move again.
I know which side I’m betting on.
You’ve always been on the side of power for its own sake, Little Anthony. Hubris. It delivers blowback.
I don’t think so. America is a nation of cowards and fools. They’re more than willing to surrender what’s left of their so-called liberty.
The ghosts are gathering, Anthony. They’re coming back. The souls who fought for what you want to take away. “Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.” —Consent of the governed. The people give it, and they can remove it.
Nonsense. We’re locked into a system.
You would believe that, because you’re so shortsighted. You believe you can call Liberty counterfeit money and take it out of circulation. The Jesuits at Regis High School and Holy Cross College taught you well. Strategy, advantage, deception. You traded your soul for underground skills. And now you’re gradually slipping back into the monarchy of apes.
I have no idea what you’re talking about.
Of course you do. Your old teachers would be disappointed in you, Anthony. You’ve been contradicting yourself in public—about masks, the test, the vaccine. The Jesuits taught you Aristotle. You’ve been violating his logic.
I’m the preferred authority. That’s the overriding factor.
Among the other apes. But among humans, rebellion arrives.
This is always the gamble, isn’t it? I’m shoving in all my chips on slavery.
As I said, Anthony, we spirits are coming back. We don’t like what we’re seeing. We can still disturb the sleepers.
I doubt it.
I woke you from your dream of ape glory.
By the way, have you been tested?
I’m immune. To you.
Even if you have no symptoms and are completely healthy, you could be a COVID-19 case.
Remember, Little Anthony, when you said asymptomatic people never ever drive an epidemic through transmission of a virus?
Well, it turns out I misspoke then.
You mean you let the cat out of the bag. Remember when you said masks are useless? And then you said everyone should wear one, then two, then three, and now one again? Remember when you said the PCR test, when performed at high sensitivity, turns out meaningless results—but neglected to mention that all laboratories do in fact perform the test at high sensitivity? Remember when you said the vaccine was the light at the end of the tunnel? And now you’re saying people have to wear masks after they’re vaccinated, and they have avoid large gatherings?
The people don’t understand these issues. They just accept what I tell them to accept.
You’re doing evil things, Anthony. And like all major criminals, you redefine freedom in the process. You make it into a protection racket.
Well that’s what it is. What else do people want?
You’re living proof that devolution of the species is possible. The land crawlers go back into the sea. The many-celled organism retreats into a single cell. The human opts for apehood.
I want to go back to sleep now. I have to give a speech in the morning.
I could take you on a tour of your past crimes, Anthony. It would be a long trip. But I’ll just let those crimes nag at you. Not because you feel guilt. You know your devious actions were necessary to maintain the structure you’re standing on. And the structure, although it looks firm, is unbalanced. The architecture is all wrong. That’s what keeps you up at night.
Nothing is perfect. Every position carries risks. Only the daring succeed.
You’re an ape with homilies.
The virus has many strains and mutations.
There is no virus, Anthony. You know it. I know it. There is a STORY about a virus. Your ape masters have appointed you salesman of the story. You’re a cheap hustler selling a used car.
I’m the director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Presidential coronavirus advisor.
Funny thing, Anthony. I called over there, to NIAID and the White House, and they said they’d never heard of you. I asked several people.
Don’t be ridiculous.
I’m serious. One person said, after a search, that a research lab connected to NIAID has a monkey in a cage in a lab. They call him “Fauci,” but no one seems to know why.
WHAT??
—For the second time that night, Fauci woke up in bed. He suppressed a howl and grabbed his phone and pressed a name.
A sleepy voice answered. “Who the f—k is this?”
“Hillary, it’s me, Tony. Tell me I’m the head of NIAID. I’m Biden’s coronavirus advisor. Please.”
“Jesus, Tony, having that dream again? Yes, you’re all that. You’re a big shot. We all love you blah-blah. You’re good-looking, sexy, a goddamn matinee idol. Now f—k off and go back to sleep before I have Bill put you in the psych ward at Walter Reed.”
George Orwell’s chilling line about “a boot stomping on your face forever” from his book 1984 is very close to its ultimate fulfillment. You see, the people who boldly announced that “by 2030 you’ll own nothing and be happy” and that you’ll merely “rent whatever you need” met during the week of Jan. 25, 2021 to discuss plans for a total reshaping of the planet. That’s right, I’m talking about the World Economic Forum also known as, the Davos Class.
The conference kicked off with remarks from Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum who claimed 2021 is “a pivotal and crucial year” for our future.
The weeklong conference was attended by representatives from government, banking, business, academia, media, Big Tech, and Big Pharma. Some of the more notable speakers included:
Anthony S. Fauci, Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
Bill Gates, President, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General, World Health Organization (WHO)
Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director, International Monetary Fund
Al Gore, Former Vice-President of the United States
John F. Kerry, US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate
Christine Lagarde, President, European Central Bank
Angela Merkel, Federal Chancellor of Germany
Sundar Pichai, Chief Executive Officer, Alphabet; Chief Executive Officer, Google Inc.
Rajiv Shah, President, The Rockefeller Foundation
There were also Special Addresses delivered by:
António Guterres, Secretary-General, United Nations
Emmanuel Macron, President of France
Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel
Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation
Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission
and Xi Jinping, President of the People’s Republic of China
The 7 main themes of this year’s Davos meetings were:
How to Save the Planet
Fairer Economies
Tech for Good
Society & Future of Work
Better Business
Healthy Futures
Beyond Geopolitics
Sounds good right? Well, if you would like everything in your life decided by a cabal of rich, self-congratulating, well-connected insiders then I’m sure it sounds wonderful. For the rest of us, who value independence, freedom, and privacy, Davos’ goals of saving the planet and transforming society sound more like authoritarian battle cries the likes of which even George Orwell would be horrified by.
No Return to Normal
Davos front man, Klaus Schwab has openly stated that the COVID-19 pandemic was the perfect opportunity to “reimagine our world” and even wrote an entire book about how to do it called COVID-19:The Great Reset. In fact, Schwab proudly proclaimed the world would never go back to normal after the pandemic as if this was an awful thing.
In COVID-19:The Great Reset, Schwab doubled down on his stance of not returning to normal, stating:
Many of us are pondering when things will return to normal. The short response is: never. Nothing will ever return to the “broken” sense of normalcy that prevailed prior to the crisis because the coronavirus pandemic marks a fundamental inflection point in our global trajectory. – Klaus Schwab
Predictably, Schwab wasn’t the only one who felt this way. He was joined by many government and business leaders who eerily began echoing almost the exact same statements in the media.
It was Schwab’s World Economic Forum along with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and John’s Hopkins Center for Health Security that sponsored Event 201 back in October 2019. This pandemic preparedness exercise presented an almost carbon copy of what would take place in real life just a few months later.
We’ll leave the subject of the virus’ true origins and nature for another time. But as the panel of experts predicted during Event 201, everything did change and very quickly once the World Health Organization declared a pandemic on March 11, 2020. The very same day, the World Economic Forum announced the creation of its COVID Action Platform, serving as a blueprint for reshaping global economic response to the coronavirus pandemic.
Also released was the Strategic Intelligence Platform developed to “explore and monitor the issues and forces driving transformational change across economies,” industries, and global issues. In other words, seizing control of everything vital to life on the planet and its population.
With these efforts and more, the Davos Class wasted no time with its plans to reshape the world. As former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel (and brother to Dr. “no return to normal” Zeke Emanuel) once stated,
You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.
But the real issue has always been about advancing an agenda to create a global government. The pandemic was the excuse used to accelerate this scheme. And oh, what a scheme it is.
But let’s once again let globalist stooge Klaus Schwab set the stage for the real mechanism that would be used to bring forth all the desired changes of the Davos Class. Fear!
Again, it was Schwab who recognized that,
The spread of infectious diseases has a unique ability to fuel fear, anxiety and mass hysteria. – Schwab, Klaus. COVID-19: The Great Reset
Indeed, the fear induced hysteria from a public health crisis caused the exact scenarios Event 201 had gamed out just months earlier. COVID-19 served as a wrecking ball unleashed to upend every facet of life. This worldwide social engineering experiment proved largely successful as societies worldwide were transformed in a couple of months into totalitarian regimes demanding compliance with draconian measures enacted to “stop the virus from spreading.”
In the US, it was billed as “15 Days to Slow the Spread”. Citizens consented to measures that prior to the outbreak would have been considered unthinkable such as social distancing, face coverings, contact tracing, business closures, and travel restrictions. All aspects of life were totally upended. Fortunately, the death rate from the virus was nowhere near what was predicted in Event 201. However, suicide rates, domestic violence, depression, and substance abuse all surged as the lockdown itself proved more menacing than the virus.
But guess what? All of this human suffering was predicted by the Davos Class. They knew it would be especially difficult on developing nations and minorities. They were fully aware a crisis of this magnitude would further widen the wealth gap between the rich and the poor. They had foreknowledge of the extreme damage that would be done and the toll it would take on human health, wealth, emotional, and spiritual well-being. But these sick, twisted, power-hungry vampires would use all of this chaos as part of their endgame. Their hope is that by making these inequities more visible, you will more readily accept their pre-planned solutions. And this is how they plan to do it.
Building Trust for Global Governance
One of the main themes of January’s Davos meetings was centered around “building trust.” In fact, Schwab believes that one of the most critical issues for their plans to succeed is a renewal of trust.
The Davos Class are pulling out all the stops to get you to agree with their plans. They can’t do this smoothly without your trust. You see, this global game works by manufacturing your consent through sophisticated propaganda, predictive programming, and flat-out brain washing. Unless you explicitly say no and do something to resist the plans of the Davos class, they’ll take your silence and complacency as permission to proceed with their agenda.
This is why they love to use words like inclusive, equitable, resilient, sustainable, multi-polar, collaborative and social justice to make it seem like you’re being invited to the table to help make decisions. In reality, all of the decisions have already been made for you. And none of them are truly for your benefit.
But the Davos Class isn’t stupid. They realize that many are on to their schemes and have even acknowledged that The Great Reset sounds like a nefarious global conspiracy. So, they’re resorting to gaslighting tactics like this video about The Great Reset to get you to doubt your suspicions and paint anyone contradicting their narrative as a quack.
Yeah, they love to dismiss any reports of their wicked agenda as “conspiracy theories.” But this sort of propaganda is nothing more than a magic trick. It’s street corner sleight of hand with professionally produced videos, reports, and clever marketing.
They desperately want you to believe they care deeply about you and are appalled by any resistance. How dare you even think to question them and seek out answers for yourselves!
Trust the experts. Trust the government. Trust the bankers. Trust the science. Trust the plan. Trust the Davos Class!
The COVID pandemic is just the first phase of the plan to get you to surrender to their objectives. What else do they have in store?
Agenda 21/2030 and Collectivism
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill … All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself. – Dr Alexander King, Co-founder of the Club of Rome The First Global Revolution, A Report by the Council of the Club of Rome by Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider 1991
The diabolical plans to formulate a global government were fomented long ago. The Club of Rome has played a huge role in it going all the way back to 1972 with the publication of its report, The Limits to Growth which essentially blames all societal problems on there being too many people consuming too many things. One of the primary ways this global syndicate of banking tycoons, intellectuals, scientists, bureaucrats and their cronies planned to achieve their New World Order was by promoting the threat of Global Warming, which today has morphed into Climate Change. It is the ruse of Climate Change that’s giving global technocrats the pretext to change the world by demanding Net Zero Carbon Emissions that would destroy the fossil fuel industry and completely alter the way the world operates.
The threat of environmental crisis will be the ‘international disaster key’ that will unlock the New World Order. – Mikhail Gorbachev
After centuries of running all of the industries that pollute the earth and filling it with poisons, they now want you to believe they have a plan to right all these wrongs. But the Club of Rome, World Economic Forum, and United Nations aren’t the only groups advancing this scheme. There’s also the World Government Summit (WGS), among a slew of other organizations and thinktanks working to bring about their dream of global government.
The modern offshoots of The Limits to Growth report are Agenda 21 and the Sustainable Development Goals of Agenda 2030 developed by the United Nations. Is it a mere coincidence that a global pandemic happened at the start of 2020 just in time to “usher in a decade of ambitious action” in a bid to seize complete control of the planet? Is it by accident that this pandemic has also been used to propel the climate change agenda into overdrive?
Another relevant question is who gave the UN this authority? I never voted for António Guterres the current Secretary-General of the United Nations or any of the previous ones and I’m sure you didn’t either. But back in 1992, a bill was passed in the United States House of Representatives to commit the country to implementing Agenda 21. It was sponsored by none other than current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and supported by current Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senator Bernie Sanders. Though this bill never passed in the Senate, many of its principles have been put in place over the years. No matter where you live, chances are your country has enacted similar laws without your consent.
Concepts like social justice, universal basic income (UBI), and Green New Deal policies all stem from Agenda 21 and when fully in place will do much more harm than good.
Thinking that most people are either in agreement with these plans or still locked into the matrix of false reality, the UN even had the audacity to create a website declaring a New World Order with “happiness, well-being, and freedom of all life on Earth by 2050” that brought so much blowback that they eventually removed it.
The Davos Class and their globalist minions love to pretend that their plans will benefit all humanity while continuing to hold most of the world’s wealth and resources within their own coffers. While they promise global equity, they never reveal that it means everyone will be equally poor and dependent on technocratic overlords for every crumb on the table.
Over the years many brave souls such as Rosa Koire, author of Behind the Green Mask and Patrick Wood, author of Technocracy Rising, have exposed their attempts to pull a bait and switch and leave the 99% with absolutely nothing.
At the heart of Agenda 21, Agenda 2030, Build Back Better, Climate Change, and The Great Reset is collectivism. As a pioneer of research into plans for global government, G. Edward Griffin has also explained how collectivism is nothing more than a marketing ploy to get people to give up their individual rights and for countries to give up their sovereignty to global elites.
The Insidiousness of Public Private Partnerships
Indeed, the World Economic Forum’s main purpose is to function as a socializing institution for the emerging global elite, globalization’s “Mafiocracy” of bankers, industrialists, oligarchs, technocrats and politicians. They promote common ideas, and serve common interests: their own. – Andrew Marshall, World Economic Forum: a history and analysis
One of the biggest takeaways from Davos 2021 was the constant call for public-private partnerships to lead the way in achieving global change.This “ppp” buzzword is just a fancy way of saying fascism, or the merging of corporations and government into one totalitarian entity.
What could go wrong with merging the efforts of global corporations like Bank of America, BlackRock, Facebook, Goldman Sachs, Google, JPMorgan Chase, Microsoft, Palantir Technologies, Pfizer, Thompson Reuters, and VISA with government agencies, and civil society? After all, according to Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff, CEO’s were the heroes of the pandemic! The scary part about all of this is that Davos men like Benioff really believe this and insist that you believe it too. After all, they’re really the “good guys” in all of this.
By cooperating with governments these and many other transnational corporations have completely seized control our food supply, economic systems, transportation, technology, media, utilities, natural resources, health systems, and entertainment industries. These powerful multi-million- and billion-dollar corporations have grown into a beastlike system of control that dictate the rules of the game in each of their industries and are out to destroy independent operators.
Enter Stakeholder Capitalism
If we are the new American slaves, then who is our master? The New Master, like some monster escaped from the laboratories of a noble experiment called the American dream, is the sum total of an amoral coupling between government and business. It looms as a monolith hybrid that is neither government nor business and is composed of individual strands of power that include the president, Congress, the courts, a multitude of governing bureaus and agencies, and an immense cluster of multinational corporations, some as wealthy as great nations. – Gerry Spence, Give Me Liberty!
To deal with the growing backlash to the greed and control exerted by the Davos Class of powerful CEOs and bureaucrats, Klaus Schwab has invented a new economic model called Stakeholder Capitalism, where private corporations are granted the role of trustees of society.
Here’s where that “trust” word comes up again. Along with the new book, Schwab has penned The Davos Manifesto, redefining the role of a company to fulfill a broader role in achieving environmental, social and good governance objectives.
Schwab again attempts to gaslight the public into believing that corporations can become altruistic, uphold human rights, and level the playing field to achieve equality. This is like trying to convince people that a leopard really can change its spots. They are trying to persuade us that the billionaire club is tired of operating soulless, money-grabbing machines, destroying the environment, and really, yes really want to help the little guy. Be warned though, because as the Bible says, Satan’s ministers love to transform themselves as angels of light!
And following this pattern, greedy globalists like John Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, and of course Bill Gates all transformed themselves into “beloved philanthropists”. It seems like this is also the future path of current wealthiest man alive Jeff Bezos of Amazon.
But how can anyone in their right mind believe this given that Bezos’ company conspired with Google and Apple to remove an entire social media platform (Parler) from the internet? Big Tech companies have obliterated free speech and it has nothing to do with the Democrat/Republican divide, but whether or not you agree with the tenets of the Davos Agenda.
On the surface, Stakeholder Capitalism sounds good, but dig a little deeper and all you’re going to find is a pyramid scheme with a smiley face sticker and you still at the bottom. Stakeholder Capitalism and The Davos Manifesto will only serve to increase the control corporations and their billionaire owners exert over every area of the human experience. Davos’ newly polished schemes would completely usher in the age of full technocratic dominion. They already proclaimed they want the 99% to own nothing. Why would anyone in their right mind believe this new wave of propaganda promising that mega-companies will become instruments of good?
The Fourth Industrial Revolution and Promised Utopia
The world is at a crossroads. The social and political systems that have lifted millions out of poverty and shaped our national and global policies for half a century are failing us…
Public trust in business, government, the media and even civil society has fallen to the point where more than half of the world feels the current system is failing them…
It is in this precarious political and social context that we face both the opportunities and the challenges of a range of powerful, emerging technologies—from artificial intelligence, to biotechnologies, advanced materials to quantum computing—that will drive radical shifts in the way we live, and which I have described as comprising the Fourth Industrial Revolution. – Klaus Schwab, Shaping the Fourth Industrial Revolution
The real Davos Agenda centers around using the fraud of Climate Change to usher in a technocratic, transhuman, Fourth Industrial Revolution complete with autonomous vehicles, the internet of things, advanced artificial intelligence, smart cities, and an internet of bodies to connect all humans with machines. Yes, Schwab has openly stated that “the future will challenge our understanding of what it means to be human, from both a biological and a social standpoint.”
The Davos Class wants to control the land, air, water and every resource on the planet including humans. It’s why you and I are and all resources on the planet referred to as “capital” in Stakeholder Capitalism. It’s also why COVID-19 provided the perfect gateway to advance the agenda to digitize everything and accelerate authoritarian control. Without the guise of a pandemic, where people were made to fear for their lives, they would have never been able to get this far, so fast. Digital currencies, digital IDs, worldwide 5G coverage, biometric security and an advanced global surveillance state is the true endgame. The Davos con cannot be fully implemented without it.
With talk about how much leisure humans will have once robots and artificial intelligence are taking care of the menial tasks people used to do, many have bought the lie that the Fourth Industrial Revolution will bring freedom and a new utopian era. Maybe this will happen for the Davos class, but what will become of the millions and even billions who will lose their jobs and livelihoods thanks to all this automation? Perhaps more future planned pandemics will spare them the indignity of becoming a serf or mere chattel serving the ruling class. Bill Gates sure seems to be thrilled with the possibilities (of another pandemic).
Perhaps no one has laid out the true agenda of the Davos Class better than the late Aaron Russo, who stated:
The end goal is to get everybody chipped, to control the whole society, to have the bankers and the elite people control the world.
This journey has taken us inside the devious minds of those who believe they are better, smarter, and worthy of making decisions for the rest of us. Decisions that will take away all of our God-given freedoms and plunge us into the depths of slavery and genocide.
But it is we who need to be reminded to use the tools God gave us to defeat the evil within ourselves and in this world. Though this is not fairy tale the lessons of one of the most iconic tales still stand true. To overcome increasing despotism, we need to stop cowering in fear and find courage like the Cowardly Lion. We need to disengage from propaganda and utilize the full capacity of our brains like the Scarecrow. We need stop allowing them to divide us and have our hearts renewed and filled with love like the Tinman. We need to awaken out of the dreamlike state we’re in like Dorothy and realize what is taken place. When we arise from the slumber induced by the media shills and globalist entities pulling their strings, we’ll see that they are just mere men and women behind a curtain trying to manipulate us like the Wizard of Oz.
The only way they win is by deception, fear and misplaced trust.
Is there a connection between China, Bill Gates, YouTube, and DNA collection?
Recent reports reveal that a Chinese company with connections to the Gates Foundation is involved in COVID-19 testing and poses a potential threat to American privacy, particularly the medical and health data of those who have been tested for COVID-19.
“60 Minutes has learned Chinese company BGI Group, the largest biotech firm in the world, offered to build COVID labs in at least six states, and U.S. intelligence officials issued warnings not to share health data with BGI.
The largest biotech firm in the world wasted no time in offering to build and run COVID testing labs in Washington, contacting its governor right after the first major COVID outbreak in the U.S. occurred there. The Chinese company, the BGI Group, made the same offer to at least five other states, including New York and California, 60 Minutes has learned. This, along with other COVID testing offers by BGI, so worried Bill Evanina, then the country’s top counterintelligence officer, that he authorized a rare public warning.”
“Foreign powers can collect, store and exploit biometric information from COVID tests” declared the notice. Evanina believes the Chinese are trying to collect Americans’ DNA to win a race to control the world’s biodata.”
Evanina said a foreign entity could learn about a person’s current or future medical conditions by studying their DNA and using this information to gain a monopoly over necessary drugs and treatments.
BGI Group declined to be interviewed by 60 Minutes and said the idea that Americans genomic data has been compromised by BGI is “groundless”.
Concerns around BGI also arose in late January when Reuters reported that more than 40 publicly available documents and research papers show BGI’s links to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Reuters said the research dealt with topics as varied as mass testing for respiratory pathogens to brain science.
The Gates Foundation and BGI
In March, journalist Natalie Winter of National Pulseuncovered documentation of a relationship between the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and BGI going back nearly a decade. Winter found a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Gates Foundation and BGI to “form a collaboration on global health and agricultural development with the goal of achieving common objectives in health and agricultural development.”
Specifically, this collaboration deals with developments in human, plant, and animal genomics, the study of DNA. In the press release for the MOU, the co-founder of BGI directly mentions the partnership as focused on genomics.
“BGI looks forward to partnering with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in this significant collaboration to apply genomics research to benefit global human health,” said Dr. Huanming Yang, Chairman and Co-Founder of BGI.
Bill Gates also visited BGI headquarters in 2010, according to a report from the Financial Times. The Times stated that BGI “is working towards a goal of building a huge library based on the DNA of many millions of people.” BGI’s goal is to use this information for new drugs, genetic research, and “transforming public health policy”.
It would appear the COVID-19 crisis has helped BGI and the Gates Foundation step into the role of influencing and transforming international health policy.
Winter’s report also notes that:
“the Gates Foundation has also funded BGI projects relating to genome sequencing alongside Chinese Communist Party bodies such as the Ministry of Science and Technology and Academy of Agricultural Sciences.
Similarly, Dr. Tadataka Yamada, the former president of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s global health program, serves as the Chairman of BGI’s Scientific Advisory Board.”
It’s clear that BGI Group and the Gates Foundation have a documented relationship over the last the decade. It’s equally apparent that BGI Group has an extensive relationship with the Chinese military and government. It is these connections – the relationship that exists between the Chinese government, the BGI Group, and the Gates Foundation – which has sparked fears regarding the potential misuse for the COVID-19 tests manufactured by BGI.
BGI and the DNA Testing Industry
Since March 2020, BGI has sold millions of their COVID-19 test kits around the world, including the United States, Europe, and Australia. Reuters reports that shares of BGI Genomics Co. have doubled in the last year, giving BGI a market value of around $9 billion USD.
The company is based in Shenzhen, on the coast of Guangdong, China. They have made a name for themselves by selling genetic sequencing services around the world, which has helped them to create a large database of DNA. BGI is also well known for creating a cloned pig in 2010.
The company has regularly partnered with the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. BGI and the PLA’s Academy of Military Medical Science share a dozen patents for DNA tests. Coincidentally, Reuters notes that one patent from 2015 is for a “low-cost test kit to detect respiratory pathogens, including SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) and coronaviruses.”
Further, Chen Weijun, BGI’s chief infectious disease expert, is listed as an inventor on the patent while also holding the title of one of the first scientists reported to have sequenced COVID-19 used samples from a military hospital in Wuhan.
BGI says the test kit developed with the Chinese military is not the same one sold to foreign countries.
The danger of COVID-19 tests being used as a method for gathering genomic data on the unsuspecting public is part of a larger conversation about the dangers posed by genealogy companies generally. Millions of people around the world have voluntarily submitted their DNA in exchange for information about their ancestry. The vast majority of the users of these companies, such as Ancestry and 23andMe, do not read the Terms of Service which outline how the genealogy firms can use the data.
One of the ways this data is used is to sell it to biotech companies who are interested in developing new drugs and therapies. Clearly, there are governments and militaries who also have an interest in collecting this data.
Evanina, the former counterintelligence officer, told 60 Minutes that Chinese companies are investing in U.S. biotech companies to gain access to the health data. He says most people do not realize that their genetic material represents “your past and your future as well as your children’s future.”
While there are clearly reasons to be concerned about the influence of the Chinese government and what they might do with your DNA, the reality is most governments with the resources will likely seek to mine DNA as well. This absolutely includes the United States government, military, and private companies.
One such company is the aforementioned 23andMe. In the January 60 Minutes report Anne Wojcicki, CEO of 23andMe, answered questions regarding her company’s use of the data they are collecting. While Wojcicki says that her company has “empowered individuals with this opportunity to come together, to crowd source research”, she doesn’t shy away from acknowledging that her company plans to use the information to develop drugs.
“And I absolutely stand behind: we are going to develop drugs. So that everyone is actually benefiting from the human genome. So absolutely the data is valuable,” Wojcicki told 60 Minutes.
While she says she agrees that Americans should be concerned about China’s investments in genomic research, she believes the answer is for the United States to invest in genetic programs.
Wojcicki and 23andMe have faced their own criticisms regarding how they use the data and whether the public can truly expect records of their DNA to be safe. In February it was announced 23andMe would become a publicly traded company with help from billionaire Richard Branson. The Guardian noted that Branson’s Virgin Acquisition Group said 23andMe and their “vast proprietary dataset” of DNA would allow Virgin to “unlock revenue streams across digital health, therapeutics, and more”.
Branson’s interest in the study of DNA resembles the interests of wannabe billionaire Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein had an obsession with funding DNA programs. Bill Gates is also a part of this web because of his relationship with Epstein and partnership with the BGI Group. TLAV’s Whitney Webb recently reported:
“Epstein donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the institution and Epstein was also used as a channel for making donations to MIT by billionaire Bill Gates. Gates has yet to explain why he would funnel his donations through Epstein as opposed to publicly donating via his well-known “philanthropic” foundation. Epstein’s funding of the MIT Media Lab in particular led to the resignation of its former director Joi Ito in September 2019 following Epstein’s arrest and subsequent ‘suicide.’”
The DNA-Biosecurity-Big Tech Web
What is not mentioned in the 60 Minutes piece – or anywhere else – is the fact that Anne Wojcicki, CEO of 23andMe, is the sister of Susan Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube. Additionally, Anne Wojcicki’s husband until 2015 was Sergey Brin, one of the founders of Google and president of Google’s parent company, Alphabet Inc, until December 2019. Google also owns YouTube.
The reason these connections matter is because there are common threads between Google, the Gates Foundation, companies like 23andMe, and the Chinese government. While Anne Wojcicki and 23andMe work on DNA mining, her sister at YouTube censors reports on such topics that are often labeled misinformation. Understanding the incredible conflicts of interests here is of the utmost importance.
In a coming report I will dive deeper into this tangled web of Big Tech, Big Philanthropy, and the Chinese government.
Catherine Austin Fitts w/ Greg Hunter: The Greatest Violations of Nuremberg Code in History Are Happening Now — “We Are Talking About a Slavery System”
“We just saw the Chairman of the Federal Reserve talking about the economy was getting better because the vaccination rate was going up. I think that’s code for the bank stocks are going up because we are downloading operating systems in more and more people, and our stock reflects that. We get a pop on our stock for every person we can remotely control with our operating system. . . . If you look at the deaths and adverse events, and the failure to provide true informed consent, we are talking about the greatest violations of the Nuremberg Code in history—now.” ~ Catherine Austin Fitts
Investment advisor and former Assistant Secretary of Housing Catherine Austin Fitts contends CV19 and the vaccines to cure it are more about control than depopulation. Fitts explains, “I think the bankers are trying to chip us. Moderna describes their injection, gene therapy as an ‘operating system.’ I agree with them. I think they are trying to download an operating system into our bodies. I don’t think it was an accident . . . the man President Trump appointed as head of ‘Operation Warp Speed’ was an expert at Brain-Machine interface. . . . Just like Bill Gates downloaded an operating system into your computer and made you update it regularly because of the threat of another virus, I think they are trying to play the same game with human bodies. It’s hard for people to fathom if they have not been following the advancements in biotech and to fathom how much money the bankers can make if they can achieve this. We just saw the Chairman of the Federal Reserve talking about the economy was getting better because the vaccination rate was going up. I think that’s code for the bank stocks are going up because we are downloading operating systems in more and more people, and our stock reflects that. We get a pop on our stock for every person we can remotely control with our operating system. . . . If you look at the deaths and adverse events, and the failure to provide true informed consent, we are talking about the greatest violations of the Nuremberg Code in history—now.”
Fitts says don’t believe the hype on the number of CV19 vaccines being given. Fitts explains, “One of the things I have seen and gotten feedback on is that the resistance is much greater than anything they are indicating in any kind of official statistics. There are also indications that the deaths and adverse events (from the vaccines) are much worse, and that has to be spreading virally. If you look at the people most resistant, including healthcare workers and nursing staff, they are seeing the adverse events, and they are seeing the deaths. So, I don’t trust the statistics. . . . The top doctors I trust essentially say this is an experiment, and it’s true. These vaccines are not approved by the FDA. These are authorized under experimental use. So, this is a trial, a human trial. The doctors I trust say we won’t know for 4, 6, 12 or 18 months what the real impact is. These are not vaccines. It is gene therapy and downloading an operating system. I would argue that they are not vaccinations, but whatever they are, if it follows the history of vaccinations, what you are going to see is a tremendous diminution of people’s immune systems and a whole world of autoimmune diseases that can be explained away by other things. I would guess that the leadership’s goal is not necessarily to depopulate, and I could be wrong, but their goal is to install an operating system. To get that done, they don’t care how many people they kill.”
In closing, Fitts says, “Naomi Wolf was giving an interview about the vaccine passports, and she said this is the end of human liberty in the west, and that’s right. If those things are allowed, along with the operating system, it is the end of liberty. We are talking about a slavery system. . . . The greatest navigation tool ever created is prayer.”
Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog.com as he goes One-on-One with Catherine Austin Fitts, publisher of The Solari Report.
For anyone considering getting the Covid-19 injections, this worksheet will help you do “due diligence” in determining the financial cost to your family in the event of vaccine injury. The risk of injury is serious and the costs can be in the millions. Included are all vaccine inserts with lists of ingredients and links to databases of vaccine injuries and deaths.
[Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: When we post a new interview with Catherine Austin Fitts many readers write to this site asking how they can get a copy of the featured Solari printed publication. These publications are available only to subscribers of The Solari Report. Subscribe at solari.com.]
The mouthpieces of the scientific establishment have identified the latest global security threat: antiscience. So what does that mean, exactly? Whatever they want it to mean, of course! This week on The Corbett Report podcast, James explores the game of Science Says that the self-appointed experts are playing with the public and outlines how that game is about to get a whole lot darker.
In his latest book, How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates lays out a plan to stop global warming by reducing greenhouse gas emissions to zero. A fact that seems a little ironic coming from one of the world’s largest emitters[1], whose “guilty pleasure” is flying on private jets and who just joined a bid to acquire the world’s largest private jet services company[2]. But this sort of contradiction, of placating a severe root problem with a superficial solution, is nothing strange for Gates, as a closer look into his million-dollar investments, billionaire and private company partnerships, and his political agenda show little alignment with the goal of truly curving climate change, helping alleviate world hunger, or lifting the poor out of poverty.
Gates’ unparalleled influence marks not only the extraordinary power of his wealth, but also a convergence of philanthropy, private corporations, and international institutions to shape policy and development landscapes to their own interests. But this shaping, while seemingly justified by a noble humanitarian and environmental cause, instead pushes a failed paradigm of industrialization and corporate concentration under the guise of necessary technological innovation.
While there is little doubt that we are living in moments of compounding crises, the push for new technological innovations as the path to solving the world’s problems is now quickly becoming the only mechanism. Creating a blind-spot for both the root causes of the crises we face, and how continually going down this path will only serve to exacerbate the crises further. But this avoidance of true systemic solutions is not an accidental overlook by a well-meaning technological innovations sector. Instead, it is resulting in the same giant corporations and power structures that created our current crises to sell us back their own proposed ‘solutions’.
This technological solutionism mentality is apparent in all of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s (BMGF) initiatives which, by their nature, end up denying real solutions to the climate crisis. These initiatives, grants, and development programs cover a vast area – such as food, agriculture, seed, health, climate change, education, media, infrastructure, and energy as shown in Navdanya International’s Gates to a Global Empire report[3] – and weave a complicated web of international power and influence to ensure specific interests. With the weight of investment capital held by both the Gates Foundation Trust and their personal wealth, in conjunction with their bought public media platform, Bill and Melinda Gates set the agenda across these different sectors with very little to no accountability. In the end, this works to align public opinion with private company investments, and international and state policy, to open up new markets through policy alignment and state co-investment in the name of ‘development’.
A principal example is how he spreads his agenda authority over global health by investing in international health institutions, like the World Health Organization (WHO), for whom the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation provides nearly 20% of the institution’s funds[4]. He aims to control education and the media, for instance, by funding scientific research establishments like Cornell University[5] and John Hopkins University, as well as providing generous grants to prominent newspapers[6] like the Guardian, BBC, and Al Jazeera to name a few, to publish stories aligned with his narratives.
Despite his pronouncement to help fight climate change, Gates also directly invests in the fossil fuel industry[7]. He is the largest shareholder[8] in one of Canada’s largest oil and gas companies, Canadian National Railway, while Microsoft also has direct ties to the oil and gas industries. As explained by ETC in “The Sugar Daddy of Geoengineering”[9], Gates has been one of the major supporters for extreme geoengineering (“miracle technologies”), Carbon dioxide Removal Techniques (CDR), Solar Geoengineering, and other such techniques alongside the fossil fuel industry for more than a decade. Techniques that could potentially lead to disastrous damage to the planet’s weather systems and natural cycles.
The Imposition of a Failed Agriculture Model
One of the major sectors where Gates’ private market and power interests are more apparent is in his push for agricultural transformation. The Gates Foundation has been pushing new technologies and an industrial agricultural model for decades, under the guise of putting an end to hunger and climate change.
In 2008, Gates attempted to revive the failed model of the 1960s Green Revolution in Africa by launching the AGRA[10] (Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa) program, encouraging farmers to move toward large-scale, commercial monocultures and promoting synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and high-yield or GMO seeds. Timothy Wise’s research explained in the Gates to a Global Empire report[11], shows how 15 years later, there is no evidence that the objectives set out by AGRA have resulted in significant productivity improvements and have instead triggered a 30% increase of people suffering from extreme poverty in AGRA countries. Demonstrating direct evidence of this initiative’s failure.
Source: AGRA
While many have come out to critique the failure of AGRA, it is not the only example of Bill Gates’ attempts to control what goes on in farmer’s fields. In January 2020, the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation launched Ag One[12], a new research institute that aims “to empower smallholder farmers with the affordable, high-quality tools, technologies, and resources they need to lift themselves out of poverty”. The goal is to promote Green Revolution techniques alongside new technological innovations, like data and sensor technology, precision agriculture, gene drives, GMOs, artificial intelligence predictive models, and so on, to increase crop productivity in Africa, Asia, and in Latin America as Ag Tech[13]. With the launch of Ag Tech, partnerships were also announced with the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA), Microsoft, Bayer, Corteva, and Syngenta, in addition to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, giving rise to a dangerous alliance in Latin America of industrial agriculture firms and biotechnology.
Source: Gates Notes
The BMGF clearly and proudly focuses on these partnerships and the perpetual pushing of the industrial agriculture paradigm. For instance, Gates’ enthusiasm for chemical fertilizers is well known, According to him, fertilizers are a “magical invention that can help lift millions of people out of poverty”[14], even though scientists say they emit dangerous amounts of greenhouse gases (GHG) [15], and are known environmental pollutants. Gates also sees GMO seeds as a “necessary technical solution” to agricultural development that could “end starvation in Africa”[16] regardless of their known failures, as well as their devastating environmental, social, health consequences. He has also publicly expressed his full-fledged support for highly problematic[17] gene editing methods like CRISPR-Cas9, which he has invested millions in[18]. His foundation also heavily funds the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) centers, which receive over 70%[19] of BMGF agricultural research investments, making Gates the second largest donor of CGIAR. These investments give Gates a considerable amount of influence, allowing him to shape the global agriculture and development policy agenda and serve as a convenient way to open up new markets for agribusiness and biotech in previously unprofitable or hard-to-reach markets. Policy alignment in these countries and these sectors then ensures a return on Gates’ investments.
Global Commission on Adaptation
One of the ways Gates silently pushes his vision and agenda is through the Global Commission on Adaptation[20], an international commission co-founded by Gates that pushes technological solutions to climate change adaptation and mitigation, through such things as filling in the ‘data gap’ of the global south through digital agriculture[21]. For example, the policy recommendations and position papers of the Commission triggered in 2018 a report co-authored by IICA and CGIAR[22] which bluntly stated that “climate change adaptation in agriculture is contingent on increased investment to modernize agricultural systems.” The report was actively endorsed by the heads of the Global Commission at the time.
The Global Commission on Adaptation, co- founded by Gates, pushes technological solutions to climate change – Source: GCA
Founders of the commission also include Kristalina Georgieva, the current managing director at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and former Chief Executive Officer of the World Bank; and the former 8th secretary-general of the UN, Ban-Ki Moon. The commission has 22 convening countries and is supported by a range of foreign ministers and ministries, policymakers, heads of development banks and development corporations, heads of the UN, and heads or former heads of governments. Since the end of its 2020 mandate, the board of directors no longer directly includes Gates, but still includes actors who remain close to the Gates agenda. These include Rodger Voorhies, the President of Global Growth & Opportunity Division of the BMGF and head of Ag One. As well as, Feike Sijbesma – current CEO[23] and honorary chairman of DSM, a synthetic biology and fake food company funded by Breakthrough Energy Ventures.
Breakthrough Energy Ventures: The Revolving Door for “Super Emitters”
While the political pushing of the industrial paradigm happens through development initiatives and policy lobby, where this game of billionaire profit-making and corporate partnerships is most clear is in one of Gates’ most prominent personal investment funds: Breakthrough Energy Ventures. Now being thrown into the spotlight as a symbol of Gates’ commitment to solving climate change, this investment fund is supported by other philanthrocapitalists[24] and billionaires such as Jeff Bezos, Mukesh Ambani, Michael Bloomberg, Richard Branson of Virgin Group, Reid Hoffman of LinkedIn, Jack Ma of Alibaba, former Enron trader and hedge fund manager turned philanthropist John Arnold, among other prominent names.
Breakthrough Energy Ventures is supported by several billionaires and philanthrocapitalists, including (from left): Bill Gates, Richard Branson, Mark Zuckerberg, George Soros, Jeff Bezos – Source: Great Game India
Out of the multiple startups funded by Breakthrough, seven are involved in the areas of food and agriculture, particularly through the development and marketing of synthetic biology and biotechnology products. While these startup companies use the greenwashed rhetoric of promoting ‘sustainable climate solutions’, a closer look reveals the company’s leadership teams to be riddled with ex DuPont, Monsanto, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, PepsiCo, and Microsoft executives. Raising the question, how can people involved in the very companies which created our health, ecological, and climate crisis, be in any way qualified to sell us back the ‘solution’?
A direct example of the overlap between industrial food and agriculture and the new tech-companies is, Motif Foodworks[25] a synthetic biotech company that works to create and market “plant-based alternatives” to meat and dairy products, as well as creating finished food products and ingredients. The startup makes its claim to sustainability by referencing its lack of need for land, agricultural inputs, and intensive external resources while providing enhanced nutrition. They have an exclusive partnership with prominent, and also Gates-funded, synthetic biotech firm Ginkgo Bioworks[26], which creates products for pharmaceutical companies, such as Moderna, industrial chemicals, and industrial food ingredients, such as for Motif Foodworks. Ginkgo Bioworks was also involved in a $100M partnership with Bayer to develop synbio microbe fertilizers. But this isn’t the only tie Motif Foodworks has to large industrial food and agriculture firms. All of their top leadership[27] – from their CEO, the Chief Commercial Officer (CCO), and the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) had previous tenures at DuPont and PepsiCo. Their head of Regulatory, Government and Industrial Affairs also spent eight years as the Director of Global Advocacy at Monsanto, another nine as Dupont’s Director of Corporate Regulatory affairs and four at CropLife as the VP of Science and Regulatory Affairs. Their top advisor is the ex-CEO of PepsiCo Indra Nooyi. The same applies to Breakthrough funded startups Nature’s Fynd[28] or Biomilq[29] where the Product Management & Business development executive, Rachel Lee was a former Strategy Officer at BMGF and co-founder of Biomilq underwent an internship at BMGF the year her company was founded.
This pattern repeats itself with another Breakthrough Energy Ventures company Pivot Bio, which looks to replace synthetic nitrogen fertilizers for corn monocultures, with synbio engineered nitrogen-fixing microbes. The company received a $70 million investment from Breakthrough in 2017, and then another $100 million investment[30] in the summer of 2020. Here all of the top executives are former DuPont or Monsanto executives: From the CTO who spent 30 years at DuPont and DuPont Pioneer developing industrial seed oils; the VP of Regulatory and Government Affairs who spent 27 years at DuPont as the former head of Government Affairs and leader of trade negotiations; the VP of Product Development spent 37 years at Monsanto; the VP of Communications led the global communications team for DuPont Pioneer, and the VP of Commercial Operations promoted the adoption of biotech while working for the marketing department of DuPont and DuPont Pioneer. Not to mention that Cooper Rinzler is both Director of Pivot Bio and a Member of the Breakthrough Energy Ventures Board of Directors.
Apart from the multiple problems with the development and application of these synthetic biology products in food and agriculture, the flight of ex-industrial agriculture company executives to new biotech startups signals the next iteration of industrial agriculture concentration and market expansion, not sustainable “climate-smart” solutions. Especially as members of the same companies that have continually denied the detrimental effects of their food and agricultural ‘innovations’, are now selling us back equally risky, myopic, and untested solutions to problems their companies created in the first place. Not to mention the obvious a repeated pattern of obviouse conflicts of interests present in this incestuous sector. This is why it is no surprise that Breakthrough Energy Ventures, also has an active policy toolkit[31]. Breakthrough does not just see itself as a private investment firm but is also involved in policy advocacy to make sure their innovations have a market. And in alignment with Gates’ strategy of shaping public opinion through media, a new journalism program, headed by former Wall Street Journal journalist Amy Harder, is also under development. But while these factors are purposefully obscured, the industry around “plant-based diets”, justified as “climate-smart”, a “sustainable diet” is starting to boom.
The False Promise of Fake Food
One of Gates’ most recent promotions is his prescriptions of synthetic foods for developed countries as a means to combat climate change. In a recent interview with MIT Technology Review[32], Gates says he thinks “all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef.” Fake food replaces animal products with highly processed food grown in labs, like fake meat, fake dairy products, or fake eggs. It is made possible by technical innovations such as synthetic biology, which involves reconfiguring the DNA of an organism to create something entirely new. For instance, plant-based meat companies like Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods use a DNA coding sequence from soybeans or peas to create a product that looks and tastes like real meat. Some companies are also investing in cell-based meat[33], grown from real animal cells, but it has yet to reach the market.
Source: Impossible Foods
More and more firms are getting involved in this fast-growing market, like Motif Foodworks (plant-based meat and dairy alternatives), Ginkgo Bioworks (custom-built microbes), BioMilq (lab-grown breast milk), Nature’s Fynd (fungi-grown meat and dairy alternatives), Eat Just (egg substitutes made from plant proteins), Perfect Day Food (lab-grown dairy products) or NotCo (plant-based animal products made through AI), to name but a few. The industrial meat-industry giants are also profiting from this blossoming market. Meat producers like Tyson Foods (which has invested in Memphis Meats and Future Meat Technologies which both create lab-grown meat replacements), Nestle, Cargill, Maple Leaf Foods, or Perdue Farms are thriving on this trend, selling products like sausages, burgers, and ground beef largely made from pea or soy protein. All these companies are backed up by high-ranked billionaires and Big Tech investors. Bill Gates alone has invested 50 million dollars in Impossible Foods and actively finances Beyond Meat, Ginkgo Bioworks, and BioMilq, as described above.
The perpetuation of ecologically damaging practices
Fake food advocates claim it is a real solution to climate change and solves environmental degradation, while also ironing out animal welfare concerns. For instance, Impossible Foods[34] declare their plant-based meat needs 96% less land, 87% less water and emits 89% fewer greenhouse gases than conventional animal-based products.
However, fake food has a larger carbon footprint than less-processed plant proteins[35]. Plant-based substitutes are up to seven times more GHG-intensive than whole pulses. Cell-based meat also emits more GHG than animal products, like pork or poultry. Recent research even suggests that over the long-term, the environmental impact of lab-grown meat[36] could be higher than that of livestock.
Moreover, fake food is advertised as “eco-friendly”, and yet it is made with proteins from pea, soy, or corn which are being grown on a large, industrial scale, relying on tillage, monocultures, toxic pesticides, and often, GMOs. The Impossible Burger is made with GMO Roundup-sprayed soya, leading to massive ecological devastation[37]. Total levels of glyphosate detected in the Impossible Burger by Health Research Institute Laboratories were 11.3ppb, making its consumption highly dangerous[38] as only 0.1ppb of glyphosate can destroy gut bacteria, damage to vital organs like the liver and kidneys, cause reproductive abnormalities, or even tumors, as glyphosate is also a “probable human carcinogen”. More broadly, the reliance on pesticides is directly linked with long-term chronic health problems, for consumers and farmers.
Other companies like Beyond Meat[39], who market their products as “cleaner” since they are free from genetically modified ingredients, still admit to not being organic[40], and still rely heavily on monocultures and pesticides. Ironically, these plant-based meat alternatives, which claim to save animals, water, and the environment, are instead directly contributing to the food system that is threatening global biodiversity[41], destroying wildlife, altering the soils, and polluting groundwater supplies[42]. Moreover, the fake food companies’ supply chains require excessive fossil fuel transport[43], like most industrial food.
The health impacts of hyper-processed fake foods
Not only is fake food harmful to the environment, but it also can be detrimental to human health. Plant-based substitutes are likely to have a range of adverse long-term health outcomes[44], due to them being highly processed and containing ingredients like isolated pea proteins and canola oil.
New additives also made through synthetic biology are being added to these products. For example, to make the Impossible Burger appear to “bleed” like real meat, a“heme” molecule is added which comes from soy leghemoglobin, a colorant produced in genetically engineered yeast. According to the Center for Food Safety, the FDA didn’t conduct adequate long-term testing[45] before approving the color additive in 2019, and after a short-term rat trial[46] several potential adverse effects were detected like changes in weight gain, changes in the blood that can indicate inflammation or kidney disease, disruptions in the reproductive cycle and possible signs of anemia. Despite the lack of evidence that the additive is safe, Impossible Foods’ products containing genetically engineered heme are now being sold in supermarkets across the United States, exemplifying a deregulatory environment that prefers corporate profit and influence over public health.
The entire process of isolating plant-based proteins can also have dangerous consequences[47] for human health. Many anti-nutrients are found within soy that can produce harmful health effects, such as digestive disorders, hormone imbalances, autoimmune diseases, obesity, digestive disorders, neurological conditions, or immunologic reactions. Especially as the soy and pea protein primarily used in most plant-based meats is heavily processed through high heating, chemical extractions and isolations of proteins, and now genetic altering, generating compounds that are not naturally found in foods.
Finally, artificially created animal products sometimes lack several natural nutrients or benefits. For instance, lab-grown milk such as BioMilq’s can’t change in response to the child’s need, as real breast milk can. It contains no hormones or bacteria from the mother’s biome and, more importantly, it does not have antibodies[48], which are vital to babies.
Plant-based meats, on the other hand, do not meet the nutritional requirements that are fulfilled by real animal foods. Simply adding isolated proteins, vitamins, and minerals to diets does not confer the same health benefits[49] as when these nutrients are ingested as whole foods, which contain thousands of compounds acting in synergy. Plant-based burgers aren’t healthier than animal products[50], including red meat.
Patenting: making profit from life
Far from ending climate change or world hunger, the patenting of artificial fake food growing techniques becomes yet another instrument of profit-making by corporations and billionaires. Especially as 20 patents[51] are now assigned to Impossible Foods, with over 100 additional patents pending[52] for other fake meat proxies, from chicken to fish.
It’s no wonder that big plant-breeding companies like Bayer see a great opportunity in the plant-based industry boom[53]. In a 2019 investor event in Missouri, Bob Reiter, Bayer’s head of research and development at the company’s crop science division, said that plant-based meat companies “are sourcing different types of crops and that could also create opportunity for us, being a company that is a plant-breeding company”.
This patenting logic also reduces animals and nature to an “improvable technology”, in the words of Pat Brown, CEO, and founder of Impossible Foods. According to him[54], “animals have just been the technology we have used up until now to produce meat”. This means they can simply be replaced by more efficient technologies like artificial food. Fake food separates humans from nature and food from life. But we need to think beyond our strictly human needs and understand the needs of the ecological systems in which we are embedded. We cannot address the pressing environmental crisis without transforming our relationship with nature.
Missing the point of regenerative agriculture
Fake food shifts political power away from organic farmers and local markets toward biotech companies. It disregards local and indigenous knowledge and diverse food cultures that have evolved alongside diverse ecosystems. Moreover, it completely ignores the solutions offered by the growing regenerative agriculture movement. While concerns about industrial meat production are legitimate, regenerative animal grazing practices[55] can actually improve biodiversity, soil health and actively sequester carbon into the soil[56] by grooming and fertilizing vegetation and soil. Such models have the potential to substantially help mitigate climate change[57], or at least not exacerbate it further, and to repair damaged soils and slow desertification processes. This means that, in some cases, meat from grass-fed animals can have a lower ecological footprint than plant-based burgers. Studies by Quantis International demonstrated a +3.5 CO2-eq emissions/per kg[58] product in the life cycle analysis of the Impossible Burger, versus −3.5 CO2-eq/per kg[59] for beef produced using regenerative grazing practices, meaning that over the lifecycle of the animal more carbon was sequestrated than emitted.
Fake food investors and advocates fail to see how the real problems lie in the industrial agriculture model, rather than in meat production alone. Pointing toward the need to implement agroecological practices and agricultural diversity[60] to ensure a healthier environment and food sovereignty on a global scale.
Fake food is a fake solution, that aims to replace meat without challenging the profit-driven capitalist food and farming industry. This mindset explains why we will soon see Beyond Meat burgers in McDonald’s plant-based menus[61] when we should instead focus on the necessity for real regenerative agriculture and systemic change to protect nature and people’s health.
Biodiversity and Agroecology are True Solutions to Climate Change
Climate change and its very real consequences cannot be fully addressed without recognizing the central role of the industrialized and globalized food system in creating the climate crisis by contributing 44% to 57% of all greenhouse gas emissions through deforestation, animals in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), plastics and aluminum packaging, long-distance transport, and food waste.[62] Further industrialization, globalization, and now digitalization as promoted by the BMGF would mean further promotion of commercial seeds, toxic chemical use, high water usage, giant gas-guzzling farm equipment, and a massive fossil fuel-based global transport and production system, which would directly risk the rise of this GHG contribution. Not to mention, as has been shown during the initial Coronavirus lockdowns in 2020, these globalized and industrialized food systems are also significantly more vulnerable to disruptions, something climate change is already accelerating. Therefore, the way we produce our food should play an important role in how we reduce greenhouse gas emissions and directly adapt to climate change.
We have a choice to not go further down the path that has already destroyed biodiversity, farmers’ lives, and rural economies and is now threatening to fully close off the future by destroying our planet. Especially as there are other paths that farmers across the world have walked for nearly 10,000 years, which have been continually rejuvenated through diverse agroecological systems. An agroecological path that can now show the way toward a more ecological future and is now being walked by local, diverse food communities across the world as a way to bring in a new paradigm of living in harmony with nature.
Agroecology is based on a broad set of principles and includes diverse ways of farming with nature and rejuvenating biodiversity through living seed, soil, and local food communities, without the use of chemicals. From seed to table, a diversity of movements is formed by a variety of actors including small farmers, gardeners, civil society organizations, citizens, policymakers, researchers, and international organizations. Movements can also take many forms including, organic farming, permaculture, biodynamic, regenerative farming, Matsunuoba Fukukua’s vision of natural farming[63], local/ zero kilometer food chains, cooperative models of production and consumption, community-supported agriculture (CSAs), farmers markets, biodistricts[64], community and school gardens, urban farms, community seed banks,[65] slow food movements and revival of traditional[66] and forgotten foods, as well as hundreds of thousands of local farming traditions which have evolved over millennia. All of these approaches adapt agroecological methods to local contexts, to fit local needs, traditions, and knowledge systems. These traditions and approaches all put care for people and the land first, and place food sovereignty at the center of their local circular, cyclical, biodiverse, healthy, and sustainable food economies. Through these diverse methods, small farmers are feeding their local communities[67] healthy, nutritious food while simultaneously preserving ecosystemic health.
Agroecological food systems are a proven way to decrease CO2 emissions through actively sequestering greenhouse gases.[68] This is done through reorienting food supply chains to local food economies that eliminate fossil fuel-intensive methods and global supply chains, replacing them with resource recycling, low-intensity inputs which mimic nature’s nutrition, and hydrologic cycles to heal the soil and biodiversity.[69] It is also done through strengthening soils by increasing soil biodiversity, contributing both to fix carbon dioxide back into soils while reducing the need for chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Healthy soils also help sustain increased biodiversity, reducing pest and disease pressures.[70] To be specific, it has been estimated that through widespread agroecological and organic farming conversions 40 percent of the world’s agriculture greenhouse gas emissions could be mitigated in a minimum implementation scenario and up to 65 percent in a maximum carbon sequestration scenario.[71]
Along with providing a long-lasting solution to climate change, the transition to agroecological food and farming systems would also ensure the livelihoods of more than 1.5 billion smallholder farmers globally, along with working to ensure food sovereignty in the world’s most vulnerable populations. All over the world, these food communities are already transitioning to this ecological and democratic path, thus sowing the seeds of a food system in the hands of communities, women, farmers, and consumers free of corporate control, poisons, food miles, plastics, and patents. They are creating resilience in the face of deepening ecological and economic vulnerabilities through reclaiming seed, food, and knowledge as commons.
Agroecological solutions to climate change are based on a systemic approach that acknowledges the root cause of our crises, a deep understanding of living processing, and therefore, embodying a different vision of what food systems transformation could look like at the political, social, and economic levels. This true, agroecological transformation is incompatible with the industrial agriculture paradigm, as it requires a complete shift away from the hyper-centralized, corporate-controlled industrial food system.
So in reality, the Gates’ strategies have nothing to do with lifting poor people out of poverty or fighting climate change. There is nothing altruistic, coy, or ‘optimistic’ about Gates and his foundation. Instead, it is a blatant attempt for the accumulation of power through the stubborn imposition of a failed paradigm. The level of influence accumulated by Gates, a billionaire who actively admits his limited knowledge of the problems he is attempting to solve, stands to take power away from democratic governance, and calls for climate and ecological justice by replacing democratic decisions through enforcing policies that adhere to his whims. All the while usurping much needed attention, funds, and policy away from a diverse agroecological transformation.
In other words, Bill Gates and his fellow private business partners will continue to produce exponentially worse problems than the ones they propose to ‘solve’, while simultaneously working to concentrate ever more power into private hands through the dogma of technology. These described technologies are used as methods of direct imposition, without any democratic, ethical, social, or ecological assessment. All the while substituting complex, diverse, self-organized, autopoietic systems, creating a new level of illusion that is propelling us faster toward collapse.
In the end, two distinct futures of food and farming are emerging – one leads to the regeneration of our planet, our soils, our biodiversity, our water, our rural economies and farmers’ livelihoods, our health, and our democracy. The second road leads to the collapse of the planet’s ecosystems and of socioeconomic systems that sustain society. The future of diverse species, our common human future, and our daily bread depends on which road we take.
Authors: Ruchi Shroff, Carla Ramos Cortés, Marion Bessol
Hi, Klaus. Satan asked me to drop by and have a chat with you.
How’s he doing?
He really wants to get The Great Reset off the ground. World fascism. Universal Guaranteed Income tied to social credit score.
We’re working on it.
He knows you and your people at the World Economic Forum are pushing as hard as you can.
I was hoping you’d have an update on my suite of rooms in Hell. The construction has been underway for a year.
The workers are almost finished, Klaus. I’ll send you photos soon. We want to get the virtual landscape right. You look through any window and you see the Swiss Alps. Installing the weather changes…there was a minor problem with the transition from winter to spring, but I think we’ve fixed it.
Good.
We could be looking at a problem with the NBA, Klaus. Reports of slaves making sneakers in China are piling up. The NBA players are supporting “social justice” protests, but they’re wearing slave-made shoes on the court. If ESPN covers the story…
I don’t think that’ll happen. Too much ad revenue at stake.
It’s tricky, Klaus.
I’m heading to China next month. I’ll speak with Xi Jinping.
See if you can get a few minutes with Michael Jordan.
How is the Hell on Earth operation proceeding?
Well, Klaus, we may need some help from your computer engineers. We have measurement problems with the current algorithms. The hundred-year plan is to remake Earth so it mirrors Hell in all respects. But how do you calculate progress toward that goal precisely? There are thousands of variables. Of course, in general, we’re succeeding. But we’re scientists. We want to be able to apply precise numbers to our reports. Satan is a stickler for numbers. MIT, Harvard. He has that background.
I have sharp people. Keep me posted. I can lend them to you. —Listen, I’m worried about the vaccine.
We’re keeping a close eye on that. Fauci continues to screw the pooch. He’s out of control. Ego. He contradicts himself every few days. We may have to sideline him. Give him a medal, a Nobel, and put him out to pasture. Which new fake virus are you considering for the next phase, Klaus?
We’re thinking about a rerun of Ebola and Zika. Both. We already have lots of prior propaganda built up on them. The hemorrhaging and bleeding symptom of Ebola scares the hell out of people. It’s useful. All we have to do is increase antibiotic usage and the spraying of organophosphate insecticides and, voila, we produce bleeding. It’s a winner.
Good. Because the “new COVID strain” fantasy isn’t selling. Are more lockdowns coming in America?
We’re trying. I don’t want to see large crowds at NSCAR, and college football next fall.
Keep testing these athletes, Klaus. Every day, if necessary. Jam that long stick right up into their brains to get samples for the PCR.
So why are you really here? What does Satan want?
This is secret society stuff, Klaus. Need to know only. Keep it strictly confidential.
Of course.
Hell is overcrowded. It’s a serious problem. As we told you a long time ago, people come here because they WANT TO. They’re not consigned. In the last year, we’ve had a major influx. We investigated. Turns out it’s the Reincarnation Hesitancy factor. Fewer people want to return to Earth for another life. And they’re scared about the entrance requirements for Heaven, so they show up in Hell.
Why are they hesitant about reincarnating?
The increasing chaos on Earth. But the big reason is: they don’t want to be reborn as infants and take all the childhood vaccines. They know the shots are highly damaging. Who wants to go through a whole life in some kind of grotesque brain-injured condition?
I see. Well, how can I help?
We want your people at the World Economic Forum to launch a new global religion. Not overtly, of course. Use cutouts. But the theme of the religion is reincarnation. Use some corrupted form of Hinduism as your guide. Insist that reincarnation is mandatory. It’s the path to enlightenment. People have to come back, over and over, until they learn every lesson that enables them to transcend the need for a human form. You get the idea.
Interesting. You know, with a combination of mandatory vaccination and mandatory reincarnation, we might really have something. A one-two punch. A squeeze play.
These days, the Gates of Hell look like the US Southern border. Lots people struggling to get in. We can’t process them all. So we’re sending them all for preliminary programming, as a first step.
What kind of programming?
It’s basically the US public education system. After a few months, the average IQ drop is 20 points. Then we assign them to meaningless desk jobs. But this is only a temporary solution. We need more supervisors to handle people individually. The trick in each case is getting the proportions of pleasure and pain right. When we do, we can keep a person for about a thousand years, before he drifts away.
I wish you could just raise Hell up to Earth and install it wholesale. It would make our work much easier.
We’re doing that on a limited basis. It’s called China.
The Beijing regime is working on a 20-year plan to surveil, in real time, every square inch of the whole country. Indoors and outdoors. It’s quite ambitious.
Their latest innovation is swarms of small spy drones disguised as doves.
I’ll put a few people to work drawing up plans for a new world religion. We might be able to add a few wrinkles to mandatory reincarnation. While on Earth, know your place. Live out the life you’re assigned. This fits nicely with the technocratic overview: every human is given a slot in the System, for the benefit of all. That kind of thing.
I like it, Klaus. A “scientific” version of “accept your fate.”
The new religion is safe and effective.
The Church of Biology.
DNA determines destiny.
Throw in a promise of GMO humans. “You can accelerate your path to enlightenment, reduce the number of your reincarnations by submitting to gene alteration.”
A whole new set of vaccines that alter DNA.
It’s good to brainstorm with you, Klaus. Get busy on this.
Say hello to Satan. Tell him thanks for my immunity passport. I look forward to being able to travel back and forth between Hell and Earth on a regular basis.
Vandana Shiva: Bill Gates Empires ‘Must Be Dismantled’
In an interview with Dr. Joseph Mercola, Vandana Shiva says, “… if In the next decade, if we don’t protect what has to be protected … and take away the sainthood from this criminal, they will leave nothing much to be saved.”
Bill Gates is entering every field that has to do with sustaining life and, for over a decade, has undermined vitality in all its forms, in an effort to seize control over and profit from it.
By funding research and financing public institutions, Gates is able to force those institutions down a path where they can only use his patented intellectual property.
While pretending to save the world through philanthropy, Gates’ solutions perpetuate and worsen the world’s problems. They may even threaten the future of humanity, as they’re driving us closer to extinction.
Through his company, Gates Ag One, Gates is pushing for one type of agriculture for the whole world, organized top, down. This includes digital farming, in which farmers are surveilled and mined for their agricultural data, which is then repackaged and sold back to them.
The answer to the environmental problems we face is not more of the very things that created the problems in the first place, which is what Gates proposes. The answer is regenerative agriculture and real food.
In this interview, Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., discusses the importance and benefits of regenerative agriculture and a future Regeneration International project that we’ll be collaborating on.
We’re currently facing enormously powerful technocrats who are hell-bent on ushering in the Great Reset, which will complete the ongoing transfer of wealth and resource ownership from the poor and middle classes to the ultra-rich. Perhaps the most well-known of the individuals pushing for this is Bill Gates who, like John Rockefeller a century before him, rehabilitated his sorely tarnished image by turning to philanthropy.
However, Gates’ brand of philanthropy, so far, has helped few and harmed many. While his PR machine has managed to turn public opinion about him such that many now view him as a global savior who donates his wealth for the good of the planet, nothing could be further from the truth.
Gates’ stranglehold on global health
The magnitude of Gates’ role over global health recently dawned on me. I believe the COVID-19 catastrophe would not have been possible had it not been for the World Health Organization (WHO), which Gates appears to exert shadow-control over. Remember, it was primarily the WHO that facilitated this global shutdown and adoption of freedom-robbing, economy-destroying measures by virtually every government on the planet.
When then-President Trump halted U.S. funding of the WHO in 2020, Gates became the biggest funder of the WHO. As explained in “WHO Insider Blows Whistle on Gates and GAVI,” the WHO has turned global health security into a dictatorship, where the director general has assumed sole power to make decisions that member states must abide by, but according to a long-term WHO insider, Gates’ vaccine alliance GAVI actually appears to be the directing power behind the WHO.
The two — Gates and the WHO — have been working hand in hand pushing for a global vaccination campaign, and Gates has a great deal of money invested in these vaccines. We’ve also seen extraordinary efforts to censor natural alternatives and inexpensive, readily available and clearly effective drugs, such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, and it appears the reason for this is probably because they’re competitors to the vaccine.
Emergency use authorization for pandemic vaccines are only given when there are no other treatments, so vilifying alternatives has been a key strategy to protect vaccine profits.
The parallels between Rockefeller and Gates
As noted by Shiva, the comparisons between Rockefeller and Gates are quite apt. Rockefeller created not just Big Oil but also Big Finance and Big Pharma. He had intimate connections with IG Farben. There was a Standard Oil IG Farben company. Without the fossil fuels of Standard Oil, IG Farben couldn’t have made synthetic fertilizers or fuels.
In 1910, Rockefeller and Carnegie produced The Flexner Report, which was the beginning of the end for natural medicine in the conventional medical school curriculum. They eliminated it because it saw natural medicine as a hugely competitive threat to the new pharmaceuticals that were primarily derived from the oil industry.
Much of Rockefeller’s history has been captured by Lily Kay, who sifted through Molecular Vision of Life’s archives. There, she discovered that the Nazi regime, which was a eugenics regime that thought some people were inferior and needed to be exterminated to keep the superior race pure, didn’t vanish when Germany lost the war.
Eugenics simply migrated to the U.S., and was taken up by Rockefeller under the term of “social psychology as biological determinants.” The word gene did not exist at that time. Instead, they called it “atoms of determinism.” Rockefeller paid for much of the eugenics research, which ultimately resulted in the silencing and suppression of true health.
To be healthy means to be whole, and wholeness refers to the “self-organized brilliance of your integrated body as a complex system,” Shiva says. That’s what Ayurveda is based on, and even this ancient system of medicine has been attacked in recent times. The notion of genetic determination ignores this foundational wholeness, seeking instead to divide the human body into mechanical components controlled by your genes.
“Coming back to the parallels, Rockefeller was behind it because he was driving the chemical industry. When the wars were over, they said, ‘Oh my gosh, we have all these chemicals to sell.’ And they invented the Green Revolution and pushed the Green Revolution on India.
“Rockefeller, the World Bank, the U.S. all worked together, and if the farmers of India are protesting today, it’s a result of Rockefeller’s initiative, the Green Revolution in India. Most people don’t realize what high cost India has borne; what high cost the state of Panjon has born.
“Then you have Gates joining up with Rockefeller and creating the Alliance for the Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) … which pretends to be his solution to climate change. I say, “My god, what kind of stage has the world reached that absolute nonsense can pass the science?” I’ll give you just three examples from his chapter on agriculture, in which he talks about how we grow things.
“First of all, plants are not things. Plants are sentient beings. Our culture knows it. We have the sacred tulsi. We have the sacred neem. We have the sacred banyan. They are sentient beings. So many people are awake to animal rights. I think we need more people awake to plant rights and really tell Mr. Gates, “No, plants are not things.”
“He goes on to celebrate Norman Borlaug, who was in the DuPont defense lab, whose job it was to push these four chemicals by adapting the plants [to them]. So, he created the dwarf variety, because the tall varieties are free varieties … [Gates] says we’re eating food because of Borlaug. No, people are starving because of Borlaug. The farmers are dying because of Borlaug.”
Gates offers problems as solutions
Gates hails synthetic fertilizer is the greatest agricultural invention. “Doesn’t he realize synthetic nitrogen fertilizers are creating desertification, dead zones in the ocean and nitric oxide, which is a greenhouse gas?” Shiva says. In short, he’s offering the problem as the solution. Gates also, apparently, does not understand that nitrogen-fixing plants can fix nitrogen. He incorrectly claims that plants cannot fix nitrogen.
Gates is equally wrong about methane production from livestock. “Have you smelt methane behind nomadic tribes?” Shiva asks. “Have you ever smelt methane behind our sacred cow in India? No, they don’t emit methane.” The reason cows in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) emit methane that stinks to high heaven is because they’re fed an unnatural diet of grains and placed in crowded quarters. It’s not a natural phenomenon. It’s a man-made one.
“You know what Mr. Gates wants to teach us? He says cows make methane because of their poor stomachs,” Shiva says. “They call them containers. I think we should sue him for undoing basic biology 101. You’ve talked about how he controls the WHO. He’s also trying to take control of the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO).
“[FAO] has recognized ecological agriculture is the way to go and supported [regenerative] agriculture up until last year, when Gates started to take charge. Now he’s moving the food summit to New York. Five hundred organizations have said, ‘This is no longer a food summit, it’s a poison summit. The poison cartel and Bill Gates are running it to push more poisons, now under new names. So, we have a lot of work to do.’”
The answer to the environmental problems we face is not more of the very things that created the problems in the first place, which is what Gates proposes. The answer is regenerative agriculture and real food.
“When people are eating healthy food, there is no problem,” Shiva says. “[Gates] wants to commit a crime against our gut microbiome, pushing more fake food through Impossible Food. And he wants to create conditions so that real food will disappear. That’s why we all have to organize together and the scientists have to start being protected.
“There’s an extinction taking place. They call it the sixth mass extinction. Most people think the sixth mass extinction is about other species. They don’t realize large parts of humanity are being pushed to extinction. Food is health, as Hippocrates said, [and that requires] indigenous systems of learning, ecological agriculture, small farmers.
“In Bill Gates’ design, all this that makes life, life, that makes society, society, that makes community, community, that makes healthy beings, he would like to push this to extinction because he’s afraid of independence, freedom, health and our beingness. He wants us to be ‘thingness,’ but we are beings …
“The worst crime against the Earth and against humanity is using gene editing technologies for gene drives, which is a collaboration of Gates with DARPA, the defense research system. Gene drives are deliberately driving [us] to extinction. Now he does it in the name of ending malaria. No. It’s about driving to extinction.
“Amaranth is a sacred food for us. It’s a very, very important source of nutrition … There’s an application in that DARPA-Gates report of driving the amaranth to extinction through gene rights. And when this was raised at the Convention on Biological Diversity, do you know what he did? He actually hired a public relations agency and bribed government representatives to not say no. Can you imagine?”
Gates’ long-term play
Gates clearly had a long-term vision in mind from the start. His growing control of the WHO began over a decade ago. Over this span of time, he also started transitioning into Big Pharma and the fake food industry, which would allow his influence over the WHO’s global health recommendations to really pay off.
While fake foods have many potential problems, one in particular is elevated levels of the omega-6 fat linoleic acid (LA). If you eat real food, you’re going to get more than enough LA. Our industrial Western diet, however, provides far more than is needed for optimal health already, and engineered meats are particularly loaded with LA, as they’re made with genetically modified soy oil and canola oil.
This massive excess of LA will encourage and promote virtually all degenerative diseases, thereby accelerating the destruction of human health. In addition to that, Gates is also investing in pharmaceuticals, which of course are touted as the answer to degenerative disease. Again, his solutions to ill health are actually the problem. Shiva says:
“Gates … [is] entering every field that has to do with life. Our work in Navdanya, which means nine seeds, is basically work on biodiversity in agriculture. We started to bring together all the work that he’s doing in taking over. I mentioned the Rockefeller Green Revolution, now the Gates-Rockefeller Green Revolution in Africa. The next step he wants to push is … digital agriculture.
“He calls it Gates Ag One, and the headquarters of this is exactly where the Monsanto headquarters are, in St. Louis, Missouri. Gates Ag One is one [type of] agriculture for the whole world, organized top down. He’s written about it. We have a whole section on it in our new report, ‘Gates to a Global Empire.’”
Stolen farmer data is repackaged and sold back to them
What does digital agriculture entail? For starters, it entails the introduction of a digital surveillance system. So far, Shiva’s organization has managed to prevent Gates from introducing a seed surveillance startup, where farmers would not be allowed to grow seeds unless approved by Gates surveillance system.
The data mining, Shiva says, is needed because they don’t actually know agriculture. This is why Gates finances the policing of farmers. He needs to mine their data to learn how farming is actually done. This knowledge is then repackaged and sold back to the farmers. It’s evil genius at its finest.
Through his funding, Gates now also controls the world’s seed supply, and his financing of gene editing research has undercut biosafety laws across the world. As explained by Shiva, the only country that doesn’t have biosafety laws is the U.S. “The rest of the world does because we have a treaty called the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety,” she says.
“While he created the appearance of philanthropy, what he’s doing is giving tiny bits of money to very vital institutions. But with those bits of money, they attract government money, which was running those institutions. Now, because of his clout, he is taking control of the agenda of these institutions. In the meantime, he’s pushing patenting, be it on drugs, vaccines or on seeds.”
Taken together, Gates ends up wielding enormous control over global agriculture and food production, and there’s virtually no evidence to suggest he has good intentions.
The anatomy of monopolization
The company that collects patents on gene-edited organisms, both in health and agriculture, is Editas, founded by a main financial investor for the Gates Foundation. Gates is also a big investor in Editas.
“So, here’s a company called Editas to edit the world as if it is a Word program. The two scientists who got the Nobel Prize this year have both been funded in their research by Gates. My mind went back to how Rockefeller financed the research, got the Nobel Prize, and then made the money.
“So, you finance the research. Then you finance the public institutions, whether they be national or international. You invest and force them down the path where they can only use what is your patented intellectual property. And, as he has said in an interview, his smartest investment was vaccines, because it is a 1-to-20 return. Put $1 in and make $20. How many billions of dollars have been put in? You can imagine how many trillions will be made.
“At the end of it, where does food come from? It comes from seed. He wants to control it. It comes from land. He’s controlling that. He’s become the biggest farmland owner [in the U.S.]. But you need weather [control]. You need a stable climate.
“So, what could be a weapon of control of agriculture? Weather modification. He calls it geoengineering. This is engineering of the climate. Again, making it look like he’s going to solve global warming by creating global cooling.”
As explained by Shiva, Gates is also heavily invested in climate modification technologies that not only will destabilize the earth’s climate systems more, but also can be weaponized against the people by controlling rainfall and drought. In India, they’ve been having massive hail during harvest time, which destroys the harvest.
Is the UN subservient to Gates?
According to Shiva, Gates is also corrupting the UN system, just like he’s corrupted world governments and the WHO, and in so doing, he’s destroying the efforts built over the last three decades to protect the global environment.
“Whether it be the climate treaty, the biodiversity treaty or the atmospheric treaties, he is absolutely behaving as if the UN is his subservient institution,” Shiva says. “[He thinks] governments and regulatory bodies should not exist … and that people in democracy have no business to speak. [If they do], they’re conspiracy theorists.”
Taking down Gates’ empires
As it stands right now, ordinary people are forced to fight battles that are in actuality rooted in institutional, structural and societal crimes. These crimes really need to be addressed the way Rockefeller’s Standard Oil empire was addressed. In the case of Gates, his empire is actually multiple empires, and they all need to be dismantled. To that end, I will be collaborating with Shiva and Regeneration International, which she co-founded, on a project to boycott Gates’ empires.
“I’ve noticed that no matter what the movement, they’re using the word regeneration now. It could be a health movement, a democracy movement, a peace movement, a women’s movement — everyone has realized that regeneration is what we have to shift to,” Shiva says.
“So, what do we need to be doing in the next decade? For me, the next decade is the determining decade, because these petty minds’ insatiable greed want to go so fast that if, in the next decade, we don’t protect what has to be protected, build resilient alternatives and take away the sainthood from this criminal, they will leave nothing much to be saved.
“The poison cartel is also big pharma. People think agriculture is here, medicine is there. No. The same criminal corporations gave us agrichemicals. They gave us bad medicine that creates more disease than it solves. So, Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Poison — it’s all one. And Bill Gates is holding it all together even more, and trying to make them bigger because he has investments in all of them …
“I think [seeds] is where we have to begin … I’m hoping that we will be able, together, to launch a global movement soon to take back our seeds from the international seed banks. The strategy is we need to remind the world that these are public institutions [and] that they’re accountable to the farmers whose collections these [seeds] are …
“On the food question, I think that’s the big one because food and health go [together]. In Ayurveda, it says food is the best medicine, and if you don’t eat good food, then no medicine can cure whatever disease you have. The best medicine is good eating. And Hippocrates said ‘Let food be thy medicine.’ So, I think this is the time to really grow a very big global campaign for food freedom.
“Food freedom means you cannot destroy our right to grow food. Secondly, you cannot destroy our governments’ obligations to us to support regenerative agriculture rather than support degenerative agriculture and subsidize it. And third, I think we should call for a worldwide boycott of lab foods …
“Another part of this should be, don’t let Big Tech enter our bodies. Let big tech not enter life sciences … These guys will make life illegal. Living will be illegal except as a little piece in their machine through their permission.”
Each year, Navdanya holds a two-week campaign on food freedom starting October 2, which is nonviolence day. We now need to take that campaign to the global stage, and I will do my part to aid this effort. So, mark your calendar and prepare to join us in a global boycott of food that makes you sick — processed food, GMO foods, lab-created foods, fake meats, all of it.
More information
You can learn more about Shiva’s work and her many projects on Navdanya.org. During the first week of April every year, Navdanya gives a five-day course called Annam, Food as Health, via Zoom. In this course, you’ll learn about soil and plant biodiversity and healthy eating for optimal health.
“When all the spiritual forces, all of nature’s forces and most of people’s forces are aligned together, what can [a few] billionaires, technocrats — who want to be richer than they are, greedier than they are, more violent than they are — do?” Shiva says. “They don’t count in the long run, really. It’s just that we cannot afford to not do the things that we can do.”
I live on a farm in the middle of nowhere. When we first started raising hens, they would not last long. Foxes would hunt them, and owls would swoop down and steal them. My hens were scared. Then we got our rooster, Earl. Earl is not a nice creature; he bosses the hens around and occasionally tries to attack me. I bring a boat oar to the henhouse for personal protection. But he keeps the predators away, so the hens put up with him because they are no longer afraid. I have not lost a hen since Earl arrived on the scene.
Why all this talk about Earl the ornery rooster? By observing animal behavior, I have clarity and understanding of the root cause of the current global mass psychosis. Our problem is fear, not Covid-19.
Psychosis is defined as impaired contact with reality. Educated, rational people have stopped using critical thinking. Acting out of fear, many blindly cling to the words of a government bureaucrat. Dr. Fauci has been wrong more times than he has been right. Under the misleading guise of “following the science,” we comply with his whims, like my hens comply with Earl’s temper. He crows the loudest — Dr. Fauci, not Earl — and is very authoritative. He makes us feel protected and authority makes us feel safe, or does it? When does authoritative behavior become authoritarian rule?
We are collectively facing a ‘complex trauma’, that is a state of prolonged exposure to multiple and interrelated traumas that override our initial fight or flight mechanism. A prolonged state of fear triggers a response known as ‘fawning’. Fawning behaviors are people-pleasing. Merging the wishes, needs and demands of others, we look to reduce conflict to achieve safety. When a person enters this state, they are under the control of their reptilian brain where lies our primitive drives. Obvious empirical evidence fails to be computed accurately and it becomes impossible to make a balanced decision.
Freedom cannot survive in an obedient, chronically fearful, and delusional society. This is an open invitation for government overreach. We must face our fear and seek truth. We cannot follow instructions out of fear without consideration. Act out of love for yourself, your family, and humankind. People are not dangerous vectors of disease but lies are. It’s time to take control back. In this series of articles, I will discuss how to control our fear responses so we can remain grounded.
Vandana Shiva: Bill Gates & Other So-Called Philanthropists Are Eco-Criminals, Creating a Digital Dictatorship & Destroying the Very Fabric of Life
The so-called philanthropists, Bill Gates in particular, are taking more and more power over our governments.
Vandana Shiva warns us on how this is bringing new and more dangerous threats to our agriculture, food, seed sovereignty, and to the biodiversity of our planet.
Together with “surveillance capitalism” all this is putting at risk the rights to our health, our freedom and our future.
Interview by Berenice Galli.
Ernst Stavro Blohfeld…Er… Klaus Schwab: A Family History
This remarkable article was spotted and shared by E.V.H., but before we get to it, a little background. Regular readers here may recall that some weeks ago I blogged about Klaus Schwab, the perpetually scowling figure who heads the World Economic Forum. I noted at the time that Schwab seemed very much like the character of Dr. Ernst Stavro Blohfeld, the fictitious villain and head of SPECTRE (Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion) from the James Bond films. I wasn’t the only one who noticed, apparently, because shortly after that, pictures of Schwab in a gray uniform, holding a white cat ala SPECTRE’s Blohfeld, began to appear on the internet. But on a more serious note, I also observed in that blog that little to nothing appeared to have been known about Schwab’s family, and there was a curious lacuna in his biography at that time from when he completed his degrees to his emergence on the world stage as the spokesman for Mr. Globaloney and The Great Financial Reset.
Apparently, others observed this curious lack of details about Schwab, and set out to remedy that situation in the very lengthy article below, which appeared just last February along with a rather flattering picture illustration of Schwab himself:
We pick up the story with Schwab’s father Eugen, a manager for a Swiss-German company, Escher-Wyss in Schwab’s home town of Ravensburg. The allegations are revealing:
In the pre-war years of the 1930s leading up to the German annexation of Poland, Ravensburg’s Escher-Wyss factory, now managed directly by Klaus Schwab’s father, Eugen Schwab, continued to be the biggest employer in Ravensburg. Not only was the factory a major employer in the town, but Hitler’s own Nazi party awarded the Escher-Wyss Ravensburg branch the title of “National Socialist Model Company” while Schwab was at the helm. The Nazis were potentially wooing the Swiss company for cooperation in the coming war, and their advances were eventually reciprocated.
Ravensburg was an anomaly in wartime Germany, as it was never targeted by any Allied airstrikes. The presence of the Red Cross, and a rumoured agreement with various companies including Escher-Wyss, saw the allied forces publicly agree to not target the Southern German town. It was not classified as a significant military target throughout the war and, for that reason, the town still maintains many of its original features. However, much darker things were afoot in Ravensburg once the war began.
Eugen Schwab continued to manage the “National Socialist Model Company” for Escher-Wyss, and the Swiss company would aid the Nazi Wermacht produce significant weapons of war as well as more basic armaments. The Escher-Wyss company was a leader in large turbine technology for hydroelectric dams and power plants, but they also manufactured parts for German fighter planes. They were also intimately involved in much more sinister projects happening behind the scenes which, if completed, could have changed the outcome of World War II.
From this point, the article traces how some of Escher-Wyss’s hydro-turbine technology made it into the Nazi atom-bomb project via the Norsk heavy water production plant in Norway. Here the article goes a bit awry claiming that heavy water was vital for the production of plutonium for that project. As I’ve outlined in my book Reich of the Black Sun, the German project, while it knew of the possibility of plutonium, also knew that its production could only be accomplished in a reactor, and that it would be a long and difficult project. It thus concentrated on the less complicated project of uranium isotope separation and enrichment for a uranium-fueled bomb. But in either case heavy water could be used both as a neutron moderator in a reactor, and more importantly, as a source of deuterium fuel for a “boosted fission” bomb, which is what I’ve been arguing in my various books about the Nazi atom bomb project.
And Schwab’s father headed a firm in Ravensbruck with ties to that project. Let that sink in a moment. As such, Schwab’s father was also allegedly involved in another infamous Nazi practice:
Back in the Escher-Wyss factory in Ravensburg, Eugen Schwab had been busy putting forced labourers to work at his model Nazi company. During the years of World War II, nearly 3,600 forced labourers worked in Ravensburg, including at Escher Wyss. According to the city archivist in Ravensburg, Andrea Schmuder, the Escher-Wyss machine factory in Ravensburg employed between 198 and 203 civil workers and POWs during the war. Karl Schweizer, a local Lindau historian, states that Escher-Wyss maintained a small special camp for forced labourers on the factory premises.
The use of masses of forced labourers in Ravensburg made it necessary to setup one of the largest recorded Nazi forced labour camps in the workshop of a former carpenter’s at Ziegelstrasse 16. At one time, the camp in question accommodated 125 French prisoners of war who were later redistributed to other camps in 1942. The French workers were replaced by 150 Russian prisoners of war who, it was rumoured, were treated the worst out of all the POWs. One such prisoner was Zina Jakuschewa, whose work card and work book are held by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Those documents identify her as a non-Jewish forced labourer assigned to Ravensburg, Germany, during 1943 and 1944.
This of course does not implicate Klaus Schwab himself in any of these practices nor does it implicate him in any way with sympathy for the practice nor the ideology behind it. It does, however, raise a yellow flag of caution, and perhaps should provide a context in which to view his own statements to the effect that “you vill not own property und you vill be happy!” This, plus the fact that Schwab seems to have pursued academic studies of mechanical engineering in relationship to macroeconomics of credit and export, might indicate at least some filial interest in his father’s wartime experiences, since after his studies and a stint in the USA at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, he went to work for his father’s old company.
The atom bomb connection would continue at Escher-Wyss (now Sulzer-Escher-Wyss) after the war, as it became involved in South Africa’s effort to acquire the bomb:
Escher-Wyss had been involved with manufacturing and installing nuclear technology at least as early as 1962, as shown by this patent for a “heat exchange arrangement for a nuclear power plant” and this patent from 1966 for a “nuclear reactor gas-turbine plant with emergency cooling”. After Schwab left Sulzer Escher-Wyss, Sulzer would also help to develop special turbocompressors for uranium enrichment to yield reactor fuels.
When Klaus Schwab joined Sulzer Escher-Wyss in 1967 and started the reorganisation of the company to be a technology corporation, the involvement of Sulzer Escher-Wyss in the darker aspects of the global nuclear arms race became immediately more pronounced. Before Klaus became involved, Escher-Wyss had often concentrated on helping design and build parts for civilian uses of nuclear technology, e.g. nuclear power generation. Yet, with the arrival of the eager Mr. Schwab also came the company’s participation in the illegal proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. By 1969, the incorporation of Escher Wyss into Sulzer was fully completed and they would be rebranded into Sulzer AG, dropping the historic name Escher-Wyss from their name.
It was eventually revealed, thanks to a review and report carried out by the Swiss authorities and a man named Peter Hug, that Sulzer Escher-Wyss began secretly procuring and building key parts for nuclear weapons during the 1960s. The company, while Schwab was on the board, also began playing a critical key role in the development of South Africa’s illegal nuclear weapons programme during the darkest years of the apartheid regime. Klaus Schwab was a leading figure in the founding of a company culture which helped Pretoria build six nuclear weapons and partially assemble a seventh. (Boldface emphasis added)
This now ratchets up the suspicion meter considerably, when placed into context of what else is known about the South African project. In 1973 the New York Times book division published a book by Barbara Rogers and Zdenek Cervenka titled The Nuclear Axis: The Secret Collaboration between West Germany and South Africa, a title which says it all… almost. The authors detail how a Luftwaffe general in the Bundeswehr, himself a holdover from World War II, and several German firms including Degussa(which was also involved in the wartime Nazi atom bomb effort), were involved in aiding South Africa to acquire the atom bomb, which in the opinion of many (including this author) it did. The arrangement was a “tidy” one: in exchange for South African uranium, Germany would supply the technology to enrich it and the engineering to turn it into a bomb. South Africa became the front behind which postwar Germany acquired nuclear weapons technology, for the South African bomb was in effect a German one…
… and an Israeli one, because the third partner in this picture was Israel itself, lending technical assistance as well in return for a steady supply of uranium from the project. The arrangement was a rather nifty one, given that all three states were in some measure and for very different reasons each a pariah state, and each viewed its national security was being jeopardized without nuclear weapons.
But now we find Schwab himself – Dr. Ernst Stavro Blohfeld and SPECTRE – squatting in the middle of that West German-South African atom bomb effort.
The implications here are inescapable, and the article’s author, Johnny Vedmore, doesn’t shrink from mentioning them:
In the case of Klaus Schwab himself, it appears that he has helped to launder relics of the Nazi era, i.e. its nuclear ambitions and its population control ambitions, so as to ensure the continuity of a deeper agenda. While serving in a leadership capacity at Sulzer Escher Wyss, the company sought to aid the nuclear ambitions of the South African regime, then the most Nazi adjacent government in the world, preserving Escher Wyss’ own Nazi era legacy. Then, through the World Economic Forum, Schwab has helped to rehabilitate eugenics-influenced population control policies during the post-World War II era, a time when the revelations of Nazi atrocities quickly brought the pseudo-science into great disrepute. Is there any reason to believe that Klaus Schwab, as he exists today, has changed in anyway? Or is he still the public face of a decades-long effort to ensure the survival of a very old agenda?
The last question that should be asked about the real motivations behind the actions of Herr Schwab, may be the most important for the future of humanity: Is Klaus Schwab trying to create the Fourth Industrial Revolution, or is he trying to create the Fourth Reich?
For my part, readers can already guess the answer, for I’ve been trying for years to warn people about a post-war “Nazi International,” an “extra-territorial state” hiding behind a complex tapestry of corporations, funds, foundations, think tanks, and a bewildering labyrinth of interconnections, all still firmly in the grasp of a hideous ideology.
Anthony Fauci steps off a small boat floating in a river at the bottom of a great cavern.
A lamp cuts into the darkness and illuminates a small table and two chairs. Fauci walks to the table and sits down.
He is joined by his old mentor, whose name is unknown.
It’s been a long time, Anthony. Remember me?
Of course. But why am I here?
You need a refresher, Anthony. You’ve been wobbling badly. Apparently you’ve forgotten our first lesson.
I was in medical school then.
That’s when we promised you significant rewards if you performed well for us. That day, I told you: you need to lie with CONSISTENCY.
Yes, sir. And I’ve obeyed your order.
No you haven’t. You’ve cooked a goose and a cake in the same pan. You’ve said it was raining and not raining. You’ve worn only a jock strap and spread sunscreen on your body in the Arctic, and you’ve bundled up at the Equator. You’re a mess.
I didn’t mean to be a mess.
I’m not interested in excuses. I’m going to straighten you out. I want you to pay close attention. Otherwise, you go in the Lake of Fire.
I’m VERY sorry, sir…
You said masks were useless. Later you said people should wear two. You admitted the vaccine was experimental, implying the people were guinea pigs. Then you said the vaccine was absolutely safe and effective. You said asymptomatic people never drive an epidemic by transmitting a virus. Then you said millions of asymptomatic people who merely tested positive were a major source of transmission. You said running the PCR at 35 cycles or higher yielded meaningless results. But labs all over the world are running the test at 40 cycles. You’ve turned into a buffoon. A clown.
I’ve made a few mistakes. I’ll correct them.
It’s too late. The cat is out of the bag.
Then what can I do?
Ignore your past contradictions. As if they never happened. You’re a matinee idol to millions of soccer moms. They’re bubble brains. They can’t think their way out of a wet paper bag. Climb back on the straight and narrow. Claim the test is very accurate, the case and death numbers are alarming, more lockdowns will be necessary, new mutations of the virus are here, and people must take vaccine. And THAT’S ALL. Don’t try to EXPLAIN things. That’s when you screw the pooch. You’re not a medical genius, Anthony. You’re our agent. Just do your job.
But I love explaining things.
And that’s your flaw. I wish we had spotted it sooner. We would have used someone else. Redfield or even Birx.
Redfield? That two-bit—
Two-bit is good, Anthony. Two-bit works.
I have theatrical qualities.
Yes, you do. For low-budget Hollywood B movies. Cary Grant you’re not.
But Bill told me—
Forget about Bill Gates. I’ll be talking to him soon. He thinks he has to throw money at every influencer in the world. His ego is out of control. He’s a nasty little poisoned pastry. Anthony, listen to me. You’re a low level gangster on a cop show. In the first ten minutes, detectives drag you into the station and question you. They find out you were in the hospital having gall bladder surgery on the afternoon of the murder, and they let you go. Got it? You’re not doing Inherit the Wind or Hamlet.
OK, all right. But I’m disappointed.
Now let me remind you of the truth, so you can make a clear distinction between it and what you’re doing. Perhaps that’ll give you much needed clarity. Viruses are basically fictions. Nobody isolates them. When technicians perform genetic sequencing, they’re cobbling together strips of DATA and using computer programs to smooth out the wrinkles and the gaps. Fairy tales. There is no pandemic. The people who are dying are dying from traditional lung infections and pollution and toxic vaccine campaigns and pesticides and medical drugs, and all this is relabeled COVID. The virologists in their labs are clueless. They’re true believers. Little egos depositing paychecks and publishing papers and angling for promotions. UNDERSTAND?
Yes. But listen, a friend of mine is developing a screen play about the life of Albert Schweitzer. His clinic in Africa. Saving lives. Great humanitarian. The Disney studio and I have been in talks. Don’t you think I could play Schweitzer?
AGAIN, Anthony—you’re a small-timer on cop shows. You’re running a protection racket forcing shop owners to come up with cash every week or else. That’s your level, Anthony.
I feel depressed.
You’re probably bipolar.
I’ll stick to the COVID script. But at very least, I’d like to win the Nobel for Medicine.
Promotions are based on performance.
Are you the Devil?
Don’t make me laugh. I’m a bureaucrat in the chain of command. You have zero chance of ever speaking with the Devil. He gives orders to the people who give orders to the people who give orders to the people who give orders to the people who give orders to the people who operate Twitter and Facebook.
Does the Devil ever watch me work?
Don’t be silly.
With due respect, sir—I feel like the victim of blackmail.
Try to imagine how little concern I have about your feelings. And blackmail occurs when the participant is unwilling. You signed up for this job. You were eager.
I’m IMPORTANT.
And there we have it. Vanity. Of all the sins, it has the most tangles and traps. One tries to escape its consequences by asserting greater vanity.
I don’t understand.
No, you wouldn’t. But unless you somehow come to your senses, and soon, you’ll pay the price.
I object to this whole conversation.
Little man, you have no standing to object in our court. As presently configured, you’re an asset, a disposable piece of property.
I wasn’t aware I was involved in a legal proceeding.
In my domain, EVERYTHING is a legal proceeding. That’s why they call it Hell.
I’m ANTHONY FAUCI.
Can you feel the heat? You’re coming closer to the Burning Lake.
Go back to your life. You have one more chance. And if you ever show up at a baseball game again without a mask, we’ll give you a stroke.
What??
Joe Biden had two brain aneurysms in 1988. You see how he turned out. Do you want to be a Biden?
Hell no, sir. Absolutely not. I’m sorry.
Then mend your ways, Anthony.
I think I need to see a psychiatrist.
My secretary will be in touch. We have a list of solid professionals.
I’m going up and down. Maybe I am bipolar.
Anthony, lean closer. Actually, just between you and me, there are no defining lab tests for any so-called mental disorder. You’re just a moral coward. Why do you think we chose you?
Because I’m photogenic?
Sure. Let’s call it that. Rather than self-delusion.
Hillary Clinton told me I’m handsome.
Have you taken a good close look at the specimen she’s married to?
Why am I such a big shot in my life and such a disappointment to you here? I’m not used to being treated this way. I’m the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the chief medical advisor to the President. I’ve advised every President since Ronald Reagan. The New Yorker and The New York Times have described me as one of the most trusted medical figures in the United States. I’ve developed therapies for polyarteritis nodosa, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, and lymphomatoid granulomatosis.
You’re quoting your Wikipedia page.
I’ve memorized it.
Anthony, people look at your reputation. I look at YOU.
It’s not fair.
Really? That’s what you’re going with? Fair? Think of us as a production studio, Anthony. We took you on. Granted, we gave you a significant role. But when an actor can’t keep his lines straight, when he wanders off-script, when he endangers the whole project, we enact harsh penalties.
All due respect, sir, you want me in my role. You need me in my role. That’s the truth. You can’t handle the truth. I’m bigger than you are.
This interview is over, Anthony. I’ll write my report and forward it to my supervisor. A piece of advice: when you go to sleep at night, make sure you’re wearing asbestos pajamas.
Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn. Go ahead, make my day.
—Suddenly, the doctor finds himself sitting in a police station. A grim cop is hovering over him.
“OK, Fauci, your story checks out. You were in the hospital the day of the murder. You’re free to go. Get the hell out of here. By the way—one of those little stores your boys collect protection money from? The owner couldn’t pay up. He just committed suicide. Left his wife without a husband and his kids without a father. The DA is looking into it. No doubt he’ll be filing charges against you.”
In a daze, Fauci stumbles to the exit and opens the door. It’s raining outside. He looks down. He’s about to step into a puddle. He scrutinizes it for any signs of fire…
He hears a howl. It sounds like a lone animal baying in the forest.
It’s coming from his own mouth.
People in the street look at him.
“Don’t worry,” he says quickly. “I’m DOCTOR FAUCI. Get tested. Take the vaccine. It’s perfectly safe. Wear two masks.”
I Didn’t Order the Fauci Baloney on Rye With RNA Sauce
Waiter, I said I didn’t want the Fauci baloney with Birx pickles and Redfield mustard and the RNA sauce.
The lockdown-vaccine lunatics have a problem. They’re running out of credible front figures.
Fauci says asymptomatic COVID-19 cases can’t drive an epidemic, and never have, which means most PCR positives are meaningless, and lockdowns are unnecessary. Then he turns around and says we all have to wear masks until the sun burns out.
He says running the PCR test at more than 35 cycles gives a meaningless result, but the FDA and the CDC advise deploying 40 cycles. Fauci makes no judgment about THAT.
He says the experimental COVID vaccine is using RNA technology for the first time in history and we’re all guinea pigs; and then he says the vaccine is absolutely safe and effective.
Biden can’t find his way from the shower to his bedroom without three minders, but he’s “following the science.” His handlers are postponing the State of the Union until he resigns his office owing to health concerns, so KamALA can deliver the address and spell out the new normal.
Bill Gates keeps pouring his Foundation money into Big Pharma. These donations push up the share prices of the companies, in which he happens to hold said shares. Ordinarily, this would be called some kind of insider trading or money laundering. The perps usually go to prison.
Credible TV star news anchors? Don’t be silly. Lester Holt is a human cadaver. The other two—David Muir and Norah O’Donnell—are a Sears underwear model and an ex PR flack. Taken together, their gravitas approaches Roger Corman’s Monster from the Ocean Floor. “COVID is coming!”
The Vatican? Apparently the Pope believes Jesus urged the founding of the Roman Church so everyone could take the COVID shot in the arm. Wafer, wine, Pfizer.
Cuomo and Newsom, the American bookend lockdown governors? Cuomo’s own Party is doing a Harvey Weinstein Lite on him. The California recall petition against Newsom has gathered 2 million signatures so far.
Angela Merkel, the chancellor of Germany, in case you missed it (US major media underreporting), has refused to take the AstraZeneca jab in the arm. She states it is only approved in Germany for people 65 and under. She’s 66. Very precise of her.
US media reports: black Americans, hospital personnel, and soldiers are refusing the jab in droves.
March 12 (UPI) – “Several more countries have suspended distribution of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine over concerns about blood clotting that’s been seen in a few isolated cases.”
“Denmark was the first to suspend giving out the vaccine on Thursday. Thailand, Norway, Iceland, Bulgaria, Luxembourg, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia had all followed suit by Friday.”
But don’t worry, be happy. It’s just “a bad batch.”
That’s what they always say when people start keeling over.
(Dr. Barbara Starfield, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”—Every year in the US, the medical system kills 225,000 people; 106,000 as a result of FDA approved medical drugs, 119,000 stemming from mistreatment and errors in hospitals. Just a bad batch…)
Assuming, for the purposes of argument only, that the virus is real; the test is accurate; the case and death numbers are authentic—report after report announce that lockdowns don’t work.
I have my own “study” on this. I point to US events that should have resulted in MASSIVE super-spreader effects. The three huge Trump rallies in Washington DC, and the BLM/Antifa riots in 315 US cities.
These vivid “non-lockdown” happenings didn’t lead to millions of COVID cases and people dropping like flies, as millions of Americans from here, there, and everywhere mingled and mixed.
Here’s an interesting attempt to go “all super-spread”: the August 2020 Sturgis, South Dakota, biker rally. 450,000 bikers pulled into town, as they do every year. A preliminary study out of San Diego State University claims the result was 260,000 new COVID cases in the following month across the US.
No detailed contact tracing was possible. The real shortcoming of the study was: I see no report on the number of COVID deaths supposedly resulting from the Sturgis rally. People being diagnosed with COVID (a pineapple can register positive on a PCR test) is a far cry from people dying.
The overwhelming percentage of COVID cases are asymptomatic, or have cough, chills, fever, and nothing more.
A WebMD article describing the San Diego study only mentions one death in Minnesota claimed to be connected to Sturgis. One. After 450,000 bikers departed town.
Speaking of pineapples, remember John Magufuli, the president of Tanzania, who last year claimed that samples taken from a goat and pawpaw fruit tested positive on a PCR kit supplied by the African CDC? He’s also refused to allow COVID vaccinations in Tanzania.
Current reports from the country state he has been missing for two weeks.
His political opponents say he’s in Kenya (or India), in a hospital, critically ill with COVID-19.
Last summer, Pierre Nkurunziza, the President of Burundi, another critic of “COVID science,” ordered all World Health Organization (WHO) representatives to leave the country. He suddenly died. His replacement invited WHO back in.
Of course, these are sheer coincidences. Who would claim otherwise? WHO?
For those readers who want an antidote to this article, in order to return to oblivion, there is a simple solution: watch Lester Holt, Norah O’Donnell, and David Muir every night, simultaneously, on three TV sets; and on Sunday mornings, deeply inhale the major oily sleazebags of political talk, George Stephanopoulos, Chuck Todd, and Chris Wallace. They’ll set your teeth on edge, but they’ll render your brain nicely helpless and quiescent.
At first glance, bioethics might seem like just another branch of ethical philosophy where academics endlessly debate other academics about how many angels dance on the head of a pin in far-out, science fiction like scenarios. What many do not know, however, is that the seemingly benign academic study of bioethics has its roots in the dark history of eugenics. With that knowledge, the dangers inherent in entrusting some of the most important discussions about the life, death and health of humanity in the hands of a select few become even more apparent.
For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.
For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).
TRANSCRIPT
Bioethics is the study of the moral issues arising from medicine, biology and the life sciences.
At first glance, bioethics might seem like just another branch of ethical philosophy where academics endlessly debate other academics about how many angels dance on the head of a pin in far-out, science fiction like scenarios.
PAUL ROOT WOLPE: Imagine what’s going to happen when we have a memory pill. First of all, you don’t have to raise your hand but let’s be honest: who here’s going to take it?
MICHAEL SANDEL: I’ve read of a sport—it’s a variant of polo that is I think played in Afghanistan if I’m not mistaken—where the people ride on horses. Is it horses or camels? I don’t know which. And they use a—it’s a dead goat or something—to, I don’t know, whack the polo ball or whatever it is. Now it’s a dead—I think it’s a goat. Maybe someone knows who studies sociology about this. So it’s not that the goat is experiencing pain. It’s dead already. And yet there is something grim about that practice, wouldn’t you agree? And yet it’s not that the interests of that goat are somehow not being considered. Let’s assume it was killed painlessly before the match began.
MOLLY CROCKETT: What if I told you that a pill could change your judgement of what is right and what is wrong. Or what if I told you that your sense of justice could depend on what you had for breakfast this morning. You’re probably thinking by now this sounds like science fiction, right?
But the bioethicists cannot be dismissed so lightly. Their ideas are being used by governments to assert control over people’s bodies and to enforce that control in increasingly nightmarish ways.
ARCHELLE GEORGIOU: Lithium is a medication that in prescription doses treats mood disorders in people with bipolar disorder or manic-depressive illness. And what these researchers found in Japan is that lithium is present in trace amounts in the normal water supply in some communities and in those communities they have a lower suicide rate. And so they’re really investigating whether trace amounts of lithium can just change the mood in a community enough to really in a positive way without having the bad effects of lithium to really affect the mood and decrease the suicide rate very interesting concept.
GATES: You’re raising tuitions at the University of California as rapidly as they [sic] can and so the access that used to be available to the middle class or whatever is just rapidly going away. That’s a trade-off society’s making because of very, very high medical costs and a lack of willingness to say, you know, “Is spending a million dollars on that last three months of life for that patient—would it be better not to lay off those 10 teachers and to make that trade off in medical cost?” But that’s called the “death panel” and you’re not supposed to have that discussion.
Even a short time ago, talk about medicating the public through the water supply or enacting death panels for the elderly still seemed outlandish. But now that the world is being plunged into hysteria over the threat of pandemics and overburdened health care systems, these previously unspeakable topics are increasingly becoming part of the public debate.
What many do not know, however, is that the seemingly benign academic study of bioethics has its roots in the dark history of eugenics. With that knowledge, the dangers inherent in entrusting some of the most important discussions about the life, death and health of humanity in the hands of a select few become even more apparent.
This is a study of Bioethics and the New Eugenics.
On November 10, 2020, Joe Biden announced the members of a coronavirus task force that would advise his transition team on setting COVID-19-related policies for the Biden administration. That task force included Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a bioethicist and senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.
JOE BIDEN: So that’s why today I’ve named the COVID-19 Transition Advisory Board comprised of distinguished public health experts to help our transition team translate the Biden-Harris COVID-19 plan into action. A blueprint that we can put in place as soon as Kamala and I are sworn into office on January 20th, 2021.
ANCHOR: We’ve learned that a doctor from our area is on the president-elect’s task force. Eyewitness News reporter Howard Monroe picks up the story.
THOMAS FARLEY: I know he’s a very bright, capable guy and i think that’s a great choice to represent doctors in general in addressing this epidemic.
HOWARD MONROE: Philadelphia health commissioner Dr. Thomas Farley this morning on Eyewitness News. He praised president-elect Joe Biden’s transition team for picking Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel to join his coronavirus task force. He is the chair of the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania.
That announcement meant very little to the general public, who likely only know Emanuel as a talking head on tv panel discussions or as the brother of former Obama chief of staff and ex-mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel. But for those who have followed Ezekiel Emanuel’s career as a bioethicist and his history of advocating controversial reforms of the American health care system, his appointment was an ominous sign of things to come.
He has argued that the Hippocratic Oath is obsolete and that it leads to doctors believing that they should do everything they can for their patients rather than letting them die to focus on higher priorities. He has argued that people should choose to die at age 75 to spare society the burden of looking after them in old age. As a health policy advisor to the Obama administration he helped craft the Affordable Care Act, which fellow Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber admitted was only passed thanks to the stupidity of the American public.
JONATHAN GRUBER: OK? Just like the people—transparency—lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, you know, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really critical to getting the thing to pass.
During the course of the deliberations over Obamacare, the issue of “death panels” arose. Although the term “death panel” was immediately lampooned by government apologists in the media, the essence of the argument was one that Emanuel has long advocated: appointing a body or council to ration health care, effectively condemning those deemed unworthy of medical attention to death.
ROB MASS: When I first heard about you it was in the context of an article you wrote right around the time that the Affordable Care Act was under consideration. And the article was entitled “Principles for the Allocation of Scarce Medical Interventions.” I don’t know how many of you remember there was a lot of talk at the time about [how] this new Obamacare was going to create death panels. And he wrote an article which I thought should have been required reading for the entire country about how rationing medical care—you think that that’s going to start with with the Affordable Care Act? Medical care is rationed all the time and it must be rationed. Explain that.
EZEKIEL EMANUEL: So there are two kinds of “rationing,” you might say. One is absolute scarcity leading to rationing and that’s when we don’t simply don’t have enough of something and you have to choose between people. We do that with organs for transplantation. We don’t have enough. Some people will get it, other people won’t and, tragically, people will die. Similarly if we ever have a flu pandemic—not if but when we have a flu pandemic—we’re not going to have enough vaccine, we’re not going to have enough respirators, we’re not going to have enough hospital beds. We’re just going to have to choose between people.
When the debate is framed as an impersonal imposition of economic restraint over the deployment of scarce resources, it is easy to forget the real nature of the idea that Emanuel is advocating. Excluded from these softball interviews is the implicit question of who gets to decide who is worthy of medical attention. Emanuel’s various proposals over the years, and those of his fellow bioethicists, have usually supposed that some government-appointed but somehow “independent” board of bioethicists, economists and other technocrats, should be entrusted with these life-and-death decisions.
If this idea seems familiar, it’s because it has a long and dark history that harkens back to the eugenicists who argued that only the “fittest” should be allowed to breed, and anyone deemed “unfit” by the government-appointed boards—presided over by the eugenicists—should be sterilized, or, in extreme cases, put to death.
GEORGE BERNARD SHAW: [. . .] But there are an extraordinary number of people whom I want to kill. Not in any unkind or personal spirit, but it must be evident to all of you — you must all know half a dozen people, at least—who are no use in this world. Who are more trouble than they are worth. And I think it would be a good thing to make everybody come before a properly appointed board, just as he might come before the income tax commissioner, and, say, every five years, or every seven years, just put him there, and say: “Sir, or madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence?”
This is the exact same talk of “Life Unworthy of Life” that was employed in Nazi Germany as justification for their Aktion T4 program, which resulted in over 70,000 children, senior citizens and psychiatric patients being murdered by the Nazi regime.
MODERATOR: So we’ll do the same format. It’ll be three minutes and then time for questions. We’ll start with Mr. Chaitkin.
ANTON CHAITKIN: [My name is] Anton Chaitkin. I’m a historian and the history editor for Executive Intelligence Review.
President Obama has put in place a reform apparatus reviving the euthanasia of Hitler Germany in 1939 that began the genocide there. The apparatus here is to deny medical care to elderly, chronically ill and poor people and thus save, as the president says, two to three trillion dollars by taking lives considered “not worthy to be lived” as the Nazi doctors said.
Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel and other avowed cost-cutters on this panel also lead a propaganda movement for euthanasia headquartered at the Hastings Center, of which Dr. Emanuel is a fellow. They shape public opinion and the medical profession to accept a death culture, such as the Washington state law passed in November to let physicians help kill patients whose medical care is now rapidly being withdrawn in the universal health disaster. Dr. Emmanuel’s movement for bioethics and euthanasia and this council’s purpose directly continue the eugenics movement that organized Hitler’s killing of patients and then other costly and supposedly “unworthy” people.
Dr. Emanuel wrote last October 12 that a crisis, war and financial collapse would get the frightened public to accept the program. Hitler told Dr. Brandt in 1935 that the euthanasia program would have to wait until the war began to get the public to go along. Dr. Emanuel wrote last year that the hippocratic oath should be junked; doctors should no longer just serve the needs of the patient. Hoche and Binding, the German eugenicists, exactly said the same thing to start the killing.
You on the council are drawing up the procedures to be used to deny care which will kill millions if it goes ahead in the present world crash. You think perhaps the backing of powerful men, financiers, will shield you from accountability, but you are now in the spotlight.
Disband this council and reverse the whole course of this nazi revival now.
It should come as no surprise, then, that Emanuel emerged last year as the lead author of a New England Journal of Medicine article advocating for rationing COVID-19 care that was later adopted by the Canadian Medical Association. The paper, “Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of Covid-19,” was written by Emanuel and a team of prominent bioethicists and discusses “the need to ration medical equipment and interventions” during a pandemic emergency.
Their recommendations include removing treatment from patients who are elderly and/or less likely to survive, as these people divert scarce medical resources from younger patients or from those with more promising prognoses. Although the authors refrain from using the term, the necessity of setting up a “death panel” to determine who should or should not receive treatment is implicit in the proposal itself.
In normal times, this would have been just another scholarly discussion of a theoretical situation. But these are not normal times. As Canadian researcher and medical writer Rosemary Frei documented at the time, the declared COVID crisis meant the paper quickly went from abstract proposal to concrete reality.
JAMES CORBETT: Let’s get back to that question about hospital care rationing, which is such an important part of this story. And it’s one of those things that when you read it at a surface level at first glance sounds reasonable enough, but the more that you look into it I think it becomes more horrifying.
And you quote, for example, specifically a March 23rd paper, “Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of Covid-19,” which was published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, which calls for “maximizing the number of patients that survived treatment with a reasonable life expectancy.” Which, again, I would say sounds reasonable at first glance. Yes, of course we want to maximize the number of patients that survive. What’s wrong with that?
So what can you tell us about this paper and the precedent that it’s setting here.
ROSEMARY FREI: Well it’s all of a sudden changing the rules in terms of saying, “Well, the most important thing is that it’s the older people get a lower place in terms of triaging.”
And I point out in my article, also, that Canadians have a lot of experience with SARS because we had that—there were a significant number of deaths in Ontario because of it. And there were people from Toronto who had direct experience with SARS—which of course is (ostensibly, at least) a cousin with the novel coronavirus—who wrote triaging guidelines, or at least an ethical framework for how to triage during a pandemic—this was in 2006—they didn’t mention age at all. And here we are 14 years later, every single set of guidelines, including this really important New England Journal of Medicine paper say, “Well, age is an important criterion.” And this is what’s interesting.
So this paper is really important because—and also the Journal of the American Medical Association, which is the official organ, I would say, of the American Medical Association says the same thing: it’s age. So they’re all stepping in line and then the Canadian Medical Association said, “Oh, we don’t have time to put our own guidelines together so we’ll just use this one from the New England Journal of Medicine.” To me, that’s astonishing.
When I was a medical writer and journalist, I did some work helping various—one particular organization: the Canadian Thoracic Society, which does, you know, chest infections and stuff. I helped them put together guidelines. There’s a whole big set of organizations for every single specialty for creating guidelines. Yet, “Oh!
We don’t have time to put together this—” And also, I mean Canada had a lot of experience with SARS, so we had a lot of this background. Yet, “Oh, we can’t do so it!” So they gave totally—they, quote, they said we have to go with the recommendations from the New England Journal of Medicine.
That bioethicists like Emanuel are writing papers that are changing the rules for rationing health care in the midst of a generated crisis should hardly be surprising for someone whose brother infamously remarked that you should never let a good crisis go to waste.
RAHM EMANUEL: You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that, it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.
But from a broader perspective, it is not at all surprising that the concept of “death panels” has been effectively smuggled in through the back door by the bioethicists.
In fact, when you start documenting the history of bioethics, you discover that this is exactly what this field of study is meant to do: Frame the debate about hot button issues so that eugenicist ideals and values can be mainstreamed in society and enacted in law. From abortion to euthanasia, there isn’t a debate in the medical field that wasn’t preceded by some bioethicist or bioethics institute preparing the public for a massive change in mores, values and laws.
That research into the history of bioethics leads one to the doorstep of the Hastings Center, a nonprofit research center that, according to its website, “was important in establishing the field of bioethics.” The founding director of the Hastings Center, Theodosius Dobzhansky, was a chairman of the American Eugenics Society from 1969 to 1975. Meanwhile, Hastings cofounder Daniel Callahan—who has admitted to relying on Rockefeller Population Council and UN Population Fund money in the early days of the center’s work—served as a director of the American Eugenics Society (rebranded as The Society for the Study of Social Biology) from 1987 to 1992.
As previous Corbett Report guest Anton Chaitkin has extensively documented, there is a line of historical continuity connecting the promotion of eugenics in America by the Rockefeller family in the early 20th century to the creation of the Hastings Center in the late 20th century. The Center, Chaitkin points out, was fostered by the Rockefeller-founded Population Council as a front for pushing the eugenics agenda—including abortion, euthanasia and the creation of death panels—under the guise of “bioethics.”
CHAITKIN: Eugenics practices that we saw and discussions and preparations for eugenics, which were going on in the United States in the early 1920s and earlier going back to the late 19th century—those discussions were carried over—and the same discussions and preparations in England—were carried over into Nazi Germany. After the war—after World War II—people who had participated in these movements wanted to keep the eugenics idea alive and with the backing of particularly the Rockefeller Foundation—which had backed Nazi eugenics before World War II in Europe—they set up a population control movement that overlapped with the Eugenics Society and with eugenics ideas. And out of that combination of eugenics and population control was born the institutes and programs which are today at the heart of what’s called “bioethics,” where you decide—so, supposedly decide—ethical questions in a medical practice based on supposedly limited resources.
So it’s a completely phony and morally disgusting field in general. It’s ill-born at the root of it and it’s a practice which has never confronted—in the medical community and in the academic community that has this as part of its, you know, its practice—they’ve never confronted the basis for the existence of this “bioethics.”
The history of bioethics connects the Rockefeller funding behind the first wave of American eugenics, the Rockefeller funding behind the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes and the Nazi-era German eugenics program, and the Rockefeller funding behind the Population Council, the Hastings Center and other centres for post-war “crypto-eugenics” research. As a result, it is perhaps not surprising to find that many of the most well-known and most controversial bioethicists working today are associated with the Hastings Center.
Take Ezekiel Emanuel himself. In addition to being a senior fellow at the John Podesta-founded Center for American Progress—which was accused in a 2013 expose from The Nation of maintaining “a revolving door” with the Obama administration and running a pay-for-play operation for various industry lobbyists—Emanuel is also a Hastings Center fellow. In fact, Emanuel’s career as a bioethicist was kickstarted by a November 1996 article in The Hastings Center Report, which—after praising Daniel Callahan’s attempts to inject a debate about the goals of medicine into the discussion of health care—highlighted a point on which both liberals and communitarians can agree: “services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed.” For “an obvious example” of this principle in action, Emanuel then cites “not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.”
Just last year, The Hastings Center hosted an online discussion about “What Values Should Guide Us” when considering COVID-19 pandemic restrictions in the United States, during which Emanuel opined that big tech was not doing enough to share data about users’ movements with governments and researchers:
EMANUEL: I have to say I’ve actually found Big Tech totally unhelpful so far in this. It’s hard for me to see that they’ve done something really, really helpful in this regard when it comes to COVID-19. They have lots of capacity. Believe me: Facebook already knows who you interact with on a regular basis; how close you’ve gotten to them; when you leave your house; which stores you go into. Google does the same. And they have not used this data. Maybe they’re afraid that people are going to be all upset, but they haven’t even been willing to give it to someone else to use in an effective manner. And I think either they’re going to become irrelevant in this process or they’re going to have to step up and actually be contributory to solving this problem.
Or take Hastings Center fellow and University of Wisconsin-Madison bioethics professor Norman Fost, who, in addition to questioning whether it is “important that organ donors be dead” in the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, made the case for involuntary sterilization—the hallmark of the now universally denounced American eugenics program—at a 2013 panel discussion on “Challenging Cases in Clinical Ethics.”
NORMAN FOST: On the sterilization thing, if his sexual behavior can be attenuated so that he’s not a risk of impregnating anybody that would be the best thing. But I don’t think we should rule out sterilization as being in his interest also, as well as potential victims of his sexual assault.
I think sterilization has a bad reputation in America because of the eugenic sterilization of a hundred thousand or more people with developmental disabilities, most of them inappropriate. But the overreaction to that . . . and Wisconsin leads the way at overreacting to that. We have a Supreme Court decision that says you can never sterilize a minor until the legislature gives us permission to do it and they never will and that’s not in the interest of a lot of kids with developmental disabilities for whom procreation would be a disaster—that is pregnancy or inflicting a pregnancy.
So if it’s the case that this fella is never going to be capable of being a parent . . . and I can’t tell quite that from the limited history here and it may not be the case—but I just want to say that the country’s overreaction to sterilization—like it’s wrong, it’s always terrible to involuntarily sterilized somebody—is not true and it ought to be at least on the table as something that might be in his interest.
But these discussions are not limited to the ranks of the Hastings Center.
Take Joseph Fletcher. Dubbed a pioneer in the field of biomedical ethics by both his critics and his apologists, Fletcher was the first professor of medical ethics at the University of Virginia and co-founded the Program in Biology and Society there. In addition to his position as president of the Euthanasia Society of America and his work helping to establish the Planned Parenthood Federation, Fletcher was also a member of the American Eugenics Society. In a 1968 article in defense of killing babies with Down’s syndrome “or other kind[s] of idiot[s],” Fletcher wrote:
“The sanctity (what makes it precious) is not in life itself, intrinsically; it is only extrinsic and bonum per accident, ex casu – according to the situation. Compared to some things, the taking of life is a small evil and compared to some things, the loss of life is a small evil. Death is not always an enemy; it can sometimes be a friend and servant.”
Or take Peter Singer. If there is any bioethicist in the world today whose name is known to the general public it is Peter Singer, famed for his animal liberation advocacy. Less well known to the public, however, are his arguments in favor of infanticide, including the notion that there is no relevant difference between abortion and the killing of “severely disabled infants,” positions which have driven his critics to call him “Son of Fletcher.”
Although Singer is extremely careful to frame his argument for infanticide using the least controversial positions when speaking to the public. . . .
PETER SINGER: . . . So we said, “Look, the difficult decision is whether you want this infant to live or not.” That should be a decision for the parents and doctors to make on the basis of the fullest possible information about what the condition is. But once you’ve made that decision it should be permissible to make sure that the baby dies swiftly and humanely, if that’s your decision. If your decision is that it’s better that the child should not live, it should be possible to ensure that the child dies swiftly and humanely.
And so that’s what we proposed. Now, that’s been picked up by a variety of opponents, both pro-life movement people and people in the militant disability movement—which incidentally didn’t really exist at the time we first wrote about this issue. And they’ve taken us as, you know, the stalking horse—the bogeyman, if you like—because we’re up front in saying that we think this is how we should treat these infants.
. . . his actual writings contain much bolder assertions that would be sure to shock the sensibilities of the average person if they were plainly stated. In Practical Ethics, for example, intended as a text for an introductory ethics course, Singer dispenses with arguments about severe handicaps and birth defects and talks more broadly about whether it is fundamentally immoral to kill a newborn baby, noting that “a newborn baby is not an autonomous being, capable of making choices, and so to kill a newborn baby cannot violate the principle of respect for autonomy.”
After conceding that “It would, of course, be difficult to say at what age children begin to see themselves as distinct entities existing over time”—noting that “Even when we talk with two or three year old children it is usually very difficult to elicit any coherent conception of death”—we could provide an “ample safety margin” for such concerns by deciding that “a full legal right to life comes into force not at birth, but only a short time after birth—perhaps a month.”
Singer is by no means alone in his profession in discussing this subject. In fact, he’s just part of a long line of bioethicists musing about exactly where to draw the line when discussing infanticide.
Take Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, two bioethicists working in Australia who published a paper titled “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?” in The Journal of Medical Ethics in 2012. In that paper, they explicitly defend the practice of infanticide on moral grounds, claiming that “The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus,” and thus “the same reasons which justify abortion should also justify the killing of the potential person when it is at the stage of a newborn.” Lest they be mistaken for forwarding the same old argument on killing severely handicapped newborn babies that bioethicists have been making for decades, the two are careful to add that their proposal includes “cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk.”
Seemingly taken aback by the strong negative reaction to a scholarly article about the moral permissibility of killing babies, the authors of the article responded by accusing the general public of being too ignorant to understand the complex arguments made in the highly academic field of bioethics:
When we decided to write this article about after-birth abortion we had no idea that our paper would raise such a heated debate.
“Why not? You should have known!” people keep on repeating everywhere on the web. The answer is very simple: the article was supposed to be read by other fellow bioethicists who were already familiar with this topic and our arguments. Indeed, as Professor Savulescu explains in his editorial, this debate has been going on for 40 years.
Whatever else may be said about the researchers’ response, this was not a dishonest defense of their work. Julian Savulescu, the editor of The Journal of Medical Ethics that published the article, did point out in his own defense of the publication that the scholarly debate about when it is permissible to kill babies goes back to at least the 1960s, when Francis Crick—the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA and an avowed eugenicist who proposed that governments should prevent the poor and undesirable from breeding by requiring government-issued licenses for the privilege of having a baby—proposed that children should only be allowed to live if, after birth, they are found to have met certain genetic criteria.
Indeed, the pages of the medical ethics journals are filled with just such debates. From Dan Brock’s article on “Voluntary Active Euthanasia,” published in The Hastings Center Report in 1992, to John Hardwig’s 1997 article in the pages of The Hastings Center Report asking “Is There A Duty to Die?” to Hastings Center Deputy Director Nancy Berlinger’s 2008 pronouncement that “Allowing parents to practice conscientious objection by opting out of vaccinating their children is troubling in several ways,” these ethics professors toiling in a hitherto unknown and unremarked corner of academia are having a greater and greater effect in steering the policies that literally mean the difference between life and death for people around the world.
Thousands of medical ethicists and bioethicists, as they are called, professionally guide the unthinkable on its passage through the debatable on its way to becoming the justifiable until it is finally established as the unexceptionable. Those who pause too long to ponder troubling questions along the way are likely to be told that “the profession has already passed that point.” In truth, the profession is usually huffing and puffing to catch up with what is already being done without its moral blessing.
Indeed, bioethicists are not, generally speaking, trained doctors, researchers or medical workers. As academics, they are forced to take the word of doctors and researchers at face value. But which doctors? Whose research? Inevitably, it will be that of the WHO, the AMA and other organizations whose work—as even those within its ranks admit—is not solely dictated by medical need, but by the arbitrary whims of the organizations’ billionaire backers.
We are feeling the effects of this now, when these bioethics professors are held up as gurus who can not only provide medical advice, but actually lecture the public on which medical interventions they are morally obligated to undergo regardless of their own feelings about bodily autonomy.
JULIAN SAVULESCU: It’s important to recognize that mandatory vaccination would not be anything new. There are many mandatory policies, other coercive policies—taxes are a form of coercion. Seatbelts were originally voluntary and they were made mandatory because they both reduce the risk of death to the wearer by 50% and also to other occupants in the car. But importantly some people do die of seat belt injuries, but the benefits vastly outweigh the risks.
Some countries in the world already have mandatory vaccination policies. In Australia the “no jab, no pay” policy involves withholding child care benefits if the child isn’t vaccinated. In Italy there are fines. And in the US children can’t attend school unless they’re vaccinated. All of these policies have increased vaccination rates and have been implementable.
KERRY BOWMAN: Some form of vaccination passport is almost inevitable. With travel it’s virtually a given. And you look at countries like Israel is now introducing the green card. And all this is going on the assumption that people that have been vaccinated are not going to be able to spread the viruses easily, meaning they can’t transmit it and it’s kind of looking like my read on the science is it’s looking like that is the case with most of the vaccines. So that would be the question.
Now some people say we absolutely can’t do it, like, it’s just not fair in a democratic society because there’s people that refuse—don’t want vaccines—and there’s people that can’t have vaccines. But here’s the other side of the argument: Is it really fair to the Canadians that have been locked down for a year when they are vaccinated—they’re no longer a risk to other people—is it really fair to continue to limit their freedom?
So you’ve kind of got those two sides of it colliding.
From its inception, the field of bioethics has taken its moral cue from the card-carrying eugenicists who founded its core institutions. For these academicians of the eugenics philosophy, the key moral questions raised by modern medical advances are always utilitarian in nature: What is the value that forced vaccination or compulsory sterilization brings to a community? Will putting lithium in the water supply lead to a happier society? Does a family’s relief at killing their newborn baby outweigh that baby’s momentary discomfort as it is murdered?
Implicit in this line of thinking are all of the embedded assumptions about what defines “value” and “happiness” and “relief” and how these abstract ideas are measured and compared. The fundamental utilitarian assumption that the individual’s worth can or should be measured against some arbitrarily defined collective good, meanwhile, is rarely (if ever) considered.
The average person, however—largely unaware that these types of questions are even being asked (let alone answered) by bioethics professors in obscure academic journals—may literally perish for their lack of knowledge about these discussions.
All things being equal, these types of ideas would likely be treated as they always have been: as a meaningless parlor game played by ivory tower academics with no power to enforce their crazy ideas. All things, however, are not equal.
Perhaps taking a page from the notebook of his brother, Rahm, about the utility of crisis in effecting societal change, Ezekiel Emanuel declared in 2011 that “we will get health-care reform only when there is a war, a depression or some other major civil unrest.” He didn’t add “pandemic” to that list of excuses, but he didn’t have to. As the events of the past year have borne out, the public are more than willing to consider the previously unthinkable now that they have been told that there is a crisis taking place.
Forced vaccination. Immunity passports. The erection of a biosecurity state. For the first time, the eugenics-infused philosophers of bioethics are on the verge of gaining real power. And the public is still largely unaware of the discussions that these academics have been engaged in for decades.
At the very least, Bill Gates can relax now: We can finally have the discussion on death panels.
Tony Fauci and the Swine Flu Hoax; Betrayal of Trust
In my current series of articles, I’ve taken apart the Ebola and Zika hoaxes.
Now I take you back to the summer of 2009, when the CDC and the World Health Organization were hyping the “deadly H1N1 Swine Flu pandemic.”
They were, of course, also urging people to take the new Swine Flu vaccine. On that subject, here is an excerpt from Robert Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense (3/27/20):
“For example, [Dr. Anthony] Fauci once shilled for the fast-tracked H1N1 influenza (‘swine flu’) vaccine on YouTube, reassuring viewers in 2009 that serious adverse events were ‘very, very, very rare.’ Shortly thereafter, the vaccine went on to wreak havoc in multiple countries, increasing miscarriage risks in pregnant women in the U.S., provoking a spike in adolescent narcolepsy in Scandinavia and causing febrile convulsions in one in every 110 vaccinated children in Australia—prompting the latter to suspend its influenza vaccination program in under-fives.”
However, that is only half the Swine Flu story. The other half—which involves an astounding hoax—was surely something Fauci was aware of at the time.
Fauci was, in fact, recommending a highly dangerous vaccine for protection against AN EPIDEMIC THAT DIDN’T EXIST AT ALL.
His friends and professional colleagues at the CDC were creating the hoax.
Let me run it down for you.
In the summer of 2009, the CDC was claiming there were thousands of Swine Flu cases in the US. But behind these statistics lay an unnerving secret. A major crime, considering the CDC’s mandate to report the truth to the American people:
Secretly, the CDC had stopped counting cases of Swine Flu.
What? Why?
CBS investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, discovered the CDC secret; and she found out why.
The routine lab testing of tissue samples from the most likely Swine Flu patients was coming back, in the overwhelming percentage of cases, with: NO SIGN OF SWINE FLU OR ANY OTHER KIND OF FLU.
Attkisson wrote an article about this scandal, and it was published on the CBS News website. However, the next, bigger step—putting out the story on CBS television news—was waylaid. No deal. And CBS shut down any future investigation on the subject. Attkisson’s article died on the vine. No other major news outlet in the world picked up her article and ran with it deeper into the rabbit hole.
Here is what Attkisson told me when I interviewed her:
Rappoport: In 2009, you spearheaded coverage of the so-called Swine Flu pandemic. You discovered that, in the summer of 2009, the Centers for Disease Control, ignoring their federal mandate, [secretly] stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America. Yet they continued to stir up fear about the “pandemic,” without having any real measure of its impact. Wasn’t that another investigation of yours that was shut down? Wasn’t there more to find out?
Attkisson: The implications of the story were even worse than that. We discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! The interest in the story from one [CBS] executive was very enthusiastic. He said it was “the most original story” he’d seen on the whole Swine Flu epidemic. But others pushed to stop it [after it was published on the CBS News website] and, in the end, no [CBS television news] broadcast wanted to touch it. We aired numerous stories pumping up the idea of an epidemic, but not the one that would shed original, new light on all the hype. It was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story. With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary.
—end of interview excerpt—
So…fake pandemic, CDC crimes, and a damaging vaccine.
But that wasn’t end of it. The CDC wanted to commit another crime. About three weeks after Attkisson’s findings were published on the CBS News website, the CDC, obviously in a panic, decided to double down. If one lie is exposed, tell an even bigger one. A much bigger one.
Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 [2009].” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon).
Are your eyeballs popping? They should be.
Fast forward to 2020. Who in his right mind, armed with a little history, would believe anything the CDC is saying about COVID-19? The discovery of a new coronavirus. The case and death numbers, the accuracy of the diagnostic tests, the need for lockdowns and economic devastation, the safety and importance of a vaccine, the fear porn? Who would believe any of it?
And who would believe anything coming out of the mouth of Dr. Anthony Fauci?
After years of building a reputation as a “ruthless tech monopolizer,” Bill Gates 2.0 was launched with the creation of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. With this foundation, he reinvented and rebranded himself as one of the world’s most generous philanthropists
However, Gates’ brand of philanthropy creates several new problems for each one it solves and can best be described as “philanthrocapitalism”
Today, Gates monopolizes or wields disproportional influence over the tech industry, global health and vaccines, agriculture and food policy (including biopiracy and fake food), weather modification and other climate technologies, surveillance, education and media
According to Gates, vaccines are phenomenal profit makers, with more than a 20-to-1 return
Gates is now promoting the technocratic “reset” plan, which includes an aggressive climate change agenda, yet Gates’ extensive travel by private jet makes him a top polluter
“Bill Gates — What You Were Not Told,” a segment of the Plandemic documentary,1 reviews the personal and professional background of the Microsoft mogul, Bill Gates. Contrary to popular myth, many see Gates as more of an opportunist than a genius inventor, and the video touches on several of the less honorable moments of his career.
After years of building a reputation as a “ruthless tech monopolizer,” Bill Gates 2.0 was launched with the creation of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. With this foundation, he reinvented and rebranded himself as one of the world’s most generous philanthropists.
Gates’ Charity Is Not What It Seems
Alas, as noted by AGRA Watch,2Shiva Vandana, Ph.D., and others, Gates’ brand of philanthropy creates several new problems for each one it solves and can best be described as “philanthrocapitalism.” As noted in the AGRA Watch article, “Philanthrocapitalism: The Gates Foundation’s African Programs Are Not Charity,” published in December 2017, advocates of philanthrocapitalism:3
“… often expect financial returns or secondary benefits over the long term from their investments in social programs. Philanthropy becomes another part of the engine of profit and corporate control. The Gates Foundation’s strategy for ‘development’ actually promotes neoliberal economic policies and corporate globalization.”
Indeed, over the years, Gates has ended up in a position where he monopolizes or wields disproportional influence over not only the tech industry, but also global health and vaccines, agriculture and food policy (including biopiracy and fake food), weather modification and other climate technologies,4 surveillance, education and media.
Not surprisingly, he’s tied to online fact checker organizations that strangle free speech, and recently told “60 Minutes” that to combat mistrust in science, we need to find ways to “slow down the crazy stuff.”5 What’s “crazy” and what’s not, however, is rarely as clear-cut as the mainstream media would like you to believe.
And, like a true philanthrocapitalist, Gates’ generosity ends up benefiting himself most of all. As discussed in “Bill Gates — Most Dangerous Philanthropist in Modern History?” the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation donates billions to the very same companies and industries that the foundation owns stocks and bonds in.
As Gates himself reveals in the featured video, he figured out that vaccines are phenomenal profit makers, saying they’re the best investment he’s ever made, with more than a 20-to-1 return. The one thing that allows for this is the liability shield vaccine makers have been given by the government.
Gates, Global Climate Czar
As mentioned in the featured video, Gates is financing an effort to divert solar rays from the Earth’s surface in an attempt to combat global warming — an irrational approach at best, considering the potential this has to devastate global agriculture.
His latest book also details his climate change recommendations, which just so happen to include urging governments to support the very companies he’s invested in and similar sleight-of-hand gestures.
Meanwhile, as noted by The Nation, Gates himself is a serious polluter, with a 66,000 square-foot mansion, a private jet, 242,000 acres of farmland (which makes him the largest farmland owner in the U.S.) and investments in fossil fuel-dependent industries such as airlines, heavy machinery and cars.
“According to a 2019 academic study6 looking at extreme carbon emissions from the jet-setting elite, Bill Gates’s extensive travel by private jet likely makes him one of the world’s top carbon contributors — a veritable super emitter,” The Nation writes.7
“In the list of 10 celebrities investigated — including Jennifer Lopez, Paris Hilton, and Oprah Winfrey — Gates was the source of the most emissions. ‘Affluent individuals can emit several ten thousand times the amount of greenhouse gases attributed to the global poor,’ the paper noted. ‘This raises the question as to whether celebrity climate advocacy is even desirable …’”
Gates Leads the Technocratic Takeover
Gates’ focus on climate change makes perfect sense once you realize that he’s part of the technocratic elite that, for decades, have been working to gobble up the world’s resources in anticipation for the Great Reset, previously known as the One World Order.
Over the past year, the need for the Great Reset has been announced by government leaders around the world, the clarion call being that we need to “reset” the global economy and the way we live, work, travel and socialize in order to make the world more fair and sustainable. Addressing climate change under the banner of a global emergency is part and parcel of that PR campaign.
If you’ve paid attention, you’ve probably seen the hints. During the initial lockdowns in the early part of 2020, there were a slew of articles talking about how nature and wildlife were thriving in the absence of human socialization and travel. At other times, the COVID-19 pandemic has been presented as a warning to us all as to what happens when you get out of sync with nature.
No Real Food for You
Gates clearly feels pressure to do his part to realize the technocratic dream. He told “60 Minutes”8 he is eager to see his various visions come to fruition within his lifetime, and he guesses he might have 20 or 30 years left. As reported by ZeroHedge:9
“Gates is pushing drastic and ‘fundamental’ changes to the economy in order to immediately halt the release of greenhouse gasses — primarily carbon dioxide— and ‘go to zero’ in order to save the planet from long-prognosticated (and consistently wrong) environmental disaster. Changes we’ll need to make in order to realize Gates’ vision include:
Allocating $35 billion per year on climate and clean energy research.
Electric everything.
Widespread consumption of fake meat, since cows account for ‘4% of all greenhouse gases.’
Retooling the steel and cement industries, which Gates says account for 16% of all carbon dioxide emissions, to inject up to 30% of captured C02 into concrete, and create a different type of steel.
Widespread adoption of next generation nuclear energy to supplement wind and solar.
And since producing plants to make fake meat emits gases as well, Gates has backed a company which uses fungus to make sausage and yogurt, which the billionaire calls ‘pretty amazing’ … ‘The microbe was discovered in the ground in a geyser in Yellowstone National Park. Without soil or fertilizer it can be grown to produce this nutritional protein — that can then be turned into a variety of foods with a small carbon footprint.’”
Indeed, Gates would like wealthy Western nations to switch entirely to synthetic lab-grown beef, and rails against legislative attempts to make sure fake meats are properly labeled as such, since that slows down public acceptance.10
Gates Again Proves Feudalism Is a Failed System
With his land ownership, Gates clearly is in a monopoly position (yet again!) to drive agriculture and food production in whatever direction he desires, and he wants us all to eat as much fake food as possible. As noted in a long and detailed article on Gates’ philanthrocapitalist endeavors by The Defender:11
“Thomas Jefferson believed that the success of America’s exemplary struggle to supplant the yoke of European feudalism with a noble experiment in self-governance depended on the perpetual control of the nation’s land base by tens of thousands of independent farmers, each with a stake in our democracy.
So at best, Gates’ campaign to scarf up America’s agricultural real estate is a signal that feudalism may again be in vogue. At worst, his buying spree is a harbinger of something far more alarming — the control of global food supplies by a power-hungry megalomaniac with a Napoleon complex.”
The article goes on to detail Gates’ “long-term strategy of mastery over agriculture and food production globally,” starting with his support of GMOs in 1994. Ever since then, Gates’ “philanthropic” approaches to hunger and food production have been built around his technology, chemical, pharmaceutical and oil industry partners, thereby ensuring that for every failed rescue venture, he gets richer nonetheless.
“As with Gates’ African vaccine enterprise, there was neither internal evaluation nor public accountability,” The Defender writes.12 “The 2020 study ‘False Promises: The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA)’ is the report card on the Gates’ cartel’s 14-year effort.
The investigation concludes that the number of Africans suffering extreme hunger has increased by 30 percent in the 18 countries that Gates targeted. Rural poverty has metastasized dramatically …
Under Gates’ plantation system, Africa’s rural populations have become slaves on their own land to a tyrannical serfdom of high-tech inputs, mechanization, rigid schedules, burdensome conditionalities, credits and subsidies … The only entities benefiting from Gates’ program are his international corporate partners …
His investment history suggests that the climate crisis, for Gates and his cronies, is no more than an alibi for intrusive social control, ‘Great Reset’-scale surveillance, and massive science fiction geoengineering boondoggles, including his demented and terrifying vanity projects to spray the stratosphere with calcium chloride or seawater to slow warming, to deploy giant balloons to saturate our atmosphere with reflective particles to blot out the sun, or his perilous gambit of releasing millions of genetically modified mosquitoes in South Florida.
When we place these nightmare schemes in context alongside the battery of experimental vaccines he forces on 161 million African children annually, it’s pretty clear that Gates regards us all as his lab rats.”
Gates Foundation Seeded Catastrophic COVID-19 Policies
Gates, of course, has also played a leading role in the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. According to investigative journalist Jordan Schachtel who has a channel on Substack,13 Gates had a hand in the “criminally negligent coronavirus response policies” that killed an inordinate number of senior citizens in nursing homes in New York, California, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Schachtel points out that a common thread in these instances is that they listened to the frightfully inaccurate modeling forecasts from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), which is funded and controlled by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He writes:14
“In March and early April, politicians were informed by the modeling ‘experts’ at Gates-funded IHME that their hospitals were about to be completely overrun by coronavirus patients.
Modelers from IHME claimed this massive surge would cause hospitals to run out of lifesaving equipment in a matter of days, not weeks or months. Time was of the essence, and now was the time for rapid decision making, the modelers claimed.
On two separate April 1 and April 2 press conferences, Cuomo made clear that his policy decisions were based off of the IHME model … In an April 9 briefing, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer referred to the IHME model in order to project deaths and the PPE resources needed for the supposed surge. It was the same story with the government of Pennsylvania.”
White House Coronavirus Task Force members Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, both of whom have substantial ties to Gates, also relied on the IHME forecast models. As noted by Schachtel:
“These models, and the policy decisions that were made by relying on them, set off a chain of events that led to indefinite lockdowns, complete business closures, statewide curfews, and most infamously, the nursing home death warrants.”
Delete That Which No Longer Serves
The Gates Foundation also co-sponsored Event 201, a scripted tabletop exercise held mere months before the COVID-19 outbreak that ended up being remarkably prophetic.
Strangely enough, in an April 2020 BBC interview, Gates denied the simulation had occurred, saying that “We didn’t simulate this, we didn’t practice, so both the health policies and economic policies, we find ourselves in uncharted territory.”15 In an article for National Herald India, Norbert Häring highlights Gates’ apparent forgetfulness, stating:16
“It is true that if a little less emphasis had been placed on opinion manipulation, more attention could have been paid to health and economic policy. One of the four meetings was entirely devoted to this. But health and economic policies did get discussed. Gates can hardly have forgotten that.
The video on control of public opinion is the most interesting one, as it helps to put in perspective the efforts in this regard, which we are currently experiencing. One participant tells us that Bill Gates is financing work on algorithms which comb through the information on social media platforms to make sure that people can trust the information that they find there.”
Gates has also erased other evidence where the truth is coming back to haunt him. Case in point: Gates-funded fact checkers have vehemently denied claims that Gates ever said we’ll need digital vaccine passports, passing it off as yet another crazy conspiracy theory.
But Gates did say that in a June 2020 TED Talk. Someone just edited that specific statement out of his speech after the quote started making the rounds on social media. In a December 11, 2020, article, The Defender presented the proof.17
Fact checkers also dismiss claims that subdermal microchips or digital tattoos will eventually be used to track and trace us, yet as noted by The Defender, Gates did commission MIT to develop an injectable quantum dot dye system to “tattoo” medical data on your body, and has patented technology that uses implanted biosensors that monitor body and brain activity and is tied to a crypto currency system.
He’s also invested tens of millions into microchip devices with remote-controlled drug-delivery systems, military contractors that track and trace pandemic infections and vaccine compliance, and has a greater than $1 billion investment in 5G video surveillance satellites and 5G antennas. When you put all of these things together, Gates’ plans start to take on a rather ominous feel.
Gates Is the Most Visible Figurehead of Modern Technocracy
Whether preplanned or not, the COVID-19 pandemic is clearly being used to usher in highly controversial changes that are unmistakably totalitarian-building, including the private take-over of government through public-private partnerships.
Surveillance has become the biggest for-profit industry on the planet, and your entire existence is now being targeted for profit. Among those who stand to profit the most is Gates himself.
You also won’t want to miss my interview with Patrick Wood, featured in “The Pressing Dangers of Technocracy.” He paints a picture that can be hard to swallow, especially if you’re just coming around to hearing about all of this for the first time, but it’s really crucial that everyone begin to understand what we’re facing.
Time is running out. To have any chance of stopping it, we must understand our trajectory, and unite to change the course Gates and others like him have set for us.
Corona Investigative Committee: PhD Scientist, Working for Decades with WHO, Exposes Deep Corruption of Bill Gates, GAVI, WHO, the UN & Global Governments
The video found below is an excerpt from the full 4+ hour session of the Corona Investigative Committee which was livestreamed on February 26th. Most of this session was exclusively in German without English subtitles. The clip found below is in English and German. View the full 4+ hour video here. The livestream session begins sometime after the 14 minute mark.
Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger is an interdisciplinary scientist at University of Geneva and Lausanne, Switzerland. She is an invited professor in European universities, an author and international public speaker
Dr. Stuckelberger begins by giving an overview of her extensive background working with WHO (World Health Organization) over several decades and how she came to understand the way the United Nations and WHO work.
“I’ve been doing research/training my whole life…Since very early on I was in WHO….I was taken in a geriatric unit with WHO-collaborated studies at the hospital in Geneva, Switzerland to do research. And research was always more and more for political decisions. So since the 90s I’ve been deputy director of the Swiss National Program of Aging — 12 million francs and we had to do science for politics, for politicians…”
Speaking of Bill Gates’ GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization), based in Switzerland:
“Switzerland is the center…of a lot of corruption. Because we have one of the most important NGO — that’s GAVI. Global Alliance Aaccine Initiative, which the foundation Bill Gates has. Which has — I tell you I have the papers — total immunity. Total, total. They can do drug trafficking, they can do whatever they want. The police can not come and look into their computer. “
Critical information is revealed concerning the web of global control that Bill Gates, GAVI and WHO have created — and how they have set themselves up as dictators with the special status of being “criminally immune”.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Even some in the independent media have bought into the hype surrounding the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID vaccine and its “non-profit” nature. But once you peel back the layers of obfuscation you quickly find not only the profit motive hiding underneath, but the dark specter of eugenics. Whitney Webb of Unlimited Hangout joins us to discuss her recent article, “Developers of Oxford-AstraZeneca Vaccine Tied to UK Eugenics Movement.”
[Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: RFK, Jr. and Dr. Vandana Shiva share a powerful overview of how Big Food & Big Pharma billionaires are attempting to crash the global economy & colonize the entire planet. These courageous farmers in India are standing in truth on behalf of all humanity.]
“I think that is the clash we are living through. You know, the billionaires wanting
to turn everything into their portfolio. And the ordinary people saying ‘no, we
want to protect our land’.” ~ Vandana Shiva
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
With a new epilogue about Bill Gates’s global agenda and how we can resist the billionaires’ war on life
Widespread poverty and malnutrition, an alarming refugee crisis, social unrest, and economic polarization have become our lived reality as the top 1% of the world’s seven-billion-plus population pushes the planet―and all its people―to the social and ecological brink.
In Oneness vs. the 1%, Vandana Shiva takes on the Billionaires Club of Gates, Buffet, and Zuckerberg, as well as other modern empires whose blindness to the rights of people, and to the destructive impact of their construct of linear progress, have wrought havoc across the world. Their single-minded pursuit of profit has undemocratically enforced uniformity and monocultures, division and separation, monopolies and external control―over finance, food, energy, information, healthcare, and even relationships.
Basing her analysis on explosive, little-known facts, Shiva exposes the 1%’s model of philanthrocapitalism, which is about deploying unaccountable money to bypass democratic structures, derail diversity, and impose totalitarian ideas based on One Science, One Agriculture, and One History. She calls for the “resurgence of real knowledge, real intelligence, real wealth, real work, real well-being,” so that people can reclaim their right to: Live Free. Think Free. Breathe Free. Eat Free.
Bill Gates and Neo-Feudalism: A Closer Look at Farmer Bill
Bill Gates has quietly made himself the largest owner of farmland in the United States. For a man obsessed with monopoly control, the opportunity to also dominate food production must seem irresistible.
“Gates has a Napoleonic concept of himself, an appetite that derives from power and unalloyed success, with no leavening hard experience, no reverses.”
— Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, presiding judge in the Gates/Microsoft antitrust-fraud case
Thomas Jefferson believed that the success of America’s exemplary struggle to supplant the yoke of European feudalism with a noble experiment in self-governance depended on the perpetual control of the nation’s land base by tens of thousands of independent farmers, each with a stake in our democracy.
So at best, Gates’ campaign to scarf up America’s agricultural real estate is a signal that feudalism may again be in vogue. At worst, his buying spree is a harbinger of something far more alarming — the control of global food supplies by a power-hungry megalomaniac with a Napoleon complex.
Let’s explore the context of Gates’ stealth purchases as part of his long-term strategy of mastery over agriculture and food production globally.
As usual, Gates coordinates these personal investments with taxpayer-subsidized grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the richest and most powerful organization in all of international aid, his financial partnerships with Big Ag, Big Chemical, and Big Food, and his control of international agencies — including some of his own creation — with awesome power to create captive markets for his products.
Characteristically, Gates’ approach to global problems put technology and his chemical, pharmaceutical and oil industry partners at the center of every solution. As it turned out, Gates’ “innovative strategy” for food production was to force America’s failed system of GMO, chemical and fossil fuel-based agriculture on poor African farmers.
African agricultural practices have evolved from the land over 10,000 years in forms that promote crop diversity, decentralization, sustainability, private property, self-organization and local control of seeds. The personal freedom inherent in these localized systems leaves farm families making their own decisions: the masters on their lands, the sovereigns of their destinies. Continuous innovation by millions of small farmers maximized sustainable yields and biodiversity.
In his ruthless reinvention of colonialism, Gates spent $4.9 billion dollars to dismantle this ancient system and replace it with high-tech corporatized and industrialized agriculture, chemically dependent monocultures, extreme centralization and top-down control. He forced small African farms to transition to imported commercial seeds, petroleum fertilizers and pesticides.
Gates built the supply chain infrastructure for chemicals and seeds and pressured African governments to spend huge sums on subsidies and to use draconian penalties and authoritarian control to force farmers to buy his expensive inputs and comply with his diktats. Gates made farmers replace traditional nutritious subsistence crops like sorghum, millet, sweet potato and cassava with high-yield industrial cash crops, like soy and corn, which benefit elite commodity traders but leave poor Africans with little to eat. Both nutrition and productivity plummeted. Soils grew more acidic with every application of petrochemical fertilizers.
As with Gates’ African vaccine enterprise, there was neither internal evaluation nor public accountability. The 2020 study “False Promises: The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA)” is the report card on the Gates’ cartel’s 14-year effort. The investigation concludes that the number of Africans suffering extreme hunger has increased by 30 percent in the 18 countries that Gates targeted. Rural poverty has metastasized dramatically, and the number of hungry people in these nations has risen to 131 million.
Under Gates’ plantation system, Africa’s rural populations have become slaves on their own land to a tyrannical serfdom of high-tech inputs, mechanization, rigid schedules, burdensome conditionalities, credits and subsidies that are the defining features of Bill Gates’ “Green Revolution.”
The only entities benefiting from Gates’ program are his international corporate partners — and particularly Monsanto, in which the Gates Foundation Trust purchased 500,000 shares worth $23 million in 2010 (but later divested those shares after pressure from civil society groups). Gates himself even filmed commercials for Monsanto’s GMOs, touting them as the “solution” to world hunger.
The AGRA Watch initiative of Seattle-based Community Alliance for Global Justice follows Gates’ agricultural and food policies. According to Heather Day, an AGRA spokesperson, AGRA is a trojan horse for corporate kleptocracy.
“The Gates Foundation and AGRA claim to be ‘pro-farmer,’ ‘pro-poor’ and ‘pro-environment,’” Day told me. “But their approach is closely aligned with transnational corporations, like Monsanto, and foreign policy actors like USAID [United States Agency for International Development].They take advantage of food and global climate crises to promote high-tech, centralized, industrial agriculture that generate profits for Gates’ corporate partners while degrading the environment and disempowering farmers. Their programs are a dark form of philanthrocapitalism based on biopiracy and corporate biopiracy.”
Gates’ climate activism (A memo to my environmental colleagues)
To cloak his dystopian plans for humanity in benign intentions, Gates has expropriated the rhetoric of “sustainability,” “biodiversity,” “good stewardship” and “climate.” These causes are all grim realities that pose existential threats to our children and require urgent attention. However, Gates’ record exposes his benevolent intentions as masquerades for his agenda to maximize personal profit and control.
It’s baffling to me how so many of my friends in the environmental movement have swallowed Gates’ chicanery. In my 40 years as a climate activist, I saw zero evidence of Gates’ funding of genuine climate advocacy; the Gates Foundation is AWOL in the climate wars.
The leading climate groups, National Resource Defense Council, Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Waterkeepers, etc., receive virtually nothing from the world’s largest philanthropy. His investment history suggests that the climate crisis, for Gates and his cronies, is no more than an alibi for intrusive social control, “Great Reset”-scale surveillance, and massive science fiction geoengineering boondoggles, including his demented and terrifying vanity projects to spray the stratosphere with calcium chloride or seawater to slow warming, to deploy giant balloons to saturate our atmosphere with reflective particles to blot out the sun, or his perilous gambit of releasing millions of genetically modified mosquitoes in South Florida.
When we place these nightmare schemes in context alongside the battery of experimental vaccines he forces on 161 million African children annually, it’s pretty clear that Gates regards us all as his lab rats.
Gates has learned to fatten himself on global crises, whether it’s pandemics, climate, famine or mass extinction. Climate change has given Gates an excuse to create monopolies over seed, food and agriculture.
In other words, climate change was the guise for more mischievous geoengineering. Meanwhile, Gates’ ag policies are destroying our planet’s climate systems, pushing millions of species to extinction, desertifying the soil, destroying water systems and enriching the Poison Cartel.
So, a note to my fellow environmental leaders: Bill Gates is not our amigo! Furthermore, Gates has put climate reform in malodour with millions of Americans, who see his climate pretenses in context of his ambitions to control humanity and put an end to economic activity and personal freedom.
It’s largely Gates’ doing that half of America sees climate change as either a “Great Reset” flimflam to shift wealth upward, or a geoengineering boondoggle. It’s on them that they don’t recognize the serious peril of climate change. It’s on us that we seem deliberately blinded to the peril of Bill Gates.
Gates profits from all this confusion; the polarization of the climate debate paralyzes reform efforts thereby preserving the value of his carbon stakes. We all need to recognize who is really behind that Green mask!
Anthony Fauci Joins the Long List of People Incapacitated by Coronavirus Vaccine
Anthony Fauci, the director of the United States government’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told reporters Thursday that he was “knocked out” for about 24 hours after, on Tuesday, taking the second dose of experimental coronavirus vaccine. Fauci has thus joined the large and growing list of people who have suffered serious harm from the injections that he and other government officials have been encouraging Americans to take.
Back on December 22, Fauci said just before publicly having his first shot of the two-shot regimen that he was being injected with the experimental vaccine “as a symbol to the rest of the country that I feel extreme confidence in the safety and the efficacy of this vaccine and I want to encourage everyone who has the opportunity to get vaccinated.”
It turns out Fauci also ended up a symbol of harm that can arise from taking the experimental vaccine.
In a Friday Daily Mail article, Natalie Rahhal provides more information about Fauci’s post-vaccination trouble, as well as the resistance by medical workers and other Americans against pressure to be injected with the experimental vaccine. You can read that article here.
Dr. David Martin Releases ‘The Fauci/COVID-19 Dossier” | 205 Pages, 22 Years of Research
In the video below, Dr. David Martin reads this excerpt from the report:
By March 2015, both the virulence of the S1 spike protein and the ACE II receptor was known to present a considerable risk to human health. NIAID, EcoHealth Alliance and numerous researchers lamented the fact that the public was not sufficiently concerned about coronavirus to adequately fund their desired research.
Dr. Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance offered the following assessment:
“Daszak reiterated that, until an infectious disease crisis is very real, present, and at an emergency threshold, it is often largely ignored. To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, he said, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCMs such as a pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of process, Daszak stated.”
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Bill Gates is the biggest owner of US farmland, having amassed 240,000 acres. His influence in the world food systems is astounding. What can we expect he will do with this inconceivable amount of control over the world’s food supply? Christian takes a deep look at the investments, motivations and goals of the new #1 owner of our farms on this Ice Age Farmer broadcast.
Once more, dear reader, I venture into the insane world where experts falsely claim they’ve proved SARS-CoV-2 exists. Within that world, they contradict themselves. They just can’t keep their story straight.
So let’s begin with Tony Fauci. We have him on video making the following statement: “…In all the history of respiratory borne viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks…Even if there’s a rare asymptomatic person that might transmit [the virus], an epidemic is not driven by an asymptomatic carrier.” [1]
Fauci is emphatic. People with no symptoms who are carrying a virus? Not a problem. They don’t spread the virus to other people. They don’t cause or maintain an epidemic.
Now let’s turn to the CDC. Jay Butler, CDC deputy director for infectious diseases just told the Washington Post, “The bottom line is controlling the COVID-19 pandemic really is going to require controlling the silent pandemic of transmission from persons without symptoms.” [2] [3]
Just the opposite of what Fauci said.
So now we have this:
ONE: People who carry the virus but have no symptoms don’t cause or maintain an epidemic.
TWO: Those very people ARE a major problem, and the epidemic can’t be controlled without controlling them—with masks, distancing, and lockdowns.
Follow the science? What science?
On the back of this gibberish, nations all over the world are seeing their economies destroyed, and hundreds of millions of lives ruined.
It’s a freak show, and the freaks are running it.
Of course, the experts can lie their way out of this. They can say, “Well, this is the FIRST TIME in human history that people with no symptoms are driving an epidemic. We’ve never seen it before…”
Right. This is a special case. Astounding.
If you believe that, I have condos for sale on the far side of the moon.
The truth is, the experts are starting backwards from an unexpressed premise, which is: WE WANT TO LOCK DOWN THE PLANET AND WRECK ITS ECONOMY, AS THE FIRST STEP TO CREATING A BRAND NEW WORLD OF TECHNOCRATIC CONTROL. NOW, WHAT DO WE HAVE TO SAY IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN?
This is how official science operates. It’s political and totalitarian, and it pretends to be objective.
So Jay Butler, the CDC deputy director, rounds off his statement to the Washington Post with this: “The community mitigation tools that we have [masks, distancing, lockdowns] need to be utilized broadly to be able to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2 from all infected persons, at least until we have those vaccines widely available.”
Translation: We have to keep lying, to keep the global population under lock and key. Putting the Chinese model of control in place, in Western countries, takes time. Buy the con for another few years and we’ll have an iron grip on the population.
According to a peer reviewed study published in a respected journal by the world’s most authoritative vaccine scientists, Bill Gates DTP vaccine killed 10 times more African girls than the disease itself. The vaccine apparently compromised their immune systems. Although, such study was never performed before 2017, Bill Gates and the Vaccine Alliance GAVI and WHO pushed the vaccines on unsuspecting African babies.
The study (read below) titled, The Introduction of Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis and Oral Polio Vaccine Among Young Infants in an Urban African Community: A Natural Experiment was commissioned by the Danish government and Novo Nordisk Foundation and was conducted by a team of the world’s leading experts on African vaccination led by two most prominent names, Drs. Søren Wengel Mogensen and Peter Aaby.
The DTP vaccine is a class of combination vaccines against three infectious diseases in humans: diphtheria, pertussis (whooping cough), and tetanus.
The DTP vaccine was discontinued in the United States and other western nations in the 1990s following thousands of reports of death and brain damage. Despite widespread vaccination, the United States and other countries are still experiencing large pertussis outbreaks.
Until the study was published in 2017, the WHO (World Health Organisation) never conducted the kind of vaccinated/unvaccinated (or placebo) study necessary to ascertain if the DTP vaccine actually yields beneficial health outcomes.
The scientists conducting the study were shocked when they found that 50% of children in the African nation of Guinea Bissau die before the age of five.
The GSK – Pfizer Multibillion Dollar Global Vaccine Monopoly
It’s Big Pharma, It’s Big Money. It’s the multibillion dollar global vaccine market.
In August 2019, five months before the onslaught of the Covid-19 crisis, two of the largest Worldwide Pharma conglomerates decided to join hands in a strategic relationship which barely made the headlines.
In an August 2019 Press release GSK confirmed the formation of a major partnership with Pfizer entitled theConsumer Health Joint Venture:
GlaxoSmithKline plc (LSE/NYSE: GSK) today announced that it has completed its transaction with Pfizer to combine their consumer healthcare businesses into a world-leading Joint Venture.
While emphasizing that the relationship is limited to “trusted consumer health brands”, the agreement is nonetheless far-reaching. It includes financial procedures as well as possible joint multibillion dollar investment projects.
While it does not constitute a merger, the GSK report points to selective integration (implying de facto collusion) in areas of marketing and distribution:
… the Joint Venture [GSK-Pfizer] will focus on completing the integration [in consumer health products] of the two businesses, which is expected to realise annual cost savings of £0.5bn by 2022 for expected total cash costs of £0.9 billion and non-cash charges of £0.3 billion. Up to 25% of the cost savings are intended to be reinvested in the business to support innovation and other growth opportunities.
The Vaccine Market
At present, five multinational companies including GSK and Pfizer control 80% of the global vaccine market. Under the agreement between the two companies, GSK-Pfizer is slated to play a dominant and coordinated role in regards to the Covid-19 vaccine.
This GSK-Pfizer relationship also encompasses a network of partner pharmaceutical companies, research labs, virology institutes, military and biotech entities, etc. many of which are currently involved in the Covid vaccine initiative.
Covid Vaccine Financed by Soaring Public Debt
The Covid vaccine is a multibillion dollar operation which will contribute to increasing the public debt of more than 150 national governments.
Supported by the fear campaign, Money rather than Public Health is the driving force behind this initiative:
“The completion of the joint venture with Pfizer marks the beginning of the next phase of our transformation of GSK. This is an important moment for the Group, laying the foundation for two great companies, one in Pharmaceuticals and Vaccines and one in Consumer Health.” (GSK, August 1, 2019, emphasis added)
While the two companies had envisageda “separation” clause following a process of restructuring, GSK and Pfizer have nonetheless integrated their decision making, specifically with regards to the vaccine market:
“With our future intention to separate, the transaction also presents a clear pathway forward for GSK to create a new global Pharmaceuticals/Vaccines company, with an R&D approach focused on science related to the immune system, use of genetics and advanced technologies, … Ultimately, our goal is to create two exceptional, UK-based global companies, with appropriate capital structures” (GSK)
What is at stake is the de facto formation of a Big Pharma Worldwide monopoly with a global network of “partners”.
Most of the so-called 125 (“small pharma”) candidates are involved in subcontracting (out-sourcing) manufacturing and marketing activities on behalf of the Big Pharma conglomerates.
The COVAX Initiative and Big Pharma
The COVAX initiative launched in April 2020 was intended to facilitate the Worldwide distribution of the Covid vaccine. It is coordinated by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, and the World Health Organization (WHO) (all of which are partially funded by the Gates foundation).
In turn, the Gates foundation is a major shareholder of the Big Pharma vaccine conglomerates including GSK and Pfizer:
Sanofi and Glaxosmithkline were awarded about $2.1 billion in July from the U.S. Operation Warp Speed to support development and large-scale manufacturing of their adjuvanted recombinant protein subunit vaccine, providing the federal government with 100 million doses. The companies also have supply deals with the U.K., Canada and Gavi, an international vaccine alliance. (BioWorld, December 202o, emphasis added)
The GSK-Pfizer joint venture alliance is being used to extend their control over vaccine sales and production in all major regions of the World including China and Latin America, through a nexus of corporate and scientific partnerships.
.
Other major actors are France’s Sanofi which acts in partnership with GSK, Moderna which has ties to Pfizer, Merck, Astrazeneca and Johnson and Johnson.
The November 2020 Launching of the Covid Vaccine
Were the standard animal lab tests using mice or ferrets conducted?
This caricature by Large + JIPÉM explains our predicament:
Mouse No 1: “Are You Going to get Vaccinated”,
Mouse No. 2: Are You Crazy, They Haven’t finished the Tests on Humans”
And why do we need a vaccine for Covid-19 when both the WHO and the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have confirmed unequivocally that Covid-19 is “similar to seasonal influenza”.
The unspoken answer is “Big Money”.
Biggest Vaccine Operation in World History
The plan to develop the Covid-19 vaccine is profit driven. It is supported by corrupt governments serving the interests of Big Pharma.
The US government had already ordered 100 million doses back in July 2020 and the EU is to purchase 300 million doses. It’s Big Money for Big Pharma, generous payoffs to corrupt politicians, at the expense of tax payers.
The objective is ultimately to make money, by vaccinating the entire planet of 7.4 billion people for SARS-CoV-2.
The Covid vaccine in some cases envisages more than one shot. If this plan were to go ahead as planned, it would be the largest vaccine initiative in World history and the biggest money making operation for Big Pharma.
Moreover, under the Pfizer Moderna initiative, the mRNA vaccine will have an impact on the human genome.
The ID2020 Digital Vaccine Identity Platform
And there is also the project promoted by GAVI to insert a “digital passport”.
It’s called the ID2020 Agenda, which, according to Peter Koenig constitutes “an electronic ID program that uses generalized vaccination as a platform for digital identity”.
“The program harnesses existing birth registration and vaccination operations to provide newborns with a portable and persistent biometrically-linked digital identity”. (Peter Koenig, March 2020)
The Founding Partners of ID2020 are Microsoft, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) among others.
It is worth noting the timeline: The ID2020 Alliance held their Summit in New York, entitled “Rising to the Good ID Challenge”, on September 19, 2019, exactly one month prior to nCov-2019 simulation exercise entitled Event 201 at John Hopkins in New York:
Is it just a coincidence that ID2020 is being rolled out at the onset of what the WHO calls a Pandemic? – Or is a pandemic needed to ‘roll out’ the multiple devastating programs of ID2020? (Peter Koenig, March 2020)
ID2020 is part of a “World Governance” project which, if applied, would roll out the contours of what some analysts have described as a Global Police
Bill Gates: Deleted Documentary | Why He Switched From Microsoft to Vaccines
Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: This documentary appears to be linked with the Plandemic — Indoctornation project. It was created with the invitation “please share” at the close of the video. Our original source was davidicke.com but it is found on many platforms and websites. None of the sources that we found share creator/producer information. ~ Kathleen
Available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels.
The COVID Vaccine and the Commercial Conquest of the Planet: The Plan
For the past 30 years, I’ve written about the dangers and ineffectiveness of vaccines, including the new COVID vaccine.
I’ve written about cutting edge nanotechnology research and its use, in vaccines, as implanted sensors, which would surveil body and brain processes in real time, and also send instructions to the body and brain.
I’ve written about the absurdity of basic vaccine theory; the unproven notion that the body needs a “rehearsal,” in order to prepare for the “real disease.”
I’ve written about how vaccines, in suppressing the immune system and its full inflammatory response, also suppress the outward signs of diseases, thus presenting a false picture of conquest of those diseases—when in fact the overall health and vitality of the body are reduced.
I’ve written about how criminal word games are played. For example, vaccines causing brain damage in children are shunted into a category called “autism”; and then, researchers claim autism is a separate disease with a genetic cause.
I’ve written about the destructive effects of a hundred years of wall-to-wall promotion of the one-disease-one-germ lie.
I’ve written about DNA vaccines permanently altering the genetic makeup of the recipients.
I’ve written about vaccines used to cause miscarriages in women when they later become pregnant.
But this article is about something else.
It’s about the dawn of a new pharmaceutical era, which was born the moment the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID vaccine was approved.
This marks the first time RNA technology deployed in a drug or vaccine has been dragged across the finish line and conditionally certified as safe and effective—which it is not.
But no matter. Bill Gates and other elite planners and money titans have won what for them is a great victory.
Because RNA vaccines are much faster, easier, and cheaper to produce than traditional vaccines.
Instead of years in the making, they can be developed in months.
And this means…bonanza.
Whole lists of so-called diseases—West Nile, Bird Flu, Zika, Swine Flu, SARS—can now be brought to soaring profits by making RNA vaccines to “prevent them.”
And not only that, a whole parade of older vaccines—hepatitis, measles, seasonal flu, diphtheria, whooping cough, tetanus, etc., can be recast with brand new updated RNA versions.
Researchers can pretend to discover a whole slew of “new viruses” that require RNA vaccines jammed into the marketplace in record time.
Don’t forget the domesticated animal market; RNA vaccines for every conceivable invented purpose sold to big corporations that operate cattle, pig, chicken, and fish “factories.”
We’re talking about trillions and trillions of dollars. More dollars than Amazon dreams of.
This is why the Pfizer RNA COVID vaccine is first in line, and why the Moderna RNA vaccine is next.
Quick, easy, and cheap RNA technology will mean endless numbers of new vaccines. And therefore, a day will come when every person routinely takes a DNA test to establish a profile, and every profile will be fitted to customized sets of vaccines.
In the same way that cosmetics are designed for every shade of skin tone, vaccines will be designed for every DNA profile.
The whole apparatus will be a highly dangerous and ineffective hoax, but what else is new? Vaccines have been a hoax since the beginning. We’re talking about MONEY.
So much money, pharmaceutical companies will be bankrolled directly by governments, after a currency reset makes new money invented out of thin air replace the old “thin air money.” Patients will receive all these vaccines “for free.” Governments will pay the vaccines companies.
UNLESS THESE LUNATICS ARE STOPPED.
Unless the people rebel and refuse the vaccines—no matter what.
If you think the futuristic vaccine-world I’m describing could only be a fantasy, what would masks, distancing, lockdowns, and planetary destruction of national economies have been called 15 years ago?
Think of past vaccines as giant clunky IBM computers sitting in empty rooms…and future vaccines as cell phones carried by billions of people.
Because RNA technology opened the door to faster, easier, and cheaper production.
What remains the same—past, present, and future—is FREEDOM.
The natural right to say NO. And mean it, come hell or high water.
CODA: What could be more awkward and foolish than the Pfizer regimen for their COVID vaccine? A first shot followed by a later booster.
I don’t care how many apps and reminders are built into this system. The fall-off from the first shot to the second will be enormous. People will opt out, after they experience severe adverse effects from the initial injection. They’ll forget to show up according to the prescribed schedule.
As I’ve detailed, the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials of their vaccines were only designed to prevent mild illness—a cough, or chills and fever. Not serious illness. Not hospitalization. Not death. And cough, chills, and fever cure themselves. No need for a vaccine.
But none of this makes any difference to the vaccine kings. They and their public health colleagues can easily rig COVID case numbers in a downward direction—and then claim the success of the vaccine is the reason and the cause.
No, commercially speaking, the point of gaining approval of the vaccine was planting the flag of RNA technology in the marketplace.
This is the equivalent of building the first railroad tracks, digging the first big canals, flying the first air freight carriers.
New markets, new products, new customers, new money.
Marry these with a vast weakening of human vitality and a strengthening of control over populations, through vaccination, and you have the fascist Holy Grail.
Gates and his minions insist the billionaire never said we’d need digital vaccine passports. But in a June 2020 TED Talk, Gates said exactly that. Someone edited out the statement, but CHD tracked down the original.
Some chiseler altered Bill Gates’ June 2020 TED Talk to edit out his revealing prediction that we will all soon need digital vaccine passports (slide 1). But after considerable effort, we tracked down the original video (slide 2).
Gates’ minions on cable and network news, his public broadcasting, social media and fact-checker toadies all now insist that Gates never said such things. They say he never intended to track and trace us with subdermal chips or injected tattoos.
Gates’ company, Microsoft, has patented a sinister technology that uses implanted chips with sensors that will monitor body and brain activity. It promises to reward compliant humans with crypto currency payments when they perform assigned activities.
Gates also invested approximately $20 million in MicroCHIPS, a company that makes chip-based devices, including birth-control implant chips with wireless on/off switches for remote-controlled drug-delivery by medical authorities.
In July 2019, months before the COVID pandemic, Gates bought 3.7M shares of Serco, a military contractor with U.S. and UK government contracts to track and trace pandemic infections and vaccine compliance.
To facilitate our transition to his surveillance society, Gates invested $1 billion in EarthNow, which promises to blanket the globe in 5G video surveillance satellites. EarthNow will launch 500 satellites allowing governments and large enterprises to live-stream monitor almost every “corner” of the Earth, providing instantaneous video feedback with one-second delay.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation also acquired 5.3 million shares of Crown Castle, which owns 5G spy antennas including more than 40,000 cell towers and 65,000 small cells.
Please make your own copy of these clips — as Gates’ power to disappear inconvenient facts is expanding every digital day.
###
[Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: The link in this article to the missing Gates’ clip sends you to Instagram. If, like me, you don’t use that platform, you won’t be able to view it. It can also be viewed HERE on BitChute at SansVimeo channel. – Kathleen]
I’ve been receiving so much email containing articles about “the Great Reset” – usually in conjunction with the covid planscamdemic, digital “currencies”, 2020 American election fraud, and so on – that I decided to do something a little unusual for today’s blog, and high octane speculation. I decided to do just a bit of “dirt scratching” about the familiar face of the “Great Reset” crowd, Dr. Klaus Schwabb. I say “dirt scratching” rather than “digging” because what I ran across was… well… perplexing. There are plenty of articles about him, his agenda, and so on. But these are of a speculative nature.
Schwabb is of course that German guy whose bald pate and perpetually scowling face has been seen in various interviews on the propatainment media lately, opining about the coming golden age vhen everyone vill be surveilled (or perhaps better put, “serveilled”), vill not own any property, und everyone vill haff a guaranteed income, and so on. In short, he’s a globaloneyist sourpuss, handing out edicts and pronouncements in a heavy German accent of vhat he vants ze vorld to be.
I cannot help, when I look and listen to this man, to think of Ian Fleming’s James Bond movies and books, and the shadowy organization called SPECTRE, which is an acronym for Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion. This organization is headed – if you remember your Bond movies – by a German character named Ernst Stavro Blofeld, who in his most memorable incarnation was played by British actor Donald Pleasance, bald, and perpetually hovering around white cats. There were other actors who played Blofeld, of course, including most recently Christopher Waltz, but Pleasance always hit the image of Blofeld on the head for me…
… as does Klaus Schwabb, and that raises the issue of Schwabb’s World Economic Forum as being a sort of real-world counterpart to SPECTRE.
But I digress.
What is interesting about Herr Blofe… er… Schwabb is his biography. Or rather, lack thereof. Just for kicks and giggles, check out the Wikipedia article on this arachnid (that’s a fancy taxonomical term for spiders and ticks):
He obtained his “Abitur” or high school diploma from the Humanistisches Gymnasium in Ravensburg, Germany.
And later on in the entry we’re informed that it was indeed Schwabb who invented the idea of “stakeholders”:
In 1971, Schwab founded the European Management Forum,[23] which in 1987 became the World Economic Forum, as a not-for-profit foundation committed to improving the state of the world. He founded the WEF in 1971, the same year in which he published Moderne Unternehmensführung im Maschinenbau[24] (Modern Enterprise Management in Mechanical Engineering). In that book, he argued that the management of a modern enterprise must serve not only shareholders but all stakeholders (die Interessenten), to achieve long-term growth and prosperity. Schwab has championed the multistakeholder concept since the WEF’s inception. In 2015, the WEF was formally recognised by the Swiss Government as an “international body”[25]. Under Schwab’s management, the WEF has been keen to promote its image as a driver for reconciliation efforts in different parts of the world, acting as a catalyst of numerous collaborations and international initiatives.
In 2004, Schwab created a new foundation using the US$1 million prize money from the Dan David Prize he received that year from Israel. The Forum of Young Global Leaders[26] aims to create a dynamic global community of exceptional people (under 40) with the vision, courage and influence to drive positive change in the world.
And finally, of course, he’s the recipient of numerous awards from the high and mighty:
He was knighted by Queen Elisabeth (Knight Commander of the Order of St Michael and St George, 2006), received the Knight Commanders Cross of Germany (2012) and the Grand Cordon of the Rising Sun of Japan (2013)[33]. He is a Knight of the Légion d’Honneur of France (1997), received the Candlelight Award from then U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan (New York, 2001)[34] and received the China Reform Friendship Medal (2018).
Now you might be asking yourself a question, and believe me, it’s the same question I’m asking myself: OK, Herr Professor Doktor des Globaloneyismus was born in Regensburg in 1938, and the next entry of note we have is him founding the precursor to the World Economic Forum, the European Management Forum, in 1971, a gap of – oh look – 33 years. What was he doing in that 33 years? Well, presumably earning all those doctorates in processology and bureaucratese and technocratism and learning how to become Ernst Stavro Blofeld. With whom did he study? We’re not told. What were his dissertations about? We’re not told. What were his memberships and associations? We’re not told. Who were his parents? We’re not told (although, as one might expect, I entertain some suspicions in all these regards).
In short, there’s a giant lacuna of some 33 years in this globaloney guru’s public record that raises all sorts of questions in my mind. We know, via relatively easily available public sources, next to nothing about this man’s early life.
Almost as if someone, somewhere, does not want those family ties or early associations too well known.
And that, dear readers, sends my suspicion meter into the red zone.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship & to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Description of video from Children’s Health Defense YouTube channel:
In the latest episode of our second season of “TRUTH” with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Kennedy interviews Dr. David Martin.
The two primarily discussed medical patents and the involvement from Dr. Anthony Fauci. Highlights of their conversation include:
– Breaking down Dr. David Martin’s company ‘M·CAM’ and how he found a way to put up intangible assets as collateral security.
– The Bayn – Dole Act that led to Fauci profiting from royalties off University patents.
– Fauci working for the NIAID but failing to study infectious diseases and allergies.
– Fauci involved in dodgy deals and price-fixing medicine in the USA.
– SARS vaccine patented in March 2019, 8 months before the COVID-19 outbreak.
Fauci Wants You Scared, Anxious, and Compliant– It’s Scientific!
For more than 70 years a branch of public health science has been studying fear. But not to help humans cope. Seventy years of study have gone into how to scare people into compliance or submission in obeying public health officials and politicians. As it turns out, fear is a powerful motivator and can drive humans to be more easily manipulated into doing things they would ordinarily resist doing.
Few citizens realize that the government and public health scientists have put time, money and much effort into studying how to scare people into doing what the experts want us to do. The study of fear as a tool to manipulate individuals or populations is called “Fear Appeal.” It is a robust field of study within psychology and public health and has been widely used to intimidate us since the beginning of the pandemic.
Remember when a large group of public health experts, surrounding the President of the United States, announced that there was a new deadly disease loose in the US threatening us with the loss of 2.2 million lives if we did not take drastic measures. I remember the stone in the pit of my stomach, the abject fear that figure and that threat stirred. Two weeks to bend the curve morphed into six weeks, and six weeks has extended seemingly forever.
Now increasing numbers of people are feeling angry at being frightened by the pandemic and COVID-19. We have become aware of the constant release of new bits of bad news or predictions about the disease, and many of us have begun to push back against what some have labeled “panic porn.”[i][ii] Other citizens, especially those with emotional vulnerabilities or who live in lockdown isolation, have suffered from months of the fear-inducing messages leading to depression, anxiety, panic attacks and hopelessness.
No one has been talking openly about this “scientific” form of scare tactics called “fear appeal.” Who knew that scaring us is actually science! Now we see this science being applied daily, especially by Dr. Anthony Fauci, the media face of the science that is used to justify the harshest shutdown measures.
A recent attempt by Dr. Fauci at fear-based influence occurred when he urged Americans to cancel their family Thanksgiving gatherings. [iii][iv] He said “When you have people coming from out of town, gathering together in an indoor setting … it is unfortunate because that’s such a sacred part of American tradition, the family gathering around Thanksgiving, but that is a risk.”
More recently Fauci and the Washington Post used “fear appeal” to sway the election by making dire warnings about a Trump victory. With the presidential election day only 48 hours away on November 2, 2020, Fauci’s warnings about COVID-19 and President Trump’s handling of it became increasingly dire. The Washington Post offered this threatening headline:[v] ‘“A whole lot of hurt”: Fauci warns of covid-19 surge, offers blunt assessment of Trump’s response.’
The article went on to repeat and explain the ominous headline:
“We’re in for a whole lot of hurt. It’s not a good situation,” Anthony S. Fauci, the country’s leading infectious-disease expert, said in a wide-ranging interview late Friday. “All the stars are aligned in the wrong place as you go into the fall and winter season, with people congregating at home indoors. You could not possibly be positioned more poorly.”
More than 70 years of scientific research has gone into this field of fear appeal. [vi] As review authors Witte and Allen explain:
… evaluation of a fear appeal initiates two appraisals of the message, which result in one of three outcomes. First, individuals appraise the threat of an issue from a message. The more individuals believe they are susceptible to a serious threat, the more motivated they are to begin the second appraisal, which is an evaluation of the efficacy of the recommended response. If the threat is perceived as irrelevant or insignificant (i.e., low perceived threat), then there is no motivation to process the message further, and people simply ignore the fear appeal. In contrast, when a threat is portrayed as and believed to be serious and relevant (e.g., “I’m susceptible to contracting a terrible disease”), individuals become scared. Their fear motivates them to take some sort of action—any action—that will reduce their fear. Perceived efficacy (composed of self-efficacy and response efficacy) determines whether people will become motivated to control the danger of the threat or control their fear about the threat. When people believe they are able to perform an effective recommended response against the threat (i.e., high perceived self-efficacy and response efficacy), they are motivated to control the danger and consciously think about ways to remove or lessen the threat. Typically, they think carefully about the recommended responses advocated in the persuasive message and adopt those as a means to control the danger. Alternatively, when people doubt whether the recommended response works (i.e., low perceived response efficacy) and/or whether they are able to do the recommended response (i.e., low perceived self-efficacy), they are motivated to control their fear (because they believe it’s futile to control the danger) and focus on eliminating their fear through denial (e.g., “I’m not at risk for getting skin cancer, it won’t happen to me”), defensive avoidance (e.g., “This is just too scary, I’m simply not going to think about it”), or reactance (e.g., “They’re just trying to manipulate me, I’m going to ignore them”).
In other words, there have now been 70 years worth of study and analysis about
How to frighten us into compliance by making us feel it personally as a risk to ourselves and loved ones
How to suggest actions we can take to alleviate the fear
How to tweak both the inducements of fear and the actions recommended to maximize the response to fear in favor of public health authoritarianism.
Feeling like a little white lab rat yet? There’s more.
In the new millennium fear appeal evolved from a primary focus on behavior relating to communicable diseases, to addressing chronic conditions that are often blamed on lifestyle choices.[vii] Who can forget those abhorrent stop smoking advertisements on television that featured very sick, very elderly people who were dying of cancers or other diseases caused by decades of smoking. The ads featured fear prominently and promised you could avoid that fate of illness, disfigurement, and death if you stopped smoking.
Using fear appeal is fraught with ethical issues and controversy. There are those professionals who feel that the attack on the mental well-being of those receiving the fear message is not justified by any positive outcome or change in behavior. And then, there are those scientists who feel that the ends justify the means, especially if society as a whole is better off because the fear campaign results in changes in behavior that lessen the threat. For example, the fearmonger scientists believe if we are told that millions could die in this pandemic in the U.S., but if we wash our hands for at least 20 seconds every chance we get we can lessen deaths, then it will be worth it if the death rate goes down.
The scientists and public health experts who use fear appeal are proving to be the same individuals who favor a top-down tightly controlled, authoritarian approach to managing a population. No encouragement of can-do Americanism. No appeal to our goodness. No inspiration to face the future with optimism and bravery. These doctors just want to terrify us.
Public health officials love fear-based messages as evidenced by the extensive use of fear in the current pandemic. From the first days where we were told over 2.2 million people would die in the U.S. and hospitals would be overrun and would collapse.[viii] We were told we needed to stay home for 2 weeks to protect hospitals from being overwhelmed and after the two weeks another month was added to the “stay home” period. After that, governors began locking down and issuing emergency orders in some states to “prevent spikes.”
Early on, those spike statistics were numbers of hospitalizations, and numbers of deaths. Then there was a little-discussed shift away from counting hospitalizations and deaths. Now the CDC counts the number of “cases” of COVID-19 meaning anyone who has tested positive even though only a tiny percentage of those testing positive will actually become seriously ill.
There is great news out there amid the tragedy: Numbers of deaths from COVID-19 have plummeted, even as numbers of cases have risen according to official statistics. That means increasing numbers of Americans are surviving the disease. Meanwhile we keep being told to be frightened and go into another shutdown because of the rise in “cases” that aren’t even sick.
Part of leadership is to help the involved members of the affected group stay strong and determined even in the face of dreadful fear and loss. Captains of ships, heads of state, and corporate leaders understand this. Consider when President Trump tries to help us feel reassured. The science experts who are fear mongers ridicule the President and dismiss him as dishonest when he is trying to offer hope and optimism in the face of this tragedy. He is like the captain of a ship in a squall, reassuring passengers that the storm will soon be over, even as the waves are breaking across the deck and tossing the ship about on the high seas.
Use of fear appeal by our government officials and pandemic experts has become rampant. Many of us sense we are being actively manipulated. During this present pandemic we have been left with having to figure out what information we are being given to scare us into conformity and what information we have been given simply because it is scary but true.
Dr. Fauci has become suspect in his pronouncements for several reasons:
First, Fauci has specific drugs that he favors for his croney corporations. He has been in his position as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director for the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) for 38 years. He has influenced the distribution of billions of dollars for specific treatments, especially Remdesivir,[ix] as well as for the development of vaccines to protect against COVID-19. Remdesivir was a bust and Fauci has already discouraged expectations for the vaccines.
Second, Fauci has shown his political hand in his latest paper, “Emerging Pandemic diseases: How We Got to COVID-19” in which he promotes his radical progressive vision by calling for a world where there is no human crowding and where we humans change our habits and thousands of years of social evolution.
Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes that may take decades to achieve: rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence, from cities to homes to workplaces, to water and sewer systems, to recreational and gatherings venues. In such a transformation we will need to prioritize changes in those human behaviors that constitute risks for the emergence of infectious diseases. Chief among them are reducing crowding at home, work, and in public places as well as minimizing environmental perturbations such as deforestation, intense urbanization, and intensive animal farming. Equally important are ending global poverty, improving sanitation and hygiene, and reducing unsafe exposure to animals, so that humans and potential human pathogens have limited opportunities for contact.[x]
Another blog would be required to thoroughly examine the far-reaching consequences of so many changes in human nature and nurture.
Adults spend every day of their lives constantly factoring risks versus benefits in the decisions we make. Should we drive the mile to the store or walk? Should we eat that burger or have some dinner that is less high-fat? And we spend a great deal of time teaching our children how to evaluate risk and reward.
But the facts of the pandemic have continued to be muddied and manipulated so badly that the truth cannot be teased out. We are all being manipulated with misinformation.
My mother is a plucky, healthy and intelligent woman of 94 years of age who lives with us. She watches the news and keeps up with the current events. But when I asked, based on her impressions from watching the news, what she thought her chances were of dying were if she caught COVID-19, she believed she had a 75% chance of dying if she caught COVID-19.
In fact, at worst my mother’s actual chance of dying from COVID-19 is somewhere between 5.6% [xi]and 10%[xii] for anyone over 80 years old. Bear in mind that the statistics for all persons over 80 years old, include patients dying of a terminal illness, in full time nursing home care with chronic incapacitating illnesses such as congestive heart failure or COPD, or otherwise impaired and incapacitated. My mother’s chances of survival are much better.
We should be suspicious of anyone–expert, scientist, doctor or government official–who is trying to frighten us into doing anything more that hurts us, our culture and society, our religious practices, our education and the education of our children, and our friends, neighbors and citizens in our states and in our nation.
We are Americans. No task is too big or too overwhelming. It is time to heal ourselves, heal our communities and states and heal America.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship & to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry & Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Based on the in-depth scientific and historical report, “Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery with Chilling Ties to the Chinese Military” on Breggin.com in the Coronavirus Resource Center.
Philanthrocapitalism — epitomized by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation — has emerged over the last 30 years as a major force with the potential to “push the future of our planet towards extinction and ecological collapse,” according to a report launched Wednesday by Navdanya International.
“Gates to a Global Empire” sheds light on how philanthrocapitalism accelerates the corporate takeover of our seed, agriculture, food, knowledge and global health systems, and how it manipulates information and erodes democracies — all in the name of corporate profits.
The report explores how the Gates Foundation, powered by an “unholy alliance” between big capital, science and technology institutions and states, has established a global empire over life, through monocultures, patents and monopolies designed to destroy the natural world of diversity, self-organization and freedom.
In her introduction to the report, Navdanya International’s founder, Vandana Shiva, said:
“The European Court of Justice has ruled that gene-edited organisms are GMOs. However, Gates is hastily pushing for deregulation with no regard for caution or potentially dangerous consequences. His ‘Gates AgOne’ … initiative is a clear declaration of his intent to create an Empire over life and biodiversity, over food and farming, and over our daily bread.”
With a net worth of nearly $117 billion, Gates is now the most powerful philanthropist in modern history, according to a synthesis of the report. After making technology available to the masses through his popularization of the at-home personal computer, the founder of Microsoft has “taken to reinventing himself as a benevolent philanthropist who uses his technologic influence and private market savvy to solve the world’s most pressing problems through his and his wife’s foundation: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.”
Through its various initiatives, sub-organizations, development schemes and funding mechanisms, Gates weaves, according to the report, “an intricate web of wide-ranging power and influence.”
“Gates to a Global Empire” Report Launch and Online Conferenceby Seed Freedom
Original video available at Seed Freedom YouTube channel.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Lbry, Odysee & Brighteon channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video.]
[As a service to protect truth from censorship, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, LBRY & Brighteon channels. All credit goes to the original source of this video.]
Revisiting all the chimeric and gain of function research performed on coronaviruses in North Carolina.
Lizards Eat Butterflies: an antidote to the “Self-help” Addiction unveils how we’re living on this planet and how we could do so much more to improve our experience with a shift in perspective. In a triumph of cutting-edge science, social commentary, and deeply personal life experience, David Martin shows us that, with an alteration in perspective, that which stands in the way of our humanity is an illusion that can be eradicated.
UN Forced to Admit Gates-funded Vaccine is Causing Polio Outbreak in Africa
This really should be one of the biggest public health scandals of the decade, but instead it’s given little attention – mainly because of the high-profile nature of the people and organisations involved.
The United Nations has been forced to admit that a major international vaccine initiative is actually causing a deadly outbreak of the very disease it was supposed to wipe-out.
While international organisations like the World Health Organization (WHO) will regularly boast about ‘eradicating polio’ with vaccines—the opposite seems to be the case, with vaccines causing the deaths of scores of young people living in Africa.
Health officials have now admitted that their plan to stop ‘wild’ polio is backfiring, as scores children are being paralyzed by a deadly strain of the pathogen derived from a live vaccine – causing a virulent wave of polio to spread.
This latest pharma-induced pandemic started out in the African countries of Chad and Sudan, with the culprit identified as vaccine-derived polio virus type 2.
Officials now fear this new dangerous strain could soon ‘jump continents,’ causing further deadly outbreaks around the world.
Shocking as it sounds, this Big Pharma debacle is not new. After spending some $16 billion over 30 years to eradicate polio, international health bodies have ‘accidentally’ reintroduced the disease to in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and also Iran, as the central Asia region was hit by a virulent strain of polio spawned by the a pharmaceutical vaccine. Also, in 2019, the government of Ethiopia ordered the destruction of 57,000 vials of type 2 oral polio vaccine (mOPV2) following a similar outbreak of vaccine-induced polio.
It’s important to note that the oral polio vaccine is being pushed by the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI), a consortium which is supported and funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
All of this should be cause for concern, especially with western governments and transnational pharmaceutical giants all rushing to roll-out their new Gates-funded experimental coronavirus vaccine for the global population.
Currently, the first experimental COVID-19 vaccine is being tested on the African population through GAVI Vaccine Alliance, another organization funded by the Gates Foundation. A large round of human trials is taking place in South Africa, run by the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg—another Gates-funded institution.
This latest revelation from Africa should prompt journalists and health advocates to ask harder questions about the efficacy and safety of the much-hype COVID ‘miracle’ vaccine.
LONDON (AP) — The World Health Organization says a new polio outbreak in Sudan is linked to an ongoing vaccine-sparked epidemic in Chad — a week after the U.N. health agency declared the African continent free of the wild polio virus.
In a statement this week, WHO said two children in Sudan — one from South Darfur state and the other from Gedarif state, close to the border with Ethiopia and Eritrea — were paralyzed in March and April. Both had been recently vaccinated against polio. WHO said initial outbreak investigations show the cases are linked to an ongoing vaccine-derived outbreak in Chad that was first detected last year and is now spreading in Chad and Cameroon.
“There is local circulation in Sudan and continued sharing of transmission with Chad,” the U.N. agency said, adding that genetic sequencing confirmed numerous introductions of the virus into Sudan from Chad.
WHO said it had found 11 additional vaccine-derived polio cases in Sudan and that the virus had also been identified in environmental samples. There are typically many more unreported cases for every confirmed polio patient. The highly infectious disease can spread quickly in contaminated water and most often strikes children under 5.
In rare instances, the live polio virus in the oral vaccine can mutate into a form capable of sparking new outbreaks.
On Monday, WHO warned that the risk of further spread of the vaccine-derived polio across central Africa and the Horn of Africa was “high,” noting the large-scale population movements in the region.
More than a dozen African countries are currently battling outbreaks of polio caused by the virus, including Angola, Congo, Nigeria and Zambia.
Amid the coronavirus pandemic, many of the large-scale vaccination campaigns needed to stamp out polio have been disrupted across Africa and elsewhere, leaving millions of children vulnerable to infection.
In April, WHO and its partners reluctantly recommended a temporary halt to mass polio immunization campaigns, recognizing the move could lead to a resurgence of the disease. In May, they reported that 46 campaigns to vaccinate children against polio had been suspended in 38 countries, mostly in Africa, because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Some of the campaigns have recently been re-started, but health workers need to vaccinate more than 90% of children in their efforts to eradicate the paralytic disease.
Health officials had initially aimed to wipe out polio by 2000, a deadline repeatedly pushed back and missed. Wild polio remains endemic in Afghanistan and Pakistan; both countries also are struggling to contain outbreaks of vaccine-derived polio.
Press in His Pocket: Bill Gates Buys Media to Control the Messaging
A Columbia Journalism Review expose reveals that, to control global journalism, Bill Gates has steered over $250 million to the BBC, NPR, NBC, Al Jazeera, ProPublica, National Journal, The Guardian, the New York Times, Univision, Medium, the Financial Times, The Atlantic, the Texas Tribune, Gannett, Washington Monthly, Le Monde, Center for Investigative Reporting, Pulitzer Center, National Press Foundation, International Center for Journalists, and a host of other groups. To conceal his influence, Gates also funneled unknown sums via subgrants for contracts to other press outlets.
His press bribes have paid off. During the pandemic, bought and brain-dead news outlets have treated Bill Gates as a public health expert—despite his lack of medical training or regulatory experience.
Gates’s media gifts, says CJR author Tim Schwab, mean that “critical reporting about the Gates Foundation is rare.” The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation declined multiple interview requests from CJR and refused to disclose how much money it has funneled to journalists.
In 2007, the LA Times published one of the only critical investigations on the Gates Foundation, exposing Gates’s holdings in companies that hurt people his foundation claims to help, like industries linked to child labor. Lead reporter Charles Piller, says, “They were unwilling to answer questions and pretty much refused to respond in any sort of way…”
The investigation showed how Gates’s global health funding has steered the world’s aid agenda toward Gates’ personal goals (vaccines and GMO crops) and away from issues such as emergency preparedness to respond to disease outbreaks, like the Ebola crisis.
“They’ve dodged our questions and sought to undermine our coverage,” says freelance journalist Alex Park after investigating the Gates Foundation’s polio vaccine efforts.
Dr. Anthony Fauci has served as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984, but has yet to come out with the “Big One” — a vaccine or infectious disease treatment that will allow him to retire with a victory under his belt
Fauci has flip-flopped on the use of masks, first mocking people for wearing them, and then insisting they should. In mid-July, he suddenly urged governments to “be as forceful as possible” on mask rules
While Fauci still claims there’s only anecdotal evidence supporting the use of hydroxychloroquine, and that the drug doesn’t work for COVID-19, the scientific support for it goes as far back as 2005
In April, Fauci praised the NIAID-sponsored drug Remdesivir, saying it “has a clear-cut and significant positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery.” Overall, the improvement rate for the drug was 31%
Research now shows hydroxychloroquine reduced mortality by 50% when given early, and many doctors anecdotally claim survival rates close to 100%. Despite such excellent results, Fauci continues to disparage and cast doubt on hydroxychloroquine
At 79 years old, Dr. Anthony Fauci — who has served as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984 — has yet to come out with the “Big One” — a vaccine or infectious disease treatment that will allow him to retire with a victory under his belt.
He failed to create a successful vaccine for AIDS, SARS, MERS and Ebola. A COVID-19 vaccine is essentially his last chance to go out in a blaze of glory. As evidenced by his history, he will stop at nothing to protect Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine and Gilead’s antiviral Remdesivir.
He even threw tried and true pandemic protocols out the window when COVID-19 hit, turning into an unquestioning spokesman for draconian liberty-stripping measures instead. To echo a question asked by Dr. Sal Martingano in his article,1 “Dr. Fauci: ‘Expert’ or Co-Conspirator,” why are we not questioning this so-called expert?
Fauci ‘Has Been Wrong About Everything’
The risk we take when listening to Fauci is that, so far, he’s been wrong about most things. In a July 14, 2020, “Opposing View” editorial in USA Today, White House adviser Peter Navarro, director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy, stated that Fauci “has been wrong about everything that I have interacted with him on.”2 According to Navarro, Fauci’s errors in judgment include:3
•Opposing the ban on incoming flights from China in late January 2020.
•Telling the American people the novel virus outbreak was nothing to worry about well into February.
•Flip-flopping on the use of masks — first mocking people for wearing them, and then insisting they should. In fact, mid-July, he suddenly urged governments to “be as forceful as possible” on mask rules.4
•Claiming there was only anecdotal evidence supporting the use of hydroxychloroquine, when the scientific grounds for it go as far back as 2005, when the study,5 “Chloroquine Is a Potent Inhibitor of SARS Coronavirus Infection and Spread,” was published in the Virology Journal.
Fauci should have been well aware of this publication. According to that study,6 “Chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage,” the study authors said. In other words, the drug worked both for prevention and treatment.
As noted by Navarro, more recent research found hydroxychloroquine reduced the mortality rate among COVID-19 patients by 50% when used early.
Interestingly, in a March 24, 2020, interview7 with Chris Stigall, Fauci did say that — were he to speak strictly as a doctor treating patients — he would certainly prescribe chloroquine to COVID-19 patients, particularly if there were no other options.
Then, in August, he flipped back to insisting hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work,8 even though by that time, there were several studies demonstrating its effectiveness against COVID-19 specifically.
So, it appears Fauci has had a hard time making up his mind on this issue as well, on the one hand dismissing the drug as either untested or ineffective against COVID-19, and on the other admitting it would be wise to use, seeing how the options are so limited.
Navarro continues:9
“Now Fauci says a falling mortality rate doesn’t matter when it is the single most important statistic to help guide the pace of our economic reopening. The lower the mortality rate, the faster and more we can open. So when you ask me whether I listen to Dr. Fauci’s advice, my answer is: only with skepticism and caution.”
Fauci Has Done Nothing to Help Unite the Country
While Fauci claims to be exasperated by how political the pandemic has become,10 Robert F. Kennedy Jr. pointed out in an August 2, 2020, Instagram post11 that Fauci himself is, at least in part, part of the problem, as his double standards on hydroxychloroquine have done much to polarize and divide the nation:
“Fauci insists he will not approve HCQ for COVID until its efficacy is proven in ‘randomized, double blind placebo studies.’ To date, Dr. Fauci has never advocated such studies for any of the 72 vaccine doses added to the mandatory childhood schedule since he took over NIAID in 1984. Nor is he requiring them for the COVID vaccines currently racing for approval.
Why should chloroquine be the only remedy required to cross this high hurdle? HCQ is less in need of randomized placebo studies than any of these vaccines since its safety is well established after 60 years of use and decades on WHO’s listed of ‘essential medicines.’
Fauci’s peculiar hostility towards HCQ is consistent with his half century bias favoring vaccines and patent medicines. Dr. Fauci’s double standards create confusion, mistrust and polarization.”
In a June 10, 2020, article,12 Global Research also questioned Fauci’s many attempts to disparage the drug for no apparently valid reason; even promoting the fake (and ultimately retracted) Lancet study that claimed to show hydroxychloroquine was dangerous. At the end of the day, who benefits? Well, certainly it benefits the drug and vaccine industries, which seems to be where Fauci’s loyalties lie.
Fauci’s Bias Is Hard to Miss
While Fauci is not named on the patents of either Moderna’s vaccine or Remdesivir, the NIH does have a 50% stake in Moderna’s vaccine,13 and the recognition that would come with a successful vaccine launch would certainly include Fauci.
He also has lots to lose — if nothing else, his pride — if Remdesivir doesn’t become a blockbuster, as his NIAID is sponsoring the clinical trials.14 The NIAID also supported the original research into Remdesivir, when it was aimed at treating Ebola.15
His bias here is clear for anyone to see. April 29, 2020, he stated16 Remdesivir “has a clear-cut and significant positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery.” How good is that? Patients on the drug recovered in 11 days, on average, compared to 15 days among those receiving a placebo. Overall, the improvement rate for the drug was 31%.
Meanwhile, research17 now shows hydroxychloroquine reduced mortality by 50% when given early, and many doctors anecdotally claim survival rates close to 100%. This still isn’t good enough for Fauci, who continues insisting hydroxychloroquine is a bust.18
His stance on these two drugs certainly doesn’t make sense based on the data alone. But it does make sense if he wants (or has been instructed) to protect the profits of Remdesivir.
As director of NIAID, which has been part of Remdesivir’s development from the start, why wouldn’t he want to see it become a moneymaker for the agency he dedicated his career to? It also makes sense when you consider his primary job is to raise funds for biodefense research, primarily vaccines but also diagnostics and drug therapies.19,20
Fauci Doubts Safety of Russian Vaccine
Early in August 2020, Russia announced they would begin vaccinating citizens with its own COVID-19 vaccine, despite not finishing large-scale human trials.21 The announcement drew skepticism from American infectious disease specialists, including Fauci, who said he has “serious doubts” that Russia’s COVID-19 vaccine is actually safe and effective.22
He’s probably right on that point. It’s hard to imagine you can prove safety and effectiveness in a mere two months of trials. But the fast-tracked vaccine efforts of the U.S. and EU are hardly bound to be significantly better, considering the many shortcuts that are being taken.
Fauci Ignores Two Decades of Failed Coronavirus Vaccines
Despite being in a position to know better, Fauci conveniently ignores the many failed attempts to create other coronavirus vaccines over the past two decades, including vaccines against SARS and MERS. A paper23 by Eriko Padron-Regalado, “Vaccines for SARS-CoV-2: Lessons From Other Coronavirus Strains” reviews some of these past experiences. As noted in the Conservative Review:24
“Since their emergence in 2003 and 2012 respectively, no safe and efficacious human vaccines for either SARS-Cov1 or MERS have been developed.
Moreover, experimental non-human (animal model) evaluations of four SARS-Cov1 candidate vaccine types, revealed that despite conferring some protection against infection with SARS-Cov1, each also caused serious lung injury, caused by an overreaction of the immune system, upon viral challenge.25
Identical ‘hypersensitive-type’ lung injury occurred26 when mice were administered a candidate MERS-Cov vaccine, then challenged with infectious virus, negating the ostensible benefit achieved by their development of promising … ‘antibodies’ … which might have provided immunity to MERS-Cov.
These disappointing experimental observations must serve as a cautionary tale for SARS-Cov2 vaccination programs to control epidemic COVID-19 disease.”
NIAID Safety Controversies and Ethics Violations
When recently asked for a rebuttal to criticism of his leadership during the pandemic, Fauci replied, “I think you can trust me,” citing his long record of service in government medicine. However, that long service record is fraught with ethics and safety lapses.
For example, in 2005, NPR reported27 the NIH tested novel AIDS drugs on hundreds of HIV-positive children in state foster care during the late 1980s and90s without assigning patient advocates to monitor the children’s health, as is required by law in most states.
Fauci was appointed director of the NIAID in 1984. The AIDS research was part of his research portfolio, and the AIDS research division reported directly to him, so these violations occurred on his watch.28 In 2008, two NIH biomedical ethicists published a paper on the controversial practice of using wards of the state as guinea pigs, noting:29
“Enrolling wards of the state in research raises two major concerns: the possibility that an unfair share of the burdens of research might fall on wards, and the need to ensure interests of individual wards are accounted for … Having special protections only for some categories is misguided. Furthermore, some of the existing protections ought to be strengthened.”
Under Fauci, the NIAID became the largest funder of HIV/AIDS in the world.30 Despite that, numerous articles over the years have discussed how AIDS activists have been less than satisfied with Fauci and the NIAID.31,32,33 A 1986 article stated:34
“If Fauci were less intent on amassing power within the federal health bureaucracy … he would have left AIDS treatment research with the NCI, where it began, relying on that institute’s proven expertise in organizing large, multisite clinical trials for cancer therapies.”
A July 23, 2020, article in Just the News lists several other safety and ethics problems that Fauci has been involved in through the years, including conflict of interest violations in vaccine research.35
Just the News also interviewed NIAID chief of ethics and regulatory compliance Dr. Jonathan Fishbein, whom the NIAID was forced to reinstate in 2005 after it was determined that Fishbein had been wrongly fired in retaliation for raising concerns about lack of safety in some of the agency’s research:36
“Fishbein said … Fauci failed to take responsibility for the managers and researchers working below him when signs of trouble emerged, allowing problems to persist until others intervened. ‘Fauci is all about Fauci,’ Fishbein said. ‘He loves being the headline. It’s his ego.’”
Fauci’s Connections to Wuhan Lab
By now, you probably also know that the NIAID funded gain-of-function research on coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. As reported by Newsweek:37
“In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7 million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million.”
This money was not given directly, but rather funneled to the Wuhan lab via the EcoHealth Alliance. According to a recent report by The Wall Street Journal,38 the NIH is now insisting EcoHealth Alliance submit all information and materials from the Wuhan lab before it’s allowed to resume funding.
Fauci is a longtime proponent of dangerous gain-of-function research. In 2003, he wrote an article39 published in the journal Nature on how “the world needs new and creative ways to counter bioterrorism.”
“We will pursue innovative approaches for modulating innate immunity to induce and enhance protection against many biological pathogens, as well as simple and rapid molecularly based diagnostics to detect, characterize and quantify infectious threats,” Fauci wrote.
“These are lofty goals that may take many years to accomplish — but we must aspire to them. Third, we must enormously strengthen our interactions with the private sector, including biotechnology companies and large pharmaceutical corporations.
Many biodefence-related products that we are pursuing do not provide sufficient incentives for industry — the potential profit margin for companies is tenuous, and there is no guarantee that products would be used.
Therefore, we will seek non-traditional collaborations with industry, for example guaranteeing that products will be purchased if companies sign up … so that we can quickly make available effective vaccines and treatments …”
With that, there can be little question about which team Fauci is on. He’s on the side of drug and vaccine makers, and has been for decades. There’s no money to be made by either the agency or its private collaborators from natural products such as vitamin D, vitamin C, quercetin or its drug equivalent, hydroxychloroquine. All of these are dirt-cheap and off patent.
Prediction Track Record = Null
Fauci’s predictions for COVID-19 mortality have also turned out to be as inaccurate as all of his previous predictions. In 1987, he predicted heterosexual infection of HIV/AIDS would rise to 10% by 1991. It never rose above 4%.
He predicted the bird flu would result in 2 million to 7 million deaths. In the end, the avian H5N1 flu killed 440 worldwide. He sought billions of dollars to combat the threat of Zika, a virus that fizzled without making much of an impact anywhere.40
When you look at his track record, you realize he’s predicted “nightmare” scenarios for decades, none of which have materialized. Last but not least, Dr. Fauci serves on Bill Gates leadership council.
Fauci Silent as CDC Makes Sweeping Changes to Covid Policy
With Dr. Fauci sidelined after vocal cord surgery, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has made rapid, sweeping changes to relax its #COVID guidelines.
Ending 14-day travel quarantines, loosening testing requirements and admissions of mask ineffectiveness, the media is buzzing with speculations as to what prompted the changes.
“Governments throw money at a problem. Bill Gates directs money at a problem. But what problem is he seeing? You’d better figure that out, because, would you take an injection from this man?” (Notes for The Underground.)
My friend Charlie recently sold a painting to the Gregorian Museum out on Galactic Park.
They hang his painting in one of the upstairs rooms for a week, and then trouble starts. Charlie gets a phone call in the middle of the night from the director. Charlie can’t believe his ears. He rushes over to the museum.
Upstairs, the director is in his pajamas pacing back and forth. Charlie goes up to his painting, looks at it for a few minutes and sees it.
People have walked into the painting and taken up residence there.
Holy crap.
They’re in there.
Law suits, the director says. Their families could take us to the cleaners.
When Charlie calls out to the people inside his painting, they don’t hear him. They don’t seem to be able to get out. At least no one’s trying.
What do you want me to do, Charlie says.
Get them the hell out of there, the director says. Pick up the picture and shake it if you have to. Turn it upside down. I don’t care.
Charlie doesn’t think this is a good idea. Somebody could get hurt.
So for the next few hours, he sits in front of his painting, drinks coffee, and tries to talk to the people inside.
No dice. Even when he yells, they don’t notice him.
By this time, the chairman of the museum board has shown up. He’s agitated. He’s yabbering about containing the situation.
Charlie asks him how he proposes to do that.
Blanket denial, the chairman says. Pretty soon, the cops are going to link these disappearances to the museum—but then we just throw up our hands and claim we know nothing about it.
A lot of good that’ll do, the director says. Even if we wiggle out of the law suits, our reputation will be damaged. People won’t want to come here. They’ll be afraid somebody will snatch them.
Okay, the chairman says, we’ll shut down for repairs. New construction. That’ll buy us a few weeks and we can figure out something. We’ll say the building needs an earthquake retrofit. Not a big one. Just some shoring up.
…So that’s what happened. They closed the museum and hoped for the best.
Charlie was upset. If word got out, how could he ever sell another painting? His agent told him he was nuts. He’d become the most famous person in the world, and people would be lining up trying to get inside his pictures. You’ll be a phenomenon, he said.
Yeah, Charlie said, until some nut tries to take me out.
A week later, while Charlie and I were having breakfast at a little cafe over by the river, he told me the people inside his painting were building yurts. They were digging a well. And for some reason, they were all wearing cloth masks.
What are they eating, I asked him.
Beats me, he said. But they don’t seem worried. They look okay.
But they can’t get out, he said. At least they don’t want to. They’re settling down in there!
I asked him the obvious question about shrinkage.
I know, he said. They’re a hell of a lot smaller. But no one’s complaining, as far as I can tell.
They like your work, I said.
He looked at me like he was going to kill me, so I let it drop.
Okay, I said. Here’s what you need to do. Go over there and add something to the painting.
He blinked.
What?
Paint on the painting. See what happens.
Sure, he said, and drive them into psychosis. Who knows what effect it would have?
Paint a nice little country road that leads them right out into the museum. They’ll see it, they’ll walk on it.
No, he said. Don’t you get it? They’ve already taken things a step further. They’re not really living in my landscape. That was just the initial draw. They’re building their own stuff in there. They’re…poaching!
Silence.
Then there’s only one thing you can do, I said.
I leaned across the table and whispered in his ear. He listened, then jumped back.
No, I said. You have to. Don’t be a weak sister. Go for it.
The next day, I learned later, Charlie showed up and went upstairs in the museum and cleared everybody out. He unpacked the little suitcase he’d brought and set up a player and a speaker. He shoved in a disc and turned on the music. Some sort of chanting. A chorus.
He took out a change of clothes from the suitcase and put on a long robe and a crazy hat. He eventually showed it to me. It was from a costume party he’d had at his house. Tall red silk hat with tassels hanging from it.
He stood in front of the painting and said:
HELLO, INHABITANTS. I AM CHARLIE. I’M YOUR CREATOR. YOU’RE LIVING IN MY WORLD, THE WORLD I MADE.
They all looked toward the sound of his voice.
THAT’S RIGHT, he said. I’M RIGHT HERE. THIS IS A REVELATION. I DON’T DO MANY OF THESE SO LISTEN UP. I AM YOUR CREATOR, YOUR GOD. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
All 30 or so of them were now gathered together, outside one of the half-finished yurts, with their masks on.
They were nodding and saying yes.
GOOD. WE NEED TO GET A FEW THINGS STRAIGHT. YOU DIDN’T OBTAIN MY PERMISSION TO ENTER MY WORLD. SO YOU’RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME OUT SO WE CAN DISCUSS DETAILS. MY WORD IS LAW. UNDERSTAND? STOP THE BUILDING. STOP THE DIGGING. WALK TOWARD ME. WALK TOWARD THE SOUND OF MY VOICE.
They hesitated, looked at each other, and started to walk toward Charlie.
THAT’S RIGHT. KEEP GOING. YOU’RE DOING FINE. I’M GOING TO SHOW YOU WHERE I LIVE.
This was apparently quite a perk, so they walked faster. They broke into a trot.
Finally, they emerged from the painting and, Charlie said, they swelled back to normal size right away.
It was quite a thing to see, he said, like balloons blowing up—and then there they were, all around me, in the museum. First thing, I took the painting off the wall and laid it on the floor, face down. Enough of that stuff.
Charlie told them who he was, the painter. It took a few hours of intense conversation before they understood and accepted the situation. All in all, they seemed sad.
And there was one other thing. They were calling him FAUCI. They repeated the word over and over, as if it were a chant. He told them to stop. They did.
What were you going to do, he asked them. Live in there forever? Couldn’t you see how to get out?
We didn’t want to get out, one of the men said. We liked it in there.
And that was pretty much that, except for the signing of waivers and non-disclosure agreements with the museum. For which the people were granted lifetime platinum memberships and some vouchers and coupons for the museum store and restaurant.
Charlie went into a funk. He didn’t go into his studio for a few months.
One night, I dropped over to his house with a bottle of bourbon and we had a few drinks out on his porch.
You know, I said, you can start a church if you want to. I know a guy who writes fake scriptures and peddles them. He’s good.
You really do want me to kill you, he said.
We drank in silence for a while.
I told him: those people with their wells and yurts and ritual masks? Sooner or later, they’re going to hypnotize themselves and fall for another strange deal. Nobody’s going to stop them.
Charlie looked grim. That’s the thing, he said. They liked living in my picture. It wasn’t a problem for them. And I took them out. I conned them.
Well, I said, if that’s the case, and there’s nothing wrong with them, they’ll find another painting. See? Someday, you’ll read about a bunch of people disappearing, and that’ll be what it is.
Yeah, he said, maybe.
A week later, he got back to work.
Universes. Some weird things happen in that area.
Like, for example, the whole business we’re having now with the landing party out at Sandy Port. Four couples, a bible and some gift boxes of mints. They say there’s lots of room in their universe and they’re looking for new settlers.
Here’s the twist. They claim they’re living in a permanent pandemic. Some sort of virus. As if this would be an inducement for people here to join up and sign on and emigrate.
They’re…I guess you could say, devoted to this pandemic of theirs. It seems to be a major part of their religion. Hard to tell.
A few of our scholars were able to take a look at their bible. It’s composed of studies. The language is strange and convoluted. All about tests, viruses, projections, models, injections, and containment measures. Apparently, where they come from, they have to keep away from each other, at a distance of several yards. At first, our scholars thought this was to prevent disease transmission, but it seemed more like a ceremony. Anyway, we began to believe they’re trying to infect us with their disease. Of course, it isn’t working. We’re healthy. We don’t get sick very often. In their bible, there’s quite a lot of language about mask-wearing. It’s mandatory for them—but here, they’re not bothering, which adds to our suspicion that they’re trying to infect us.
Then—our people found, in their bible, mention of a man named Fauci. He was some kind of prophet. They still revere him. He lived long ago. He foretold a time of great pestilence. They’ve built monuments and even shrines to him back home.
I called Charlie right away and told him about Fauci. He didn’t want to know about it. Look, I said, maybe these people come from that world inside your painting. Maybe they’re actually a lot smaller than they appear to be here. This is fantastic.
He blew up and started cursing at me.
I guess I can understand his reaction. He paints a painting and everything is just fine, and then other people look at it, and then they walk into it. That’s the farthest thing from what he intended.
This is one of those problems artists face, I guess. What are they going to do? They paint a painting or write a novel, and the audience puts their own twist on it.
It can even become a religion. Of course, I don’t have an issue with that. I’m a businessman. I see an opportunity, I take it. If you can sell a product, and people decide to use it in their own way, so what? As long as they like it, who cares?
This guy Fauci probably saw things that way. He was selling disease. A lot of customers bought in. They went whole hog and started a church. What was he going to do? Abdicate? Maybe he enjoyed playing the prophet.
In our world, we have all sorts of laws against corruption, double-dealing, fraud, and so on, but most people ignore the rules. Commerce at any cost, no matter what, is the tradition.
I’ve told Charlie to wise up. Selling and buying—what more do you expect? Sure, people get hurt in the process, but it’s what we’re stuck with. May as well make the most of it.
I‘ve been around the block a few thousand times. As a hobby, I study societies, civilizations. Freedom? Honor? They’re always trampled on.
Why? Because people won’t keep fighting for what they believe in. Then they stop believing.
I don’t blame them. I’m sympathetic. I accept their weak attitude. In fact, I use it. Wouldn’t you, if you could, when all is said and done?
I’ve lived in a lot of times and places.
My name is Bill Gates, and I like to think of myself as a practical man.
This Fauci. I feel I know him from somewhere. Maybe a long time ago, we worked together. I’ve worked with so many people. They might start out with a few honorable principles that cause them trouble. Then I show them they need to get real. Then things go much better for them.
One day I said to Charlie, look, you’re inventing new worlds all the time. It’s terrific. But somehow, people take it the wrong way. They don’t see how pure your ideas are. So you have a problem. I can straighten that out for you. You just need to make an adjustment. Don’t expect so much from people. Relax. Just that little change, and you’ll be on the road to fame and fortune. Don’t fight them. Cater to their weaknesses.
He couldn’t see it.
But I keep trying.
Charlie, I say, let people have their illusions, just get rid of yours. Join the majority and play the game. The only game there is. Control, or be controlled. Am I right? Come on. Sure I’m right. See a problem, solve a problem. What else is there?
When I find someone who won’t give in, I do everything I can to turn him.
If you don’t like me, fight me. Let’s see who wins.
When I notice a certain kind of…LIGHT, it irritates me. I try to turn off the switch. That’s my thing. I operate on a certain level. I want everybody to live on that level.
Joseph P. Farrell: Speculation on Sudden, En Masse Reindeer, Bird & Elephant Deaths
If you’re a regular reader here, you’ll recall that I recently blogged about a strange story from Botswana of the sudden death of a herd of elephants in that country. Indeed, the article was accompanied by sad pictures of elephant corpses that look as if they had died so suddenly that they collapsed and fell where they stood. SADs (sudden animal deaths) are one of the topics that fascinate me, not only for their occurrence, but also because of their inherent strangeness, and the equally strange explanations offered for them. The topic began to interest me years ago when I heard a radio report of the sudden deaths of a flock of birds in Tennessee that simply fell from the sky, stone cold dead, while they were in flight. At the time, I thought that it might have been a test of some sort of exotic electromagnetic weaponry, and I haven’t really modified that conclusion since. We’ll get back to that in a moment, for it forms part of today’s “really high octane speculation.”
That SAD Tennessee bird incident was followed by similar stories of birds falling from the sky from Arkansas to Texas, and then there was a story of a flight of geese in Idaho that fell dead from the sky, again in mid-flight. Indeed, I’ve written a number of blogs related to the phenomenon of Sudden Animal Deaths, and I thought this would be a good time and context to remind readers here of those blogs:
All this brings me to a story that I did not blog about at the time, but which I did comment about with an interviewer. I believe it was “Al” of Forum Borealis. In this case, the story is from 2016, was shared by PAI, who is due a big thank you for reminding me of it. The, like the story of the sudden deaths of the herd of elephants, concerns the sudden deaths of a herd of reindeer, half a world away, in Norway. But this time, the story has a twist:
Note that similarly to the elephants in Africa, the reindeer appeared to just have suddenly died where they stood. Notably, there’s no attempt to write the SAD reindeer event off to “sudden onset reindeer flu”. (Scamplandemics did not have the cachet they do now.) Rather, an entirely different explanation was offered, and it’s one that, at first glance, seems broadly to confirm my electromagnetic weapons speculations, and raises new issues. Citing from the article, which first appeared in August 2016 in the New York Times:
Experts say that lightning most likely caused the grisly sight. But for many people who have seen images and video of the eerie scene that answer has raised some suspicion.
“Lightning does not strike a point, it strikes an area,” said John Jensenius, a lightning safety specialist with the National Weather Service. “The physical flash you see strikes a point, but that lightning is radiating out as ground current and it’s very deadly.”
It’s possible that a single bolt could have hit one or two reindeer directly, he said, but the majority of the carnage was caused by ground current. When the electric discharge touches down it spreads out in search of places to travel. The reindeer, with their four hooves on the grass, presented potential pathways where that current could flow.
OK… that’s believable and plausible. Lightning does create a ground current, and in some cases, if one watches carefully, lightning can actually start from the ground and go up to the sky (as, incidentally, recent videos of the California fires seem to include examples of this type). The Earth is an electrodynamic body, and biological life – like reindeer – are bio-electrical systems. Suddenly zapping them with a pulse of electricity can cause them to die, like that surge protector you have on your computer is designed to prevent transients or pulses from frying your computer. It’s electromagnetic pulse, but through the wires, or in this case, through the ground. Wet ground would be far more conductive, and hence this explanation might explain the sudden elephant deaths in Africa. Except that there, recall, the speculation was on some kind of fast acting pathogen, not lightning strikes. Why? We’re not told, except we may speculate that perhaps the weather was not storming or raining where the elephants were found, and hence a lightning strike in clear blue weather might raise uncomfortable questions.
But then comes an odd statement, and with it, questions are raised:
“The electricity would go up one leg of the body and stop the heart and go down and out another leg,” he said. “In an instant, of course.”
The same thing can and does happen to humans, Mr. Jensenius said, but animals are particularly vulnerable because they have more legs and their legs are further apart. The greater the distance between two legs, the greater the chance that electricity will try to flow through them, and the stronger that charge will be.
Though the reindeer were in a herd when they died they did not have to be touching to get electrocuted. They only had to be touching the ground within an area about 160 to 260 feet in diameter from where the strike or strikes hit. The 323 reindeer most likely dropped dead from cardiac arrest where they stood and did not go flying in the air, like in some movies. Mr. Jensenius said that it’s likely the lightning would have struck that location whether the reindeer were there or not.
Now, as we know, livestock and humans can be struck by lightning, and die from that ground current discharge. What I find extremely odd about both instances is that no other animal deaths are reported in conjunction with the reindeer and elephants. For that matter, the same seems to hold true in those reports of birds falling from the sky. Here it’s starlings, there it’s geese. Particularly in the case of a herd of reindeer, one might assume that the herd would be being stalked by predators of some sort, wolves, cougars, and so on. In other words, it’s the fact that, in all these incidents, it’s only one type or species of animal that is involved is what raises my suspicions. That, to my mind, suggests deliberate targeting of that species. After all – and here’s today’s high octane – if every species has its own unique bio-electric template, and if that signature or template is known, one can modulate an electrical pulse to take out only that species with an electromagnetic pulse. This hypothesis – wild and woolly though it is – is what I believe to be in action in some of these strange cases. All that is needed is to something to complete the circuit…
… like a cell phone. Just dial the right number, and send the pulse…
“Plandemic — Indoctornation” reveals the driving forces behind the vaccine agenda. It looks at the roles of the World Health Organization, Bill Gates, Tedros Adhanom, Dr. Anthony Fauci, mainstream media, Silicon Valley tech giants, Big Pharma and many others, connecting the dots between them
The U.S. CDC owns the patent for SARS-CoV (the virus responsible for SARS) isolated from humans. In 2007, the CDC filed a petition with the patent office to keep their coronavirus patent confidential. They also own patents for detection methods, and for a kit to measure the virus
By law, one cannot patent naturally-occurring DNA. If SARS-CoV is natural, then the patent is illegal. If the virus is manmade, the patent is legal, but the creation of the virus would be a violation of biological weapons treaties and laws. So, either way, the CDC has engaged in illegal activity
Because the CDC owns the patent on SARS-CoV, it controls who has the ability to make inquiries into it. Unless authorized, you cannot look at the virus, you cannot measure it or make tests for it, since they own all those patents. This means the CDC has a major profit motive
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill owns a patent describing methods for producing recombinant coronaviruses
Late in May 2020, media producer Mikki Willis released the first part of his documentary “Plandemic,” featuring Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., a cellular and molecular biologist1 whose research revealed many vaccines are contaminated with gammaretroviruses, due to the viruses being grown in contaminated animal cell lines. The 26-minute film was banned on every social media platform after going viral.2 August 18, 2020, Part 2, titled “Plandemic — Indoctornation,” was released.
Plandemic — Indoctornation
Part 2 is a full-length feature, revealing the driving force behind the vaccine agenda. It looks at the roles of the World Health Organization, Bill Gates, Tedros Adhanom, Dr. Anthony Fauci, mainstream media, Silicon Valley tech giants, Big Pharma and many others, connecting the dots between them. Willis interviews a variety of individuals, including:
Activist and journalist Theo Wilson
Researcher Dr. Aaron Lewis
Board-certified primary care physician Dr. Jeff Barke
Attorney, science teacher and author Kent Heckenlively
Sherri Tenpenny, D.O.
Dr. Rashid Buttar, medical director for the Centers for Advanced Medicine
Author Curtis Cost
Attorney David J. Follin
Author and winner of the Doctors Who Rock Truth in Journalism Award 2017, Erin Elizabeth
NJ state representative Jamel C. Holley
Dr. Colin Gonsalves, senior counsel, Supreme Court of India
Legal researcher Travis Middleton
Mary Holland, vice chair and general counsel for the Children’s Health Defense
Educator and activist Peggy Hall
Kevin Jenkins, CEO of Urban Global Health Alliance
Professor John Oller, researcher in theoretical and experimental biosemiotics
Engineer and Google whistleblower Zach Vorhies
Dr. George Zabrecky, physician, medical educator and researcher
Dr. Pamela Popper, president of Wellness Forum Health
Scientist Denis Rancourt, Ph.D.
Dr. Meryl Nass, physician, researcher and writer
Professor Dolores J. Cahill, Ph.D., a molecular biologist and immunologist
Professor Luc Montagnier, a Nobel Laureate, medical researcher and virologist
Free supplemental footage, including a follow-up interview with Mikovits, as well as links to additional resources provided by all of the interviewees are supposed to be available on the film’s website, plandemicseries.com.
Event 201
The film starts out by reviewing Event 201, a pandemic preparedness simulation hosted by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in October 2019 — 10 weeks before the COVID-19 outbreak first began in Wuhan.
This scripted tabletop exercise included everything we now see playing out in real time, in the real world, from PPE shortages, lockdowns and removal of civil liberties to mandated vaccination campaigns, riots, economic turmoil and the breakdown of social cohesion. A highlight reel of the predictions put forth during this event is included in the documentary.
At the time, they spent a great deal of time discussing ways to limit and counter the spread of expected “misinformation” about the pandemic and the vaccines that would have to be developed. In addition to outright censorship, their plan included the use of “soft power,” a term referring to stealth influencing using celebrities and other social media influencers.
I discussed this in “The PR Firm Behind WHO’s Celeb Endorsements.” Just as in real life, one of the pieces of “misinformation” that had to be countered was rumors that the virus had been created and released from a bioweapons laboratory.
Operation Mockingbird Never Ended, It Just Got Privatized
The film also reveals how SARS-CoV-2 has been turned into a profit center, the possible origins of SARS-CoV-2, and how Silicon Valley tech giants are controlling the narrative, pushing fearmongering and censoring differing views.
What we’re seeing is straight out of the Operation Mockingbird playbook, a clandestine CIA media influencing campaign launched in the 1950s. During the Cold War, the CIA used it to spread propaganda. It recruited journalists to pen fake stories that disparaged communist ideologies.
Today, they’re doing the complete opposite, promoting radical socialist ideas that support their plan for a technocratic economic system. As revealed in the widely-banned documentary “Shadowgate,”3,4 a shadow government has built up behind the scenes, and they’re using sophisticated psychological warfare tools against the American public to further their nefarious agenda.
Shockingly, the reason this shadow government — led by government contractors, privatized intelligence companies — are able to manipulate public opinion is because they’ve been illegally siphoning the data collected by the NSA from all Americans, and privatizing it.
All of our personal data, combined with artificial intelligence and so-called localization strategies, allows sophisticated computer programs to predict which action or public message will result in a particular outcome.
We’re in the midst of a social engineering project that poses a serious existential threat to our personal liberty and freedom. We’re all exposed to it daily, and have been for years. It’s just that now it’s become so pervasive, it’s blatantly obvious for anyone willing to see it. As you’d expect, “Plandemic — Indoctornation” also spends some time reviewing the role of Bill Gates and his foundation.
CDC Owns Coronavirus Patents
Willis interviews David E. Martin, Ph.D., a national intelligence analyst and founder of IQ100 Index, which developed linguistic genomics, a platform capable of determining the intent of communications. According to Martin, in 1999, IBM digitized 1 million U.S. patents, which allowed his company to conduct a review.
Using linguistic genomics technology, Martin made the “horrific assessment” that one-third of all patents filed in the U.S. were functional forgeries, meaning that “while they had linguistic variations, they covered the same subject matter.” In 1999, patents for coronavirus also started to appear, “and thus began the rabbit trail,” Martin says.
In 2003, Asia experienced an outbreak of SARS. Almost immediately, scientists began racing to patent the virus. Ultimately, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention nabbed ownership of SARS-CoV (the virus responsible for SARS) isolated from humans.
The CDC actually owns the entire genetic content of that SARS virus. It’s patented under U.S. patent 7776521. They also own patents for detection methods, and for a kit to measure the virus.
U.S. patent 7279327,5 filed by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, describes methods for producing recombinant coronaviruses. Ralph Baric, Ph.D., a professor of microbiology and immunology who is famous for his chimeric coronavirus research, is listed as one of the three inventors, along with Kristopher Curtis and Boyd Yount.
According to Martin, Fauci, Baric and the CDC “are at the hub” of the COVID-19 story. “In 2002, coronaviruses were recognized as an exploitable mechanism for both good and ill,” Martin says, and “Between 2003 and 2017, they [Fauci, Baric and CDC] controlled 100% of the cash flow to build the empire around the industrial complex of coronavirus.”
CDC Has Broken the Law, One Way or Another
Now, here’s the key take-home message Martin delivers. There’s a distinct problem with the CDC’s patent on SARS-CoV isolated from humans, because, by law, naturally occurring DNA segments are prohibited from being patented.
The law clearly states that such segments are “not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated.” So, either SARS-CoV was manmade, which would render the patent legal, or it’s natural, thus rendering the patent on it illegal.
However, if the virus was manufactured, then it was created in violation of biological weapons treaties and laws. This includes the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, passed unanimously by both houses of Congress and signed into law by George Bush Sr., which states:6
“Whoever knowingly develops, produces, stockpiles, transfers, acquires, retains, or possesses any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system for use as a weapon, or knowingly assists a foreign state or any organization to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both. There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section committed by or against a national of the United States.”
So, as noted by Martin, regardless of which scenario turns out to be true, the CDC has broken the law one way or another, either by violating biological weapons laws, or by filing an illegal patent. Even more egregious, May 14, 2007, the CDC filed a petition with the patent office to keep their coronavirus patent confidential.
Now, because the CDC owns the patent on SARS-CoV, it has control over who had the ability to make inquiries into the coronavirus, Martin notes. Unless authorized, you cannot look at the virus, you cannot measure it or make tests for it, since they own the entire genome and all the rest.
“By obtaining the patents that restrained anyone from using it, they had the means, the motive, and most of all, they had the monetary gain from turning coronavirus from a pathogen to a profit,” Martin says.
Dangerous Gain-of-Function Research Was Permitted
Martin goes on to describe events occurring between 2012 and 2013. At that time, the National Institutes of Health decided to take another look at gain-of-function research, ultimately deciding that gain-of-function research on coronavirus was too risky to continue.
This led to the suspension of funding of such research in 2013. That included funding flowing into Harvard, Emery and University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. However, while the NIH had moral and even legal reasons for suspending such research, they made the funding pause voluntary, not mandatory.
Then, in 2014, when the push-back against gain-of-function research into coronaviruses grew further, the NIH — under the leadership of Fauci — offshored that research to — you guessed it — the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.
However, as detailed by Martin, the funding was not sent in a straight-forward way. Instead, it was funneled through front organizations such as the EcoHealth Alliance, led by its president, Peter Daszak, whose research, according to the EchoHealth Alliance website, “includes identifying the bat origin of SARS.”7
Between 2014 and 2019, EcoHealth Alliance received a long list of grants from the NIH to study “the risk of bat coronavirus emergence.” EcoHealth Alliance then subcontracted that work to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. So, in the end, the U.S. could deny culpability, blaming the outbreak on China when, in fact, it was American research that had been outsourced.
Interestingly, in late-breaking news August 19, 2020, The Wall Street Journal8 reported that the NIH had notified EcoHealth that it wants “a sample of the new coronavirus that the Wuhan researchers used to determine its genetic sequence,” along with study details and other information.
Additionally, the NIH demanded that EcoHealth “arrange for an inspection of the Wuhan Institute of Virology by an outside team that would examine the facility’s lab and records ‘with specific attention to addressing the question of whether WIV staff had SARS-CoV-2 in their possession prior to December 2019.’”
The problem, Martin notes in “Indoctornation,” is that while the evidence is staring us right in the face, we’re told that so-called “fact-checkers” have a transcendent view of the situation, and they are the ultimate arbiters of truth. As a result, we have this very strange situation where facts and logic are being steamrolled and lambasted as good old-fashioned heresy.
Will Truth Prevail?
The film goes on to interview many other experts, many of whom are convinced the evidence points to SARS-CoV-2 being a manmade virus. Like Plandemic Part 1, Part 2 is well worth your time. As noted by Willis, in today’s fast-paced world, few have the time to do the necessary research to unveil what’s really going on.
The evidence is there, but you have to put it together. This is why documentaries such as “Plandemic” and “Shadowgate” are so useful. They weave the dots together so that you can see a fuller, more complete picture. Unfortunately, the picture at present is grim.
Yet, we must face it because it’s not going away or resolving in the near future. It is important to understand that we are all being subjected to a massive propaganda campaign to move us toward a very specific technocratic agenda. It is only by seeking alternative views that we can begin to understand the truth.
In the case of coronavirus, it should be clear that gain-of-function research is a dangerous game that should not be permitted. By giving researchers the go-ahead to continue this kind of research, even as the NIH publicly “paused” funding for it, the NIH failed to uphold its moral and legal responsibilities.
It’s also clear that the CDC has engaged in illegal activities relating to the patenting of the virus, and that they had ample motive and means to profit from a coronavirus pandemic. It’s hard to imagine a more corrupt system than what we currently have. The question is: When will something be done about it?
Connect with Dr. Mercola and subscribe to his newsletter at mercola.com.
[TCTL editor’s note: See the Plandemic Series & follow-up interviews in one post HERE. See the Plandemic Series with link to “down the rabbit hole” documents for further study HERE.]
As COVID-1984 Accelerates, Bill Gates Blames “Freedom” for Spread of the Virus
Recently, Bill Gates gave an interview to the Rothschild partially owned Economist. In this interview, Gates was asked about how he views the U.S. response to the outbreak. His reply was…
Aside from the high ‘risk money’ the US ponied up for vaccine research and development, he think the U.S. is doing a poor job overall.
Gates proceeded to directly blame the poor response on lack of preparation, but also freedom. Yes, Bill Gates blamed our freedoms for the spread of the virus.
Bill Gates then went on to praise China’s authoritarian response and said, despite the fact that people’s rights were violated, China’s response was really amazing!
This is right out of the 2010 Rockefeller Lock Step document that laid out a scenario for a world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership.
In this video report, we examine how we seem to be living out a scenario very similar to a Rockefeller Foundation document from a decade ago.
We also explore several examples of how what was initially considered to be basic, fundamental freedoms are being erased in response to this current crisis.
At the end of the day, one must always ask … who benefits?
I take you back to the summer of 2009, when the CDC and the World Health Organization were hyping the “deadly H1N1 Swine Flu pandemic.”
They were, of course, also urging people to take the new Swine Flu vaccine. On that subject, here is an excerpt from Robert Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense (3/27/20):
“For example, [Dr. Anthony] Fauci once shilled for the fast-tracked H1N1 influenza (‘swine flu’) vaccine on YouTube, reassuring viewers in 2009 that serious adverse events were ‘very, very, very rare.’ Shortly thereafter, the vaccine went on to wreak havoc in multiple countries, increasing miscarriage risks in pregnant women in the U.S., provoking a spike in adolescent narcolepsy in Scandinavia and causing febrile convulsions in one in every 110 vaccinated children in Australia—prompting the latter to suspend its influenza vaccination program in under-fives.”
Thank you. Dr. Fauci. Explain to us why you haven’t been downgraded to pumping gas in Death Valley or sent to prison?
However, that is only half the Swine Flu story. The other half—which involves an astounding hoax—was surely something Fauci was aware of at the time.
Fauci was, in fact, recommending a highly dangerous vaccine for protection against AN EPIDEMIC THAT DIDN’T EXIST AT ALL.
His friends and professional colleagues at the CDC were creating the hoax.
Let me run it down for you.
In the summer of 2009, the CDC was claiming there were thousands of Swine Flu cases in the US. But behind these statistics lay an unnerving secret. A major crime, considering the CDC’s mandate to report the truth to the American people:
Secretly, the CDC had stopped counting cases of Swine Flu.
What? Why?
CBS investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, discovered the CDC secret; and she found out why.
The routine lab testing of tissue samples from the most likely Swine Flu patients was coming back, in the overwhelming percentage of cases, with: NO SIGN OF SWINE FLU OR ANY OTHER KIND OF FLU.
Attkisson wrote an article about this scandal, and it was published on the CBS News website. However, the next, bigger step—putting out the story on CBS television news—was waylaid. No deal. And CBS shut down any future investigation on the subject. Attkisson’s article died on the vine. No other major news outlet in the world picked up her article and ran with it deeper into the rabbit hole.
Here is what Attkisson told me when I interviewed her:
Rappoport: In 2009, you spearheaded coverage of the so-called Swine Flu pandemic. You discovered that, in the summer of 2009, the Centers for Disease Control, ignoring their federal mandate, [secretly] stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America. Yet they continued to stir up fear about the “pandemic,” without having any real measure of its impact. Wasn’t that another investigation of yours that was shut down? Wasn’t there more to find out?
Attkisson: The implications of the story were even worse than that. We discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! The interest in the story from one [CBS] executive was very enthusiastic. He said it was “the most original story” he’d seen on the whole Swine Flu epidemic. But others pushed to stop it [after it was published on the CBS News website] and, in the end, no [CBS television news] broadcast wanted to touch it. We aired numerous stories pumping up the idea of an epidemic, but not the one that would shed original, new light on all the hype. It was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story. With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary.
—end of interview excerpt—
So…fake pandemic, CDC crimes, and a damaging vaccine.
But that wasn’t end of it. The CDC wanted to commit another crime. About three weeks after Attkisson’s findings were published on the CBS News website, the CDC, obviously in a panic, decided to double down. If one lie is exposed, tell an even bigger one. A much bigger one.
Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 [2009].” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon).
Are your eyeballs popping? They should be.
Fast forward to 2020. Who in his right mind, armed with a little history, would believe anything the CDC is saying about COVID-19? The discovery of a new coronavirus. the case numbers, the accuracy of the diagnostic tests, the need for lockdowns and economic devastation, the safety and importance of a vaccine, the fear porn? Who would believe any of it?
And who would believe anything coming out of the mouth of Dr. Anthony Fauci, who hyped a highly destructive Swine Flu vaccine for an epidemic that didn’t exist at all?
Welcome. If you’re reading these words, then it’s likely that you’re here because of the #ExposeBillGates global day of action.
Perhaps you’re here out of curiosity. Perhaps you came here to argue with crazy conspiracy theorists. Perhaps you already know about the #ExposeBillGates movement but just want to learn more.
Whatever your motivations for clicking on this link, I promise you this article is not clickbait. This is not a put-on or satire or a trendy internet listicle. The #ExposeBillGates movement is deadly serious, and it aims to alert the public to the real dangers of the world that are coming into view: a world of lockdowns and quarantines, masks and vaccines, checkpoints and immunity passports, cashless payments and biometric IDs.
So the first question you might be asking is: why Bill Gates? Why are all these people on the internet trying to warn about Bill Gates in the midst of this global pandemic? Isn’t Gates a philanthropist who’s trying to help the world out by donating his fortune to good causes?
It was to answer that very question that I created my feature-length documentary on this subject, Who Is Bill Gates?
If you haven’t watched it already, please do so in the player above. You can also follow this link to access the full transcript and audio/video downloads completely for free.
But if you need a bit more information before you invest your time in watching a two-hour documentary, here are some important issues for you to explore, along with some suggestions for further reading and viewing that will help you get caught up on the reasons that we need to #ExposeBillGates.
Bill Gates is not a selfless philanthropist
When he set up the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation with his wife and his father around the turn of the 21st century, Bill Gates went from villain to superhero in the public imagination seemingly overnight. No longer a reviled monopolist who built his Microsoft empire on the back of glitchy software and out of a ruthless desire to squash his competition, Gates was suddenly seen as a selfless philanthropist, generously giving away his fortune for the benefit of the world.
What few realize is that Gates’ philanthropy is hardly selfless. He “generously” donates to causes that directly benefit his family (like his $80 million gift to the prestigious private school that his own children attend) and his business interests. His foundation has even provided hundreds of millions of dollars in grants to corporations like Merck, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Vodafone, Sanofi, Ericsson, LG, Medtronic, and Teva in which his foundation trust holds corporate stocks and bonds.
This self-serving “giving” might account for the striking fact that, over the past decade of his “philanthropy,” Gates’ net worth has actually doubled, from $50 billion to over $100 billion.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has monopolized the global health industry
Gates’ unique brand of philanthropy doesn’t simply benefit his family financially. It also affords him unprecedented power in the field of global public health, where his foundation directs much of its funds. It is remarkable that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the second-largest donor to the World Health Organization (WHO), right behind the US government. In fact, if the US government does withdraw its funding from the WHO next year as it is currently threatening to do, the Gates Foundation will be the single largest funding source for the group.
But Gates’ influence extends far beyond the WHO. The Gates Foundation co-founded the Global Fund to Fight AIDS; the Global Financing Facility for Women, Children and Adolescents; the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations; Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; the Stop TB Partnership; and seemingly every other major global health initiative of the past two decades.
To many, the fact that Gates’ funding is behind all of these initiatives is just another sign that Gates is serious in his pledge to devote his wealth to charitable causes. But a growing number of people around the world see the outsized influence of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as a cause for concern. By funding individual health initiatives and entire organizations into existence, Gates has garnered the ability to direct research priorities and even to determine what forms of medical intervention are used to treat various diseases.
As the WHO’s own malaria chief, Dr. Arata Kochi warned in an internal memo, Gates’ influence means that the world’s leading malaria scientists are now “locked up in a ‘cartel’ with their own research funding being linked to those of others within the group” and that the foundation is “stifling debate on the best ways to treat and combat malaria, prioritizing only those methods that relied on new technology or developing new drugs.”
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has been involved in illegal and unethical research in developing countries
The Gates Foundation has been involved in a number of scandals involving illegal and unethical medical research and clinical trials of vaccines and drugs throughout the developing world.
In 2006, for example, Gates funds were used to help PATH—a global health nonprofit based in Gates’ hometown of Seattle—embark on a five-year project “to generate and disseminate evidence for informed public sector introduction of HPV vaccines.” In India, this project involved a “demonstration project” for GlaxoSmithKline’s and Merck’s HPV vaccines. The aim was to get those vaccines included on India’s national immunization schedule. The Hindunoted that this “shockingly unethical trial” involved flagrant breaches of basic ethical guidelines, including 2,800 cases of children being enrolled in the program by wardens or headmasters acting as “guardian.” The Indian parliament itself wrote a blistering report excoriating the parties involved for their violation of the human rights of the study’s participants.
Other shocking examples of Gates participation or funding in questionable or outright unethical trials include:
The Gates-founded and funded Meningitis Vaccine Project, which led to the creation and testing of MenAfriVac, a $0.50-per-dose immunization against meningococcal meningitis. The tests led to reports of between 40 and 500 children suffering seizures and convulsions and eventually becoming paralyzed.
The 2017 confirmation that the Gates-supported oral polio vaccine was actually responsible for the majority of new polio cases and the 2018 follow-up study showing that 80% of polio cases are now vaccine-derived.
The 2018 paper in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, which concluded that over 490,000 people in India developed paralysis as a result of being given the oral polio vaccine between 2000 and 2017.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has practiced philanthropic racism throughout the developing world
Critics of the Gates Foundation have noted that its efforts to limit population growth (including Melinda Gates’ promotion of the highly controversial Depo Provera drug and other forms of injectable birth control) have centered primarily on nations in Africa and Latin America. The charge that focusing population control programs on these countries constitutes “philanthropic racism” is bolstered by the specter of eugenics. Indeed, the eugenics philosophy has hung like a dark cloud over the realm of corporate foundation philanthropy ever since these philantropic vehicles were pioneered by the Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Foundation and similar organizations at the turn of the 20th century.
Eugenics is a pseudoscientific rationale for racism and classism that was massively popular in the United States during the Progressive Era of the early 1900s. It holds that the rich and powerful are fit, by virtue of their superior genes, to rule over the “infirm” and “feebleminded” and those with “defective germplasm”—terms that were used to refer to the handicapped, the poor, ethnic minorities and common criminals.
As a field of study, eugenics was largely funded by the philanthropic foundations that the late-19th-century robber barons had founded as a tax-free shelter for their enormous wealth. The Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Foundation in particular helped with significant cash infusions into the Eugenics Records Office and other key research facilities in the eugenic movement. This research led to the passage of involuntary sterilization laws across the US and even the T4 eugenic sterilization program in Nazi Germany.
After the name of eugenics was tarnished in the wake of World War II, many of the eugenics researchers continued their work under different names. Thus, many members of the American Eugenics Society took up work in the offices of John D. Rockefeller III’s Population Council, and Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control League—which had boasted prominent members of the American Eugenics Society on its board—morphed into Planned Parenthood, which was led for many years by a director of the American Eugenics Society, Alan Guttmacher. Bill Gates, Sr. also served on the board of Planned Parenthood, a fact that Gates cited as being influential in his early years as a population control advocate.
The shadow of eugenics and racism still hangs over the field of “population control” research, a stigma that the Gates Foundation has openly wrestled with in recent years.
Gates is helping to form a cashless payment and biometric identity grid
By now, the general public is used to seeing Gates as the public face of the coronavirus crisis. Mainstream media outlets have turned time and again to Gates for more information on the response to COVID-19 and the pressing need to vaccinate “basically the entire world” against SARS-Cov-2.
But, while Gates’ role in funding the global health field is by now well known, his role in funding other technologies that will shape the post-COVID world is not.
The Gates Foundation is tied to ID2020 through Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. Also known as the “Digital Identity Alliance” ID2020 brings Gavi and Gates’ old company Microsoft and other corporate partners together to create a global digital ID system. This has led the Gates-tied Gavi alliance to focus increasingly on tying vaccine recipients with governmental digital health records and, ultimately, with biometric ID databases. Meanwhile, Gates himself has been a vocal advocate of India’s Aadhaar system, the ambitious project to enroll a billion Indian citizens in the largest biometric database ever constructed.
Gates is also interested in advancing the digitization of the economy. For example, he has addressed government fora in both India and the US about the benefits of digital payment systems. Also, the Gates Foundation helped co-found the Better Than Cash Alliance, a consortium of governmental and non-governmental organizations whose members are committed to creating a digital payment infrastructure for development programs and aid for the poor. This infrastructure, Gates and his cohorts argue, will help governments and aid groups to more effectively target and manage their aid.
But while the fields of global health, biometric identification and digital payments may seem distinct, they have begun to converge as governments and intergovernmental bodies start to imagine the “Great Reset” of the post-COVID “new normal.” Gates has argued that digital immunity certificates—combining the medical diagnostic field with the biometric identification field—will be necessary if life is to return to normal. That convergence is already reflected in the World Economic Forum-promoted “CovidPass” vision of a “health passport,” which would allow people to travel or prevent them from traveling based on their health status and proof of immunity or vaccination.
It does not take a great deal of imagination to see how such a health passport could be tied into the digital payment structure to prevent unvaccinated people from transacting in any number of situations that the authorities might frown upon. After all, Gates himself has touted the ability of governments to block transactions they disapprove of as a key part of the digital payments systems of the future.
This agenda does not begin and end with Bill Gates
Don’t let the hashtag in #ExposeBillGates fool you. True, you have seen in this article (and you will see when you watch the complete Who Is Bill Gates? documentary) that Bill Gates has played an integral role in almost every facet of the coronavirus pandemic and, more importantly, in the global response to it. But the point of #ExposeBillGates is not simply to stop one man, Bill Gates, from enacting this agenda and then to call it a day.
No, Bill Gates is merely the recognizable spider at the center of a web of organizations, institutions, corporations and government bodies that are acting in concert to transform the world as we know it. But these various bodies are all dedicated to the same vision of The Great Reset and the new normal that Bill Gates is, and they would continue to bring that vision about even if Bill Gates himself were somehow stopped.
There are many reasons to be concerned about this agenda and its implications. But even if we were to trust that Gates himself actually is a selfless philanthropist with the purest of intentions, no one should trust that the heads of the various groups, organizations, bodies, NGOs, foundations and governments who are spearheading this agenda are all similarly trustworthy. The amount of power that is being centralized in the hands of unaccountable institutions and nongovernmental bodies should be disturbing to anyone who understands the real danger of putting so much power in so few hands.
It is for this reason that people around the world are joining the #ExposeBillGates movement. They are seeking to draw attention to these issues, to work hand-in-hand with one another, and to begin a public discussion that will derail the agenda promoted by Gates and his fellow travelers.
If you share these concerns, please continue to research the information presented under the #ExposeBillGates hashtag and help spread this vital information far and wide. Together, we can make a difference.
Bill Gates was recently asked by Yahoo Business what would he do if he were president. In this interview James Corbett of CorbettReport.com joins Spiro to ask the very same question, only to arrive at a much different conclusion.
Corbett and Spiro also analyze the events that have led up to today’s current situation regarding the virus and the response to it. From the beginning of this crisis, we have all asked… Will the cure be worse that the problem? It seems evident at this point that the answer to that question is a resounding yes!
Spiro and Corbett delve deep into the problem-reaction-solution perspective known as the Hegelian Dialectic we are seeing play out in this manufactured crisis. The end game is clear. The only question is… Will the people accept what the social engineers have in store for humanity?
In the event that the original video is censored and deleted by the source social media platform,
link here to a mirrored copy on TCTL BitChute & LBRYchannels.
