A White House email, obtained on behalf of ICAN, shows Facebook, Merck, and the CDC Foundation, whose corporate partners includes Pfizer, have formed an alliance “to use social media and digital platforms to build confidence in and drive uptake of vaccines.” No conflict there.
On August 12, 2021, ICAN, through its attorneys, submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for communications between White House staff and Facebook, Google, and YouTube. In response to this request, ICAN received a June 15, 2021 email sent by Facebook’s then-Public Policy Manager, Nkechi “Payton” Iheme, to several White House employees.
In it, Iheme announces a new initiative, the “Alliance for Advancing Health Care,” between Facebook and several major companies and organizations, including Merck, the Vaccine Confidence Project, the Sabin Vaccine Institute, and the CDC Foundation. Significantly, one of the CDC Foundation’s corporate partners is Pfizer. In the email, Iheme explains that the Alliance is “focused on advancing public understanding of how social media and behavioral sciences can be leveraged to improve the health of communities around the world” and states that its first project is to “provide grants to researchers and organizations for projects that explore how to use social media and digital platforms to build confidence in and drive uptake of vaccines.” Facebook announced this new initiative on June 9, 2021 here.
The conflict of interest is astonishing. This email shows without a doubt that, through the CDC Foundation created “to support the [CDC’s] work,” the federal government, which is in charge of ensuring the safety of vaccines, has teamed up with Big Pharma and Big Tech to push a liability-free product on the world, while attempting to stomp out anyone who questions this arrangement.
Just as the pharmaceutical companies will never rest when it comes to promoting and selling their vaccine products, and the federal government will not rest in its efforts to assist them, we will never rest in exposing the truth regarding these products or in demanding full transparency and full informed consent for any and all vaccines.
The video below was recorded by Australian aboriginal leader Lurnpa, also known as David Cole. He is joined by Northern Territory aboriginal leaders Keith Rory (elder) and Gadrian Hoosan.
Here we share a few key excerpts from Lumpa’s message:
“Everything all governments do on this continent is all about minerals and resources. All interaction and dealings with aboriginal, original, people is about control, oppression and land grabbing — since 1788 to today.
The state, territory and federal quasi-governments are really corporations, vying to steal the land for multinational and national corporations.
The Intervention was nothing but a land grab. It allowed for the removal of the Racial Discrimination Act which resulted in the removal of the land permit system.
Once The Intervention started, 273 exploration permits for uranium mining were approved within the first 6 months of The Intervention. And our communities witnessed a large number of planes and helicopters flying in grid formation across their lands, across the entire territory, mapping out the land, the resources and the minerals.
The current fraudulent pandemic is also being used as an opportunity to steal the land and take as much resources and minerals for the government and private corporations.
I’ve said it from the start, this is not about our health. It is an attempt to remove the tribal people of the land and steal everything. The only thing standing in the way is the tribal people.
This corporate genocide is a war crime. And all involved are complicit.
As the Nuremberg 2 trials [Grand Jury model proceeding] begin, led by Reiner Fuellmich, it is evident through evidence available to all, that this pandemic is a lie. And this experimental vaccine they are forcing upon humanity is nothing but a bioweapon, designed to kill people.”
###
“The planned and approved sell-off of the land contradicts the people’s wishes to not have any businesses on their lands that destroy the land any further.”
###
“It is my belief, through evidence and the mistreatment of our tribal people, that this absolute agenda of all quasi- governments, national and international corporations, is to steal the land and rid the land of the one thing stopping them from completely taking everything — and that’s the sovereign original tribal people of the lands.
The Deagel military website states that the Australian population will decrease to 9 million people by 2025. That’s 16 million people gone.
So these multinational corporations are happy to genocide 15 million non-tribal people in order to convince 1 million tribal people to take this bioweapon — so they can be left with 9 million obedient slaves to mine all these lands and resources they are stealing off the sovereign tribal people through this process.
This is genocide on a grand scale.
These corporate governments and the land councils are trying to eradicate the sovereign tribal people, for the greed of multinational corporate conglomerates and private shareholders, in order to steal the land and resources at the expense of killing off the oldest living culture on the planet.
…
All parties, domestic and foreign, should cease and desist in these actions immediately. This is an evil agenda.
The international community needs to intervene immediately and stop the genocide.”
###
“This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for us to stand together — black and white — to unite, to take back our country and to stop this genocide against all people. And to keep the land healthy, to keep the land safe for future generations.
We can do this. We can work together. We just have to unite and stand together as one.
Please, work with us. Let’s stand together. Let’s free us aa.
In order to determine whether a “virus” actually exists, the particles must be purified (freed from contaminants, pollutants, and foreign elements) so that they can be isolated (separated from everything else). Only once this occurs can the particles assumed to be “virus” then be proven pathogenic through experimentation. Only purified particles can be used to visualize as well as biochemically and molecularly characterize the “virus” in order to determine specific proteins, antibodies, genomic sequence, electron microscopy imaging, etc. Without purification, one can not determine that the “virus” exists at all and the non-specific laboratory results obtained from unpurified material are absolutely meaningless.
###
Luc Montagnier unleashed his “retroviral” monster onto the world in 1983 and it grew into a beast of its own kind during the proceeding decades. Countless lives have been destroyed by the fear of the HIV diagnosis as well as the subsequent subjection to toxic black label pharmaceuticals.
“HIV is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause AIDS.” ~ Luc Montagnier, VI Int’l AIDS Conference, Jun 24 1990
If you have been following the news recently, you may have heard that there is currently a new “highly virulent strain” of HIV running around the Netherlands (I think there is a pun in there somewhere). You may also have heard that there is a brand new experimental HIV mRNA vaccine that has shown promise in animals. If you have really been paying attention, you may have even heard of French virologist Luc Montagnier, the man credited with the discovery of HIV, and his various critical statements against the dangerous use of mRNA vaccines for “Covid-19.” If so, you are also most likely aware that during this increased attention geared towards HIV and mRNA vaccines, Luc Montagnier died very recently on February 8th, 2022. While he lived to be the ripe old age of 89, many are suspicious of the timing of his death in light of the current HIV resurgence.
While I do find the timing of all of these events interesting, that is not what this article is about. I have always planned to dive into Montagnier’s original HIV paper but I have held off as the HIV/AIDS scam has been exposed brilliantly by many others before me. However, I have always felt that the HIV fraud is the perfect gateway into understanding the “Covid-19” fraud as the numerous parallels to what is going on today are uncanny. We can see the same misuse of PCR and antibody testing, the same rebranding and reuse of toxic pharmaceuticals, the same collection of various symptoms under one giant umbrella disease, the same propaganda spreading fear of the infected, and the same Anthony Fauci spearheading the whole thing. Even though it is not my intention to touch on all of these aspects in one article, the best place to start unravelling this tangled web of deceit begins with the man who was credited with unleashing the HIV monster upon the world, Luc Montagnier.
In 1983, Montagnier was sent a lymph node sample from a 33-year-old (note the age) male determined to have the symptoms of AIDS. From this sample, Montagnier and his team uncovered what they claimed was a new “retrovirus,” originally known as L.A.V., for lymphadenopathy associated “virus.” After several indirect experiments, the team concluded that further studies were needed in order to determine whether or not the new “virus” had any role in the etiology of AIDS. After this initial discovery of the potential “viral” cause of AIDS, there was a bit of drama in 1984 when American virologist Robert Gallo claimed to have uncovered the cause of AIDS himself with the discovery of HTLV-3. Long story short, it was later determined that Gallo had used/borrowed/stolen a sample from the same patient as Montagnier and uncovered the same “virus.” The “virus” was eventually renamed HIV in 1986 and in 2008, Luc Montagnier was awarded the Nobel Prize for the discovery while Robert Gallo pouted off in a dark corner somewhere.
One of the nicest aspects of writing about Montagnier’s original HIV paper now in 2022 is that in retrospect, Montagnier himself tore apart his own evidence for the existence of his “retrovirus” in the decades following the publishing of his 1983 paper. A perfect example of this is found in a 1997 interview Montagnier did with scientific journalist Djamel Tahi. I have provided highlights from this interview below yet I definitely recommend reading the whole discussion sometime. While reading, note the assumptions made by Montagnier about his “virus,” the various contradictions in his statements, and the revelations about the relation (or lack thereof) of HIV to AIDS. This interview provides an in-depth look into the illogical mindframe of a virologist stuck in unproven theories and pseudoscientific dogma:
Interview with Professor Luc Montagnier by Djamel TAHI – (Pasteur Institut, July 1997)
Djamel TAHI: A group of scientists from Australia argues that nobody up till now has isolated the AIDS virus, HIV. For them the rules of retrovirus isolation have not been carefully respected for HIV. These rules are: culture, purification of the material by ultracentrifugation, Electron Microscopic (EM) photographs of the material which bands at the retrovirus density, characterisation of these particles, proof of the infectivity of the particles.
Luc Montagnier: No, that is not isolation. We did isolation because we “passed on” the virus, we made a culture of the virus. For example Gallo said: “They have not isolated the virus…and we (Gallo et al.), we have made it emerge in abundance in an immortal cell line.” But before making it emerge in immortal cell lines, we made it emerge in cultures of normal Iymphocytes from a blood donor. That is the principle criterion. One had something one could pass on serially, that one could maintain. And characterised as a retrovirus not only by its visual properties, but also biochemistry, RT [reverse transcriptase] activity which is truly specific of retroviruses. We also had the reactions of antibodies against some proteins, probably the internal proteins. I say probably by analogy with knowledge of other retroviruses. One could not have isolated this retrovirus without knowledge of other retroviruses, that’s obvious. But I believe we have answered the criteria of isolation. Totally.
Djamel TAHI: according to several published references cited by the Australian group, RT is not specific to retroviruses and moreover your work to detect RT was not done in the purified material?
Luc Montagnier: I believe we published in Science (May 1983) a gradient which showed that the RT had exactly the density of 1.16. So one had a ‘peak’ which was RT. So one has fulfilled this criterion for purification. But to pass it on serially is difficult because when you put the material in purification, into a gradient, retroviruses are very fragile, so they break each other and greatly lose their infectivity. But I think even so we were able to keep a little of their infectivity. But it was not as easy as one does it today, because the quantities of virus were nonetheless very feeble. At the beginning we stumbled on a virus which did not kill cells. The virus came from an asymptomatic patient and so was classified amongst the non-syncithia-forming, non-cytopathogenic viruses using the co-receptor ccr5 . It was the first BRU virus. One had very little of it, and one could not pass it on in an immortal cell line. We tried for some months, we didn’t succeed. We succeeded very easily with the second strain. But there lies the quite mysterious problem of the contamination of that second strain by the first. That was LAI.
Djamel TAHI: Why do the EM photographs published by you, come from the culture and not from the purification?
Luc Montagnier: There was so little production of virus it was impossible to see what might be in a concentrate of virus in the gradient. There was not enough virus to do that. Of course one looked for it, one looked for it in the tissues at the start, likewise in the biopsies. We saw some particles but they did not have the morphology typical of retroviruses. They were very different. Relatively different. So with the culture it took many hours to find the first pictures. It was a Roman effort! It’s easy to criticise after the event. What we did not have, and I have always recognised it, was that it was truly the cause of aids.
Djamel TAHI: How is it possible without EM pictures from the purification, to know whether or not these particles are viral and appertain to a retrovirus, moreover a specific retrovirus?
Luc Montagnier: Well, there were the pictures of the budding. We published images of budding which are characteristic of retroviruses. Having said that, on the morphology alone one could not say it was truly a retrovirus. For example, a French specialist of EMs of retroviruses publicly attacked me saying: “This is not a retrovirus, it is an arenavirus”. Because there are other families of virus which bud and have spikes on the surface, etc.
Djamel TAHI: Why this confusion? The EM pictures did not show clearly a retrovirus?
Luc Montagnier: At this period the best known retroviruses were those of type C, which were very typical. This retrovirus wasn’t a type C and lentiviruses were little known. I myself recognised it by looking at pictures of Equine infectious anaemia virus at the library, and later of the visna virus. But I repeat, it was not only the morphology and the budding, there was RT…it was the assemblage of these properties which made me say it was a retrovirus.
Djamel TAHI: About the RT, it is detected in the culture. Then there is purification where one finds retroviral particles. But at this density there are a lot of others elements, among others those which one calls “virus-like”.
Luc Montagnier: Exactly, exactly. If you like, it is not one property but the assemblage of the properties which made us say it was a retrovirus of the family of lentiviruses. Taken in isolation, each of the properties isn’t truly specific. It is the assemblage of them. So we had: the density, RT, pictures of budding and the analogy with the visna virus. Those are the four characteristics.
Djamel TAHI: But how do all these elements allow proof that it is a new retrovirus? Some of these elements could appertain to other things, “virus-like”…?
Luc Montagnier: Yes, and what’s more we have endogenous retroviruses which sometimes express particles – but of endogenous origin, and which therefore don’t have pathological roles, in any case not in aids.
Djamel TAHI: But then how can one make out the difference?
Luc Montagnier: Because we could “pass on” the virus. We passed on the RT activity in new Iymphocytes. We got a “peak” of replication. We kept track of the virus. It is the assembly of properties which made us say it was a retrovirus. And why new? The first question put to us by Nature was: “Is it not a laboratory contamination? Is it perhaps a mouse retrovirus or an animal retrovirus?”. To that one could say no! Because we had shown that the patient had antibodies against a protein of his own virus. The assemblage has a perfect logic! But it is important to take it as an assemblage. If you take each property separately, they are not specific. It is the assemblage which gives the specificity.
Djamel TAHI: With what did you culture the lymphocytes of your patient? With the H9 cell line?
Luc Montagnier: No, because it didn’t work at all with the H9. We used a lot of cell lines and the only one which could produce it was the Tampon (!?) Iymphocytes.
Djamel TAHI: When one looks at the published electron microscope photographs, for you as a retrovirologist it is clear it’s a retrovirus, a new retrovirus?
Luc Montagnier: No, at that point one cannot say. With the first budding pictures it could be a type C virus. One cannot distinguish.
Djamel TAHI: Could it be anything else than a retrovirus?
Luc Montagnier: No…well, after all, yes…it could be another budding virus. But we have an atlas. One knows a little bit from familiarity, what is a retrovirus and what is not. With the morphology one can distinguish but it takes a certain familiarity.
Djamel TAHI: Why no purification?
Luc Montagnier: I repeat we did not purify. We purified to characterise the density of the RT, which was soundly that of a retrovirus. But we didn’t take the “peak”…or it didn’t work…because if you purify, you damage. So for infectious particles it is better to not touch them too much. So you take simply the supernatant from the culture of lymphocytes which have produced the virus and you put it in a small quantity on some new cultures of lymphocytes. And it follows, you pass on the retrovirus serially and you always get the same characteristics and you increase the production each time you pass it on.
Djamel TAHI: But there comes a point when one must do the characterisation of the virus. This means: what are the proteins of which it’s composed?
Luc Montagnier: That’s it. So then, analysis of the proteins of the virus demands mass production and purification. It is necessary to do that. And there I should say that that partially failed. J.C. Chermann was in charge of that, at least for the internal proteins. And he had difficulties producing the virus and it didn’t work. But this was one possible way, the other way was to have the nucleic acid, cloning, etc. It’s this way which worked very quickly. The other way didn’t work because we had at that time a system of production which wasn’t robust enough. One had not enough particles produced to purify and characterise the viral proteins. It couldn’t be done. One couldn’t produce a lot of virus at that time because this virus didn’t emerge in the immortal cell line. We could do it with the LAI virus, but at that time we did not know that.
Djamel TAHI: Gallo did it?
Luc Montagnier: Gallo?…I don’t know if he really purified. I don’t believe so. I believe he launched very quickly into the molecular part, that’s to say cloning. What he did do is the Western Blot. We used the RIPA technique, so what they did that was new was they showed some proteins which one had not seen well with the other technique. Here is another aspect of characterising the virus. You cannot purify it but if you know somebody who has antibodies against the proteins of the virus, you can purify the antibody/antigen complex. That’s what one did. And thus one had a visible band, radioactively labelled, which one called protein 25, p25. And Gallo saw others. There was the p25 which he calledp24, there was p41 which we saw…
Djamel TAHI: About the antibodies, numerous studies have shown that these antibodies react with other proteins or elements which are not part of HIV. And that they can not be sufficient to characterise the proteins of HIV.
Luc Montagnier: No! Because we had controls. We had people who didn’t have AIDS and had no antibodies against these proteins. And the techniques we used were techniques I had refined myself some years previously, to detect the src gene. You see the src gene was detected by immunoprecipitation too. It was the p60 [protein 60]. I was very dexterous, and my technician also, with the RIPA technique. If one gets a specific reaction, it’s specific.
Djamel TAHI: But we know AIDS patients are infected with a multitude of other infectious agents which are susceptible to induce crossreactions.
Luc Montagnier: Yes, but antibodies are very specific. They know how to distinguish one molecule in one million. There is a very great affinity. When antibodies have sufficient affinity, you fish out something really very specific. With monoclonal antibodies you fish out really ONE protein. All of that is used for diagnostic antigen detection.
Djamel TAHI: For you the p41 was not of viral origin and so didn’t belong to HIV. For Gallo it was the most specific protein of the HIV. Why this contradiction?
Luc Montagnier: We were both reasonably right. That’s to say that I in my RIPA technique…in effect there are cellular proteins that one meets everywhere – there’s a non-specific “background noise”, and amongst these proteins one is very abundant in cells, which is actin. And this protein has a molecular weight 43000kd. So, it was there. So I was reasonably right, but what Gallo saw on the other hand was the gp41 of HIV, because he was using the Western Blot. And that I have recognised.
Djamel TAHI: For you p24 was the most specific protein of HIV, for Gallo not at all. One recognises thanks to other studies that antibodies directed against p24 were often found in patients who were not infected with HIV, and even certain animals. In fact today, an antibody reaction with p24 is considered non specific.
Luc Montagnier: It is not sufficient for diagnosing HIV infection.
Djamel TAHI: No protein is sufficient.
Luc Montagnier: No protein is sufficient anyway. But at the time the problem didn’t reveal itself like that. The problem was to know whether it was an HTLV or not. The only human retrovirus known was HTLV. And we showed clearly that it was not an HTLV, that Gallo’s monoclonal antibodies against the p24 of HTLV did no recognise the p25 of HIV.
Djamel TAHI: At the density of retroviruses, 1.16, there are a lot of particles, but only 20% of them appertain to HIV. Why are 80% of the proteins not viral and the others are? How can one make out the difference?
Luc Montagnier: There are two explanations. For the one part, at this density you have what one calls microvesicles of cellular origin, which have approximately the same size as the virus, and then the virus itself, in budding, brings cellular proteins. So effectively these proteins are not viral, they are cellular in origin. So, how to make out the difference?! Frankly with this technique one can’t do it precisely. What we can do is to purify the virus to the maximum with successive gradients, and you always stumble on the same proteins.
Djamel TAHI: The others disappear?
Luc Montagnier: Let’s say the others reduce a little bit. You take off the microvesicles, but each time you lose a lot of virus, so it’s necessary to have a lot of virus to start off in order to keep a little bit when you arrive at the end. And then again it’s the molecular analysis, it’s the sequence of these proteins which is going allow one to say whether they are of viral origin or not. That’s what we began for p25, that failed…and the other technique is to do the cloning, and so then you have the DNA and from the DNA you get the proteins. You deduce the sequence of the proteins and their size and, you stumble again on what you’ve already observed with immunoprecipitation or with gel electrophoresis. And one knows by analogy with the sizes of the proteins of other retroviruses, one can deduce quite closely these proteins. So you have the p25 which was close to the p24 of HTLV, you have the p18.. in the end you have the others. On the other hand the one which was very different was the very large protein, p120.
Luc Montagnier’s 1997 interview is a highlight reel of revelations. We can see clearly, as Montagnier repeated on more than one occasion, that he himself (and Robert Gallo according to his knowledge) did not purify any “virus.” Why is this important? In order to determine whether a “virus” actually exists, the particles must be purified (freed from contaminants, pollutants, and foreign elements) so that they can be isolated (separated from everything else). Only once this occurs can the particles assumed to be “virus” then be proven pathogenic through experimentation. Only purified particles can be used to visualize as well as biochemically and molecularly characterize the “virus” in order to determine specific proteins, antibodies, genomic sequence, electron microscopy imaging, etc. Without purification, one can not determine that the “virus” exists at all and the non-specific laboratory results obtained from unpurified material are absolutely meaningless.
As most virologists do, Montagnier claimed that even though he did not purify the “virus” and therefore did not have direct evidence for its existence, he had plenty of non-specific indirect evidence that when added together, became “specific” to the “virus.” It was the accumulation of indirect evidence that proved his “virus” existed. In essence, he had a circumstantial case based upon evidence that was not drawn from direct observation. This would be considered a weak case in a court of law.
Looking at his circumstantial case, Montagnier admitted that without purification, images of particles taken from electron microscopy could not be definitively claimed to be “retroviruses” or “viruses” of any kind based on morphological appearance alone. He stated that it was necessary to have knowledge of other “retroviruses” first in order to discover a new one. He himself referred to an atlas of images of other “retroviruses” in order to claim that his unpurified particles were also “retroviruses.”
However, what Montagnier did not admit is that this atlas of “retroviruses” was also made up of images of unpurified particles. Therefore, none of the particles imaged in his atlas could be considered “retrovirus” particles until evidence of purified/isolated “retroviruses” are released. Purification would have had to have occurred with the very first “retrovirus” ever discovered and imaged in order for this method of identification to be valid. Montagnier admitted that while purification is a necessary step, it is impossible as the more you purify the sample, the more damage occurs to the particles and the less “virus” you have at the end. Since he stated that they did not purify the culture used to obtain the EM images of “HIV,” there is no proof that the random particles claimed to be HIV are in fact a “virus” at all.
Montagnier also tried to claim that antibodies/antigens, such as the p24 protein, are specific to HIV and that they can be used as part of the evidence for the existence of his “virus.” However, as Djamel expertly pointed out, these proteins are not specific to HIV as there are over 60 conditions (such as pregnancy, tuberculosis, the flu vaccine, etc.) with related proteins that can trigger positive HIV tests. Montagnier ended up admitting that no protein is sufficient for diagnosing HIV thus nullifying any claims he made about the specificity of antibodies/antigens and their value in being used as indirect evidence for the existence of an unseen “virus.”
The biggest revelation by Montagnier in this 1997 interview is his belief that HIV is not the cause of AIDS. While he believed he had discovered a new “retrovirus” based on an accumulation of weak indirect evidence, according to his statement it was not pathogenic. If we take his indirect evidence and break it down, Motagnier did not have purified “virus” particles which means his EM images are useless, his antibody tests are meaningless, and the genomic sequence is worthless. Without purified particles, he had no proof of pathogeniticity as he had no valid independent variable in order to establish cause and effect. It is amazing that Montagnier believed he had a “virus” at all as in every meaningful way possible, he did not have evidence of one.
All of that being said, for those still interested in reading Montagnier’s original 1983 paper containing no evidence of any “virus” whatsoever, here is the paper in its entirety:
Isolation of a T-Lymphotropic Retrovirus from a Patientat Risk for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS)
Abstract. A retrovirus belonging to the family of recently discovered human T-cell leukemia viruses (HTLV), but clearly distinct from each previous isolate, has been isolated from a Caucasian patient with signs and symptoms that often precede the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). This virus is a typical type-C RNA tumor virus, buds from the cell membrane, prefers magnesium for reverse transcriptase activity, and has an internal antigen (p25) similar to HTLVp24. Antibodies from serum of this patient react with proteins from viruses of the HTLV-I subgroup, but type-specific antisera to HTLV-I do not precipitate proteins of the new isolate. The virus from this patient has been transmitted into cord blood lymphocytes, and the virus produced by these cells is similar to the original isolate.
From these studies it is concluded that this virus as well as the previous HTLV isolates belong to a general family of T-lymphotropic retroviruses that are horizontally transmitted in humans and may be involved in several pathological syndromes, including AIDS.The acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) has recently been recognized in several countries (1). The disease has been reported mainly in homosexual males with multiple partners, and epidemiological studies suggest horizontal transmission by sexual routes (2) as well as by intravenous drug administration (3), and blood transfusion (4).
The pronounced depression of cellular immunity that occurs in patients with AIDS and the quantitative modifications of subpopulations of their T lymphocytes (5) suggest that T cells or a subset of T cells might be a preferential target for the putative infectious agent. Alternatively, these modifications may result from subsequent infections. The depressed cellular immunity may result in serious opportunistic infections in AIDS patients, many of whom develop Kaposi’s sarcoma (1). However, a picture of persistent multiple lymphadenopathies has also been described in homosexual males (6) and infants (7) who may or may not develop AIDS (8).
The histological aspect of such lymph nodes is that of reactive hyperplasia. Such cases may correspond to an early or a milder form of the disease. We report here the isolation of a novel retrovirus from a lymph node of a homosexual patient with multiple lymphadenopathies. The virus appears to be a member of the human T-cell leukemia virus (HTLV) family (9).
The retrovirus was propagated in cultures of T lymphocytes from a healthy adult donor and from umbilical cord blood of newborn humans. Viral core proteins were not immunologically related to the p24 and p19 proteins of subgroup I of HTLV (9). However, serum of the patient reacted strongly with surface antigen (or antigens) present on HTLV-I-infected cells. Moreover, the ionic requirements of the viral reverse transcriptase were close to that of HTLV. Recently, a type-C retrovirus was also identified in T cells from a patient with hairy cell leukemia. Analysis of the proteins of this virus showed they were related to, but clearly different from, proteins of previous HTLV isolates (10).
Moreover, recent studies of the nucleic acid sequences of this new virus show it is less than 10 percent homologous to the earlier HTLV isolates (11). This virus was called HTLV-II to distinguish it from all the earlier, highly related viruses termed HTLV-I. The new retrovirus reported here appears to also differ from HTLV-II. We tentatively conclude that this virus, as well as all previous HTLV isolates, belong to a family of T-lymphotropic retroviruses that are horizontallytransmitted in humans and may be involved in several pathological syndromes, including AIDS.
The patient was a 33-year-old homosexual male who sought medical consultation in December 1982 for cervical lymphadenopathy and asthenia (patient 1). Examination showed axillary and inguinal lymphadenopathies. Neither fever nor recent loss of weight were noted. The patient had a history of several episodes of gonorrhea and had been treated for syphilis in September 1982. During interviews he indicated that he had had more than 50 sexual partners per year and had traveled to many countries, including North Africa, Greece, and India. His last trip to New York was in 1979.
Laboratory tests indicated positive serology (immunoglobulin G) for cytomegalovirus (CMV) and Epstein-Barr virus. Herpes simplex virus was detected in cells from his throat that were cultured on human and monkey cells. A biopsy of a cervical lymph node was performed. One sample served for histological examination, which revealed follicular hyperplasia without change of the general architecture of the lymph node. Immunohistological studies revealed, in paracortical areas, numerous T lymphocytes (OKT3+). Typing of the whole cellular suspension indicated that 62 percent of the cells were T lymphocytes (OKT3+), 44 percent were T-helper cells (OKT4+), and 16 percent were suppressor cells (OKT8+).
Cells of the same biopsied lymph node were put in culture medium with phytohemagglutinin (PHA), T-cell growth factor (TCGF), and antiserum to human a interferon (12). The reason for using this antiserum was to neutralize endogenous interferon which is secreted by cells chronically infected by viruses, including retroviruses. In the mouse system, we had previously shown that antiserum to interferon could increase retrovirus production by a factor of 10 to 50 (13). After 3 days, the culture was continued in the same medium without PHA. Samples were regularly taken for assay of reverse transcriptase and for examination in the electron microscope.
After 15 days of culture, a reversetranscriptase activity was detected in the culture supernatant by using the ionic conditions described for HTLV-I (14). Virus production continued for 15 days and decreased thereafter, in parallel with the decline of lymphocyte proliferation. Peripheral blood lymphocytes cultured in the same way were consistently negative for reverse transcriptase activity, even after 6 weeks. Cytomegalovirus could be detected, upon prolonged co-cultivation with MRC5 cells, in the original biopsy tissue, but not in the cultured T lymphocytes at any time of the culture.
Virus transmission was attempted with the use of a culture of T lymphocytes established from an adult healthy donor of the Blood Transfusion Center at the Pasteur Institute. On day 3, half of the culture was cocultivated with lymphocytes from the biopsy after centrifugation of the mixed cell suspensions. Reverse transcriptase activity could be detected in the supernatant on day 15 of the coculture but was not detectable on days 5 and 10. The reverse transcriptase had the same characteristics as that released by the patient’s cells and the amount released remained stable for 15 to 20 days. Cells of the uninfected culture of the donor lymphocytes did not release reverse transcriptase activity during this period or up to 6 weeks whenthe culture was discontinued.
The cell-free supernatant of the infected coculture was used to infect 3-day-old cultures of T lymphocytes from two umbilical cords, LCl and LC5, in the presence of Polybrene (2 ,ug/ml). After a lag period of 7 days, a relatively high titer of reverse transcriptase activity was detected in both of the cord lymphocyte cultures. Identical cultures, which had not been infected, remained negative. These two successive infections clearly show that the virus could be propagated on normal lymphocytes from either newborns or adults.
That this new isolate was a retrovirus was further indicated by its density in a sucrose gradient, which was 1.16, and by its labeling with [3H]uridine (Fig. 1). Electron microscopy of the infected umbilical cord lymphocytes showed characteristic immature particles with dense crescent (C-type) budding at the plasma membrane (Fig. 2).
Virus-infected cells from the original biopsy as well as infected lymphocytes from the first and second viral passages were used to determine the optimal requirements for reverse transcriptase activity and the template specificity of the enzyme. The results were the same in all instances. The reverse transcriptase activity displayed a strong affinity for poly(adenylate-oligodeoxythymidylate) [poly(A) -oligo(dT)], and required Mg2+ with an optimal concentration (5 mM) slightly lower than that for HT (14) and an optimal pH of 7.8. The reaction was not inhibited by actinomycin D. This character, as well as the preferential specificity for riboseadenylate *deoxythymidylate over deoxyadenylate * deoxythymidylate, distinguish the viral enzyme from DNA-dependent polymerases.
We then determined whether or not this isolate was indistinguishable from HTLV-1 isolates. Human T-cell leukemia virus has been isolated from cultured T lymphocytes of patients with T lymphomas and T leukemias [for a review, see (9)]. The antibodies used were specific for the p19 and p24 core proteins of HTLV-I. A monoclonal antibody to p19 (15) and a polyclonal goat antibody to p24 (16) were used in an indirect fluorescence assay against infected cells from the biopsy of patient 1 and lymphocytes obtained from a healthy donor and infected with the same virus. As shown in Table 1, the virus-producing cells did not react with either type of antibody, whereas two lines of cord lymphocytes chronically infected with HTLV (17) and used as controls showed strong surface fluorescence.
When serum from patient 1 was tested against infected lymphocytes from the biopsy the surface fluorescence was as ntense as that of the control HTLV-producing lines. This suggests that serum of the patient contains antibodies
that recognize a common antigen present on HTLV-I-producing cells and on the patient’s lymphocytes. Similarly, cord lymphocytes infected with the virus from patient 1 did not react with antibodies to p19 or p24. Only a minor proportion of the cells (about I percent) reacted with the patient’s serum. This may indicatethat only this fraction of the cells was infected and produced virus. Alternatively, the antigen recognized by the patient’s serum may contain cellular determinants that show less expression in T lymphocytes of newborns.
We also cultured T lymphocytes from a lymph node of another patient (patient 2) who presented with multiple adenopathies and had been in close contact with an AIDS case. These lymphocytes did not produce viral reverse transcriptase; however, they reacted in the immunofluorescence assay with serum from patient 1. Moreover, serum from patient 2 reacted strongly with control HTLV-producing lines (not shown). In order to determine which viral antigen was recognized by antibodies present in’ the two patients’ sera, several immunoprecipitation experiments were carried out. Cord lymphocytes infected with virus from patient I and uninfected controls were labeled with [35S]methionine for 20 hours. Cells were lysed with detergents, and a cytoplasmic S10 extract was made. Labeled virus released in the supernatant was banded in a sucrose gradient.
Both materials were immunoprecipitated by antiserum to HTLV- I p24, by serum from patients 1 and 2, and by serum samples from healthy donors. Immunocomplexes were analyzed by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis under denaturing conditions. Figure 3 shows that a p25 protein present in the virus-infected cells from patient 1 and in LC1 cells infected with this virus, was specifically recognized by serum from patients I and 2 but not by antiserum to HTLV-1 p24 or serum of normal donors.
Conversely, the p24 present in control HTLV-infected cell extracts was recognized by antibodies to HTLV but not by serum from patient 1. A weak band (lane 2, Fig. 3B) could hardly be seen with serum from patient 2, suggesting some similarities of the p25 protein from this patient’s cells with HTLV-1 p24. When purified, labeled virus from patient I was analyzed under similar conditions, three major proteins could be seen: the p25 protein and proteins with molecular weights of 80,000 and 45,000. The 45K protein may be dueto contamination of the virus by cellular actin which was present in immunoprecipitates of all the cell extracts (Fig. 3).
These results, together with the immunofluorescence data, indicate that the retrovirus from patient 1 contains a major p25 protein, similar in size to that of HTLV-I but different immunologically. The DNA sequences of these and other members of the HTLV family are being compared. All attempts to infect other cells such as a B-lymphoblastoid cell line (Raji), immature or pre-T cell lines (CEM, HSB2), and normal fibroblasts (feline and mink lung cell lines) were unsuccessful.
The role of this virus in the etiology of AIDS remains to be determined. Patient 1 had circulating antibodies against the virus, and some of the latter persisted in lymphocytes of his lymph node (or nodes). The virus-producing lymphocytes seemed to have no increased growth potential in vitro compared to the uninfected cells. Therefore, the multiple lymphadenopathies may represent a host reaction against the persistent viral infection rather than hyperproliferation of virus-infected lymphocytes. Other factors, such as repeated infection by the same virus or other bacterial and viral agents may, in some patients, overload this early defense mechanism and bring about an irreversible depletion of T cells involved in cellular immunity.
doi: 10.1126/science.6189183.
That’s an impressive circle. Montagnier looks quite pleased with his creation.
In Summary:
According to HIV discoverer Luc Montagnier, they did “isolate” HIV because they “passed on” the “virus” and they made a culture of the “virus”
He stated that Robert Gallo (American virologist who plagiarized Montagnier’s work) said: “They have not isolated the virus…and we (Gallo et al.), we have made it emerge in abundance in an immortal cell line.”
But before making it emerge in immortal cell lines, Montagnier claimed his team made it emerge in cultures of normal Iymphocytes from a blood donor
Montagnier stated that it is obvious one could not have isolated any retrovirus without knowledge of other “retroviruses”
To pass a “virus” on serially is difficult because when you put the material in purification, into a gradient, “retroviruses” are very fragile, so they break each other and greatly lose their infectivity
At the beginning they stumbled on a “virus” which did not kill cells
It was the first BRU “virus,” yet they had very little of it and could not pass it on in an immortal cell line
They were later successful with the second strain yet Montagnier stated that there lies the quite mysterious problem of the contamination of that second strain by the first which was LAI
Quick sidenote: BRU and LAI are considered the first strains of HIV
“The original isolate HIV-1 Bru, formerly called LAV, was derived from patient BRU. HIV-1 Lai was derived from patient LAI and contaminated a HIV-1 Bru culture between 20 July and 3 August 1983. The culture became, in effect, HIV-1 Lai, identifiable by a unique motif in the V3 loop. Because of this contamination two, rather than one, HIV-1 isolates were sent to the Laboratory of Tumor Cell Biology at the National Cancer Institute on 23 September 1983.”
When asked about the lack of purification for EM imaging of HIV, Montagnier stated that there was so little production of “virus”it was impossible to see what might be in a concentrate of “virus” in the gradient
What they saw were some particles but they did not have the morphology typical of “retroviruses” as they were very different
He claimed it was “a Roman effort” with the culture as it took many hours to find the first pictures
On the morphology alone one could not say the EM images were truly a “retrovirus”
A French specialist of EMs of “retroviruses” publicly attacked Montagnier saying: “This is not a retrovirus, it is an arenavirus” as there are other families of “virus” which bud and have spikes on the surface, etc.
He stated that it was not only the morphology and the budding, but that there was reverse transcriptase
It was not one property but the assemblage of the properties which made them say it was a “retrovirus” of the family of “lentiviruses”
Taken in isolation, each of the properties isn’t truly specific
The four properties were:
The density
Reverse Transcriptase
Pictures of budding
The analogy with the visna “virus”
Montagnier stated that we have endogenous (human origin) “retroviruses” which sometimes express particles – but of endogenous origin, and which therefore don’t have pathological roles
The first question put to them by Nature was: “Is it not a laboratory contamination? Is it perhaps a mouse “retrovirus” or an animal “retrovirus?”
Montagnier stated that it was important to take it as an assemblage as if you take each property separately, they are not specific and it is the assemblage which gives the specificity
When culturing the “virus,” they used a lot of cell lines and the only one which could produce it was the Tampon (!?) Iymphocytes
He admitted that when viewing EM images, one cannot distinguish if the particle is a “retrovirus” or not
They used an atlas of previous “retroviruses” to determine if the “virus” had the morphology of one as it takes a certain familiarity to distinguish them
Montagnier repeated they did not purify the “virus” because if you purify, you damage the “virus” particles
He stated that for infectious particles, it is better to not touch them too much
Analysis of the proteins of the “virus” demands mass production and purification and so it is necessary to do that
In that regard, Montagnier claimed that they partially failed
They did not have enough particles produced to purify and characterise the “viral” proteins as it couldn’t be done
They couldn’t produce a lot of “virus” at that time because the “virus” didn’t emerge in the immortal cell line
Montagnier stated that he believed Gallo also did not purify and he believed Gallo had launched very quickly into the molecular cloning part
He also said that you cannot purify the “virus” but if you know somebody who has antibodies against the proteins of the “virus,” you can purify the antibody/antigen complex
However, this is a complete contradiction as he claimed that purification needed to be done in order to characterise the proteins of the “virus,” so if you can’t purify the “virus” to characterise the proteins, you would be unable to know which proteins act against the “virus”as well as any specific antibodies reacting to them
Montagnier claimed antibodies are very specific and that they know how to distinguish one molecule in one million
With monoclonal antibodies you fish out really ONE protein and all of that is used for diagnostic antigen detection
There are cellular proteins that one meets everywhere – there’s a non-specific “background noise”
An antibody reaction with p24 is considered non specific and it is not sufficient for diagnosing HIV infection
Montagnier agreed that no protein is sufficient to diagnose HIV
When asked why, at the 1.16 density gradient band, 80% of the particles are “non-viral” and only 20% are HIV, Montagnier explained that at this density, there are microvesicles of cellular origin, which have approximately the same size as the “virus,” and then the “virus” itself, in budding, brings cellular proteins
Effectively these proteins are not “viral” and are cellular in origin
He stated that with this technique one can’t differentiate them precisely
If you purify the “virus” to the maximum with successive gradients, you always stumble on the same proteins
Montagnier stated that the other proteins only reduce a little bit as you can take off the microvesicles, but each time you lose a lot of “virus,” so it’s necessary to have a lot of “virus” to start off in order to keep a little bit when you arrive at the end
And then again it’s the molecular analysis, it’s the sequence of these proteins which is going allow one to say whether they are of “viral” origin or not
However, what Montagnier doesn’t seem to understand is that if you can not purify the “virus” in order to determine which proteins belong to the “virus,” sequencing proteins will not tellyou if they are “viral” or not
This “virus” is a typical type-C RNA tumor “virus,” buds from the cell membrane, prefers magnesium for reverse transcriptase activity, and has an internal antigen (p25) similar to HTLVp24
Antibodies from serum of this patient react with proteins from “viruses” of the HTLV-I subgroup, but type-specific antisera to HTLV-I do not precipitate proteins of the new isolate
Remember, Montagnier admitted they did not purify the “virus” and that purification was necessary in order to characterise the proteins of the “virus, so how would they know if the antibodies are reacting to “virus” proteins?
The “virus” from this patient has been transmitted into cord blood lymphocytes, and the “virus” produced by these cells is similar to the original isolate
From these studies it is concluded that this “virus” as well as the previous HTLV isolates belong to a general family of T-lymphotropic “retroviruses” that are horizontally transmitted in humans and may be involved in several pathological syndromes, including AIDS
The pronounced depression of cellular immunity that occurs in patients with AIDS and the quantitative modifications of subpopulations of their T lymphocytes suggest that T cells or a subset of T cells might be a preferential target for the putative infectious agent
Alternatively, these modifications may result from subsequent infections
The depressed cellular immunity may result in serious opportunistic infections in AIDS patients, many of whom develop Kaposi’s sarcoma
However, a picture of persistent multiple lymphadenopathies has also been described in homosexual males and infants who may or may not develop AIDS
The “retrovirus” was propagated in cultures of T lymphocytes from a healthy adult donor and from umbilical cord blood of newborn humans
They tentatively (i.e. subject to further confirmation; not definitely) concluded that this “virus,” as well as all previous HTLV isolates, belong to a family of T-lymphotropic “retroviruses” that are horizontally transmitted in humans and may be involved in several pathological syndromes, including AIDS
The patient the “virus” came from had a history of several episodes of gonorrhea and had been treated for syphilis in September 1982
Oddly enough, syphilis has the exact same symptoms of AIDS and the usual treatment is a series of Penicllin injections, which coincidentally (or not) can destroy a person’s “immune” system
Laboratory tests indicated positive serology (immunoglobulin G) for “cytomegalovirus” (CMV) and Epstein-Barr “virus“
Herpes simplex “virus” was detected in cells from his throat that were cultured on human and monkey cells
Cells of the same biopsied lymph node were put in culture medium with phytohemagglutinin (PHA), T-cell growth factor (TCGF), and antiserum to human a interferon
The reason for using this antiserum was to neutralize endogenous interferon which is secreted by cells chronically infected by “viruses,” including “retroviruses”
After 15 days of culture, a reverse transcriptase activity was detected in the culture supernatant by using the ionic conditions described for HTLV-I and “virus” production continued for 15 days and decreased thereafter, in parallel with the decline of lymphocyte proliferation
Quick sidenote: Montagnier stated here that the “virus” was cultured for 30 days, as it took 15 days for the reverse transcriptase activity to be detected and another 15 days for the “virus” production to decrease. Interestingly, in a paper he wrote in 2003, Montagnier stated this:
“The initial clinical isolate, unlike HTLV, had no transforming or cytopathic effects on T lymphocytes. Barré-Sinoussi notes in her commentary that the lymphocyte culture I started from the patient’s lymph node biopsy died after 4 weeks. But this was anticipated as soon as we realized that the cells were not transformed, because normal cultures of the same type also die within this time period.The need for succesive use of peripheral blood mononuclear cells to maintain a viral culture was therefore a likely hypothesis that proved to be correct. The virus would later be classified as non-syncytium-inducing, as is usually the case for viruses isolated from recently infected HIV patients who are either asymptomatic or present with lymphadenopathies. However, the first typical cytopathic effect, formation of large syncytia, was not observed until 5 months later, in a third clinical sample (HIV LAI) from a patient who had full-blown AIDS.”
It appears they cultured the “virus” for 30 days knowing full well that regular cultures of the same type die within this 4 week time frame. Montagnier stated that they did not even notice the cytopathic effect (CPE) until they had a third clinical sample 5 months later. CPE is claimed to be structural changes in host cells that are caused by “viral” invasion and yet, this was absent in their first two samples.
On day 3, half of the culture was cocultivated with lymphocytes from the biopsy after centrifugation of the mixed cell suspensions
Cells of the uninfected culture of the donor lymphocytes did not release reverse transcriptase activity during this period or up to 6 weeks when the culture was discontinued
The cell-free supernatant of the infected coculture was used to infect 3-day-old cultures of T lymphocytes from two umbilical cords, LCl and LC5, in the presence of Polybrene (2 ,ug/ml)
FYI, Polybrene was shown to negatively impact the proliferation and maintenance of growth potential of human keratinocytes here
Electron microscopy of the infected umbilical cord lymphocytes showed characteristic immature particles with dense crescent (C-type) budding at the plasma membrane
“Virus-infected” cells from the original biopsy as well as infected lymphocytes from the first and second “viral” passages were used to determine the optimal requirements for reverse transcriptase activity and the template specificity of the enzyme
A monoclonal antibody to p19 (15) and a polyclonal goat antibody to p24 (16) were used in an indirect (i.e. not directly caused by or resulting from something) fluorescence assay against infected cells from the biopsy of patient 1 and lymphocytesobtained from a healthy donor and infected with the same “virus” (why did they not use healthy donor lymphocytes without the added “virus?”)
Cord lymphocytes infected with the “virus” from patient 1 did not react with antibodies to p19 or p24
Only a minor proportion of the cells (about I percent) reacted with the patient’s serum
This may indicate that only this fraction of the cells was infected and produced “virus”
When purified, labeled “virus” from patient I was analyzed under similar conditions, three major proteins could be seen: the p25 protein and proteins with molecular weights of 80,000 and 45,000
The 45K protein may be due to contamination of the “virus” by cellular actin which was present in immunoprecipitates of all the cell extracts (i.e. “purified” with contaminants…otherwise known as not purified)
All attempts to infect other cells such as a B-lymphoblastoid cell line (Raji), immature or pre-T cell lines (CEM, HSB2), and normal fibroblasts (feline and mink lung cell lines) were unsuccessful
The role of this “virus” in the etiology of AIDS remains to be determined (ultimately, Montagnier believed his “virus” did not cause AIDS)
Other factors, such as repeated infection by the same “virus” or other bacterial and “viral” agents may, in some patients, overload this early defense mechanism and bring about an irreversible depletion of T cells involved in cellular immunity
Luc Montagnier unleashed his “retroviral” monster onto the world in 1983 and it grew into a beast of its own kind during the proceeding decades. Countless lives have been destroyed by the fear of the HIV diagnosis as well as the subsequent subjection to toxic black label pharmaceuticals. The stigma of the positive test result is the “viral” scarlet letter unfairly placed upon a person in a toxic state due to lifestyle choices and/or environmental factors. It does not matter that Montagnier attempted to steer his monster from the lethal killer it was made out to be into a harmless passenger inside the human body. It does not matter that he believed HIV did not cause AIDS. It does not matter that he believed that co-factors other than a “virus” should be examined in regards to AIDS. It does not matter that he believed HIV could be eliminated based on healthy diet/lifestyle choices. It does not matter that he admitted to not purifying any “virus.” Montagnier’s legacy is tied to the beast of his own creation. He opened Pandora’s Box and released this fraudulent curse upon the world. For that, I doubt he will rest in peace.
Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: In the following video, Spacebusters uses images to artistically highlight & add clarity to an essential part of a conversation (Merritt Medical Hour — February 2, 2022) between Dr. Lee Merritt & Dr. Tom Cowan. See the entire interview at Merritt Medical Hour on BrighteonTV.
To those of us that know that virology’s “isolation” and genomic sequencing methodologies are anti-scientific, it is still interesting to see the proponents of the nonsense offer official explanations about what they are up to.
Here in New Zealand, the Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR) is responsible for some of the alleged isolation experiments and genomic sequencing of the imaginary “SARS-CoV-2” particle, that they claim is responsible for the clinically undefined illness “COVID-19”. On the 9th of February 2022, they responded to questions surrounding the methodology of their cell culture and genomic sequencing experiments in relation to an Official Information Act request (which is analogous to a Freedom of Information request).
ESR couldn’t seem to find the “virus” but they featured this pretty picture.
So let’s have a look at the ESR’s “scientific” method with regards to their official records of a “SARS-CoV-2 virus”…
“Viral Culture/Experiment details –
Once the cells are 90 – 100% confluent, they are inoculated with 500 uL of diluted clinical sample (sample is diluted 1:10 in Infection media),10 mL of Infection Media is added to the flask. Infection media is made up of DMEM with 1% pen/strep/gentamycin, 1% Nystatin, 1% Glutamax, 1.5% Hepes plus 4ug/mL TPCK added.”
~ Jill Vintiner, Joint General Manager Health and Environment Group, ESR, 9 Feb 2022.
The “clinical sample” will be something like a crude nasopharyngeal sample taken from a patient. These specimens contain human tissue (from the host and other individuals in close contact with them), various bacterial and fungal elements, and whatever other material was in the patient’s mucosa. Amongst all this biological soup is the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus, which of course, has never been directly found in any person. Apparently there can be 200 million copies of the virus in a sneeze but strangely they can’t find any in an “infected” individual.
Instead they resort to tissue culture experiments, as the ESR continues to explain…
“The flasks are then placed into an incubator and monitored for cytopathic effect (CPE) A SARS-CoV-2 N gene PCR is performed on the diluted 1:10 clinical sample and on the supernatant of the flask after 1 week of incubation (or sooner if 100% CPE is evident). CT values for both specimens are used as well as the CPE observed in the flask to determine if viral culture has been successful.”
~ Jill Vintiner, Joint General Manager Health and Environment Group, ESR, 9 Feb 2022.
Cytopathic effects are non-specific and are simply the observation that cells being stressed in a test tube eventually break down and die, with some cells producing vesicles. However, in the world of virology it is seen as evidence that a virus is at work and is somehow destroying the cells from within. “SARS-CoV-2 N gene” is a misnomer because there has never been a demonstration of a viral particle that contains this genetic sequence. Even more problematic is that there’s never been a demonstration of any viral particle. However, here we see them claiming “successful” viral culture if they detect a single short genetic sequence by PCR amplification. Note to virologists: detecting genetic sequences of unproven provenance does not equal virus.
Then we get to another interesting part…
“Viral culture/experiment details of the negative control –
The method above is also used for the negative control and the flask undergoes the same conditions as the flasks used for viral culture, however we use Infection media only.”
~ Jill Vintiner, Joint General Manager Health and Environment Group, ESR, 9 Feb 2022.
How on earth is this a comparable control experiment? – they added no control sample to their culture brew. In their first experiment they added a veritable biological soup containing human tissue along with various microorganisms and other organic fragments (everything present in a respiratory tract sample), and their alleged virus of course. Examples of valid control experiments would be:
The same type of sample taken from a well person.
The same type of sample taken from a person with a comparable clinical condition but said not to have “COVID-19” (without biased pre-selection in the form of a PCR result.)
Ironically, both of the above become meaningless in the case of “COVID-19” as it has no specific symptoms, signs, or investigations outside of the PCR result – a PCR result that has never been validated to a clinical condition. In fact, a priori the PCR could never be validated in this application as it is simply a tool to amplify selected genetic fragments, not determine their origin or the significance of their presence in mixed biological samples. So, in the case of (1) above, many well people are said to have “COVID-19” and in the case of (2), there is no way to distinguish a novel clinical condition. Dr Sam Bailey explained these problems back in 2020 in “What is a COVID-19 Case?” – a video banned by Big Tech after several hundred thousand views but still available here.
The wheels really fall off the ESR’s response when they are asked to explain how they purify the alleged virus sample for genomic sequencing and compare this to a control:
“’Whole Genome’ Sequencing – Purity and Control Details:
[• The degree of purity of the “virus” sample used in the sequencing experiment.] The protocols used for amplification of the SARS-CoV-2 virus consists of primers that specifically and selectively amplify the viral material, any remaining host or bacterial material is filtered out programmatically prior to data analysis.”
~ Jill Vintiner, Joint General Manager Health and Environment Group, ESR, 9 Feb 2022.
Either they don’t understand the question or are being disingenuous here. Their response doesn’t provide any evidence that they have a virus, let alone have attempted to purify it, in the analysis of its purported genome. They are simply using a process that amplifies sequences they have artificially selected but as it is a mixed sample they cannot demonstrate the origin of them. There is no way to claim this is “viral material” because no one has ever demonstrated that these sequences come from inside a virus, let alone belong to “SARS-CoV-2”. They are simply building on the nonsense that has spun out of control on GISAID.org where not one of the millions of deposited “genomes” has been shown to come from inside a viral particle. It’s turtles all the way down with these contrived “genomes”.
And with regards to the ESR’s “controls”?…
“[• All details of the control group that was used when comparing the results of sequencing:
o the total nucleic acid extracted from the “viral lysate” (from the experimental group), versus
o the total nucleic acid extracted from the non-viral lysate (from the control group).]
The protocols used to extract RNA from clinical samples do not yield a uniform quantity as this depends on the viral load within a sample. Details about the ranges obtained and used for further analysis are published in detail in several scientific peer-reviewed publications and can also be found on the publicly accessible protocols.io website, link provided below as requested.”
~ Jill Vintiner, Joint General Manager Health and Environment Group, ESR, 9 Feb 2022.
They appear to have dodged the question and the protocols provide no evidence of valid control experiments. The ESR have been asked to clarify this but we can already see they are not adhering to the scientific method. I also looked at the four publications that they suggested but these simply confirmed the problem: there is no evidence of any virus and the world is being duped in this war on humanity.
In fact, by definition, there has never been a demonstration of any disease-causing virus ever, full stop. Even if the ESR performed valid genomic control experiments there would still need to be further experiments to demonstrate the existence of a replication competent, obligate intracellular parasite that causes disease in a host. In other words, the actual existence of a virus. It makes me wonder whether the virologists are going to change the very definition of a virus soon in order to keep the whole façade afloat. However, once people realise that virology has never fulfilled its own postulates, they can take a major step away from this health misconception and ignore any of the related damaging measures and “treatments” coming from the medical-pharmaceutical complex.
In an October, 2021 Forbes article, AstraZeneca marketed an experimental “injectable antibody therapy cocktail” to a fearful public. Without valid research, or proof, it claimed its cocktail to be effective at preventing severe illness or death in people with mild or moderate Covid-19 infections. It claimed its therapy cut the risk of death or severe illness by two-thirds (67%) if given within five days of showing symptoms.
The cocktail was marked as experimental for a reason.
Neither AstraZeneca, nor any vaccine maker, has ever revealed the ingredients of its experimental antibody or mRNA cocktail to the public. Neither have they provided informed consent as part of the offer.
Everything is an offer to contract, whether it be a personal, medical, or a business relationship. Every vaccinated subject must sign that they take full responsibility. Because no one else will.
According to the AMA, Informed Consent is required in all medical contracts in order to provide the nature, purpose, burdens, and risks of the proposed medical intervention so the patient can formally consent. The informed consent process falls under 45 CFR 46, for human subjects in research, which sounds a lot like conducting human experimentation. Americans were warned by the Secretary of State in March of 2020 that COVID is a live exercise.
In the beginning, COVID injectables were deployed as Emergency Use Authorized, or EUA, meaning, Off-label, Experimental Research, Unapproved, and without Informed Consent. In other words, use at your own discretion. Until recently, if you wanted to know what was inside the injectable mRNA cocktails, you were handed a blank piece of paper. However, what was hidden is now being revealed.
In November 2020 Dr Andreas Noack, a German chemist and one of the EU’s top graphene experts, released a video explaining that he had discovered graphene hydroxide contained in the COVID-19 experimental treatments. He described how the graphene hydroxide nano structures injected into the human body act as ‘razor blades’ inside the veins of recipients and how they would not show up on an autopsy or normal toxicology tests given their atomic size. On 26th November 2021, just hours after publishing his latest video about graphene hydroxide, he died in suspicious circumstances.
Professor Dr Pablo Campra, University of Almeria, Spain also examined Covid-19 experimental treatments in November 2021 using Micro-Raman Spectroscopy, the study of frequencies. He too confirmed the presence of graphene.
The charges center around the nano-ingredient, graphene hydroxide (GHO), discovered in EUA COVID injections. Considered to be a trade secret, GHO is not found on any label. Therefore, no one would be the wiser, except that GHO can be identified for its polymeric signature properties using Micro-Raman Spectroscopy. Other methods used to verify the serums morphologies and contents include: Optical Microscope, Dark-Field Microscope, UV absorbance and fluorescence spectroscope, Scanning Electron Microscopes, Transmission Electron Microscope, Energy Dispersive Spectroscope, X-ray Diffractometer, and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance instruments.
Damage Report
Trade secrets aside, Graphene hydroxide is well known in the world of science. A Pubmed database search generates over 18,000 published studies on ‘Graphene oxide’. Whether called graphene oxide (GO), or graphene hydroxide, (GOH), it is nanotechnology invisible to the human eye. Graphene has optical, thermal, mechanical, and electrical properties, with applications in silicon-based semi-conductor devices. Once inside the human body, graphene acquires magnetic properties and becomes a superconductor. The human superconductor.
Graphene is isolated from crystalline graphite. It is a flat monolayer composed of single-atom-thick, two-dimensional sheets of a hexagonally arranged honeycomb lattice. A summary of the findings detailed in the attached toxicology report reveals that Graphene nanomaterials (GFNs) can penetrate the body’s natural barriers and damage the central nervous system.
Summary of Graphene hydroxide (GOH) in biological systems:
Epigenetic toxicity comes from toxic environmental exposures which exert undesirable genetic effects on living organisms. Epigenetic toxins are found in water, air, food, and medical drugs, including nanotech. The current focus of graphene nanotech utilizes its electromagnetic properties as a carrier and adjuvant in vaccines. For instance, UV Fluorescence test results from the Pfizer BioNanoTech vaccine, show nanomaterial present in the vial that corresponds perfectly to that of graphene oxide (340 nm).
Due to its magnetic properties, Graphene oxide nanoparticles have the ability to absorb radiation from frequency 5G technology. Unfortunately, most MSDS sheets ignore contact by injection, and electromagnetic effects. If injected into the body, these nanoparticles have the ability to not only cause biological harm, but also to absorb radiation and convert gigahertz signals to terahertz signals, thousands of times higher than those created by silicon, alone. The European Union research group called EUCALL states:
What makes this feat possible is the highly efficient non-linear interaction between light and matter that occurs in graphene. The researchers used graphene containing a large number of free electrons that originated from the interaction between graphene and the substrate onto which it was deposited. When these electrons became excited by an oscillating electric field in room-temperature conditions, they rapidly shared their energy with bound electrons in the material.
It is best to lower expectations for justice to prevail in the UK case, or any case, of criminal corporations who geo-engineer humanity using experimental cocktails. After all, it is the individuals hidden behind the “corporate entity” who write history. For as long as humans have lived on earth, biology, along with history, has been altered. (See Arthur Firstenberg’s book, The Invisible Rainbow). Nothing changes when criminal defendants are identified as “corporate entities,” without names and insurance bonds. It becomes impossible stop the interconnected crimes, let alone stop the madness.
History and biology continue to be rewritten and transformed. While fraud is allowed to continue under the guise of ineffective public shaming rituals that pass for justice, humanity is entering a new Transhuman Age. With so many corporate criminals protected by bubble indemnity, there is a question that must be asked. Is the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act of 2007 and other Acts like it, a distraction, established to legalize the Act of Corporate Homicide, rather than deter it?
The way to rewrite history and biology is an individual process of knowing who you are and of rejecting The Transhuman Agenda.
Disclaimer: The author encourages you to consult your health care practitioner before making any health changes, especially any changes related to a specific diagnosis or condition. No information in this article should be relied upon to determine diet, make a medical diagnosis, or to determine or prescribe a treatment for a medical condition. This information is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended to build synapses for thinking.
Through a Freedom of Information Request, a watchdog organization revealed that the National Institutes for Health spent $2.3 million of taxpayer money injecting puppies with cocaine.
The point of the experiment was to see how a certain prescription drug reacted with cocaine.
The dogs were then euthanized, or used in further experiments.
This is the second recent example of the NIH funding cruel experiments using puppies.
In October, we talked about an experiment from Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (a sub agency of the NIH) which forced beagle puppies into mesh cages to allow sand flies to attack their heads, and spread parasites.
Some of the dogs’ vocal cords were removed so that Fauci’s researchers did not have to hear them cry.
At the time, FDA officials clarified that none of these experiments require testing on dogs.
These are the totally ethical health experts we are supposed to trust.
And the answer to that question is obvious. Throwing babies into a volcano makes no money for Pfizer.
On Feb. 15, the FDA will decide whether to approve the Pfizer COVID shot for children between the ages of six months and four years. The press and gov’t. spokespeople predict it’s a GO.
This is murder.
The FDA approval committee members will come in several categories: those who’ve been paid off; those who’ve been threatened; straight-out cold Nazi bureaucrats; those who’ve been blackmailed; and those who WANT TO murder babies.
You can’t get around this. Given the mainstream view of COVID, these FDA/CDC people KNOW the risk of the disease to babies is non-existent, and risks of the vaccine are absolutely devastating.
—Over a million vaccine injuries have already been reported to the US federal database; and this number represents vast UNDER-REPORTING.
Nevertheless, the FDA deciders are ready to say, unless exposed for what they are: inject the babies; kill the babies.
If you still think the government COVID response had anything to do with science or public health or human concern, if you’re still making excuses for Fauci and the whole rogue crew of predators and maniacs at the FDA and CDC, you’re an automatic robot; you just don’t know it.
Get a load of this. CNBC: “Pfizer amended its clinical trial in December to evaluate a third dose after two shots did not induce an adequate immune response in children 2- to 4-years-old. Pfizer and BioNTech said they will submit data on the third dose to the FDA in the coming months.”
I see. The vaccine didn’t work after 2 shots, but it’ll be approved anyway in few days, and Pfizer will let us know IN A FEW MONTHS how the third shot worked.
And that’s science. That’s the bullshit the educated class believes in. That’s the bullshit the deaf, dumb, and blind believe in.
And THE TRUCKERS are the terrorists. Sure. The government is righteous and just. Of course.
People “who spread misinformation about COVID” are terrorists. The government is righteous and just.
Love the government. Hate the terrorists.
Memo to parents: if you’ve been crazy enough to take the shots yourselves, are you ready to deliver your innocent babies into the hands of doctors and nurses who’ll spin the roulette wheel of death and inject their bodies? Is that what you’re going to do?
If so, why? Do you think it’ll make a nice talking point when you get together with friends? Do you think it’s a potent virtue signal? Do you think it proves you’re a loyal subject of the king?
Perhaps you can show up at a local school board meeting, with your infant in your arms; and you can look at the doughy morbid faces of the low-rent grifters sitting behind their long table, and you can say, “Look! I just had my baby shot with the vaccine! It’s wonderful!” And they’ll nod approvingly.
And some piece of dreck who picks up a paycheck as a city public health official will speak at the meeting. He might say vaccinated babies should wear masks. Ask him and find out. Look at his eyes. His brother-in-law, who knows the mayor, rescued him from a career as a gravedigger.
I want to know what the Pope thinks. He’s already stated taking the vaccine is a loving gift to God. What about the babies? Does Popius Maximus Jesuiticus believe The Lord wants infants injected? Let’s get this Pontiff on the record.
Would Mary, in her hut, have told the local doc to inject baby Jesus? Perhaps her husband Joseph, a minor character in the story up to that point, would have brandished a Glock and motioned the sawbones to the door.
Speaking of guns, I think four or five Secret Service agents, their weapons drawn, should usher Nurse Jill to the White House residence, where she will speak candidly and starkly to old Joe—spending as much time as necessary informing him about what the FDA is ready to do, until he UNDERSTANDS.
Then, the agents will force Joe in front of a camera—going live on major channels—where he will unambiguously declare his position on injecting babies.
If he supports the program, he will take full responsibility for the consequences.
After all, the FDA is an agency in the Executive Branch, under the President.
The buck stops with him. It should stop under harsh television spotlights, where no tap-dancing is permitted.
Of course, you parents will have the last word. Unless the guns of the State are pointed at you. If that comes to pass, are you ready to die fighting for your children?
Or will you sacrifice them on the altar of your own passivity and cowardice?
I STRONGLY suggest you make your position clear now.
Publically.
Leave no doubt.
Before it’s too late.
WE NEED AN UPROAR.
Are you standing up? Or are you grinning and virtue signaling—down on your knees?
The Covid19 narrative is broken, that battle is over. Yes, there are still pockets of token resistance, little embattled squares who aren’t ready to give up the ghost just yet, but for the most part the establishment are letting it go.
Country after country after country are “relaxing” their Covid restrictions, abandoning vaccine passport plans and attempting to “get back to normal”.
It seems every week some new “expert” who spent the last two years predicting we’re all gonna die turns up on the news claiming we should “treat Covid like the flu”.
But just because they’re giving slack on Covid does not mean the agenda behind Covid is gone. Far from it.
In fact, even as they seek to dump this pandemic in a shallow grave, they are already prepping the public for the next health scare – AIDs.
Then, just last week it was suddenly reported there was a “new variant” of HIV circulating in Europe, this new strain is allegedly “more virulent”, “more transmissable”, and “progresses to AIDS faster”.
Following hot on the heels of this fresh wave of fear is a push for everyone to get AIDS tested as soon as possible, from politicians and celebrities and everyone in between.
Prince Harry is leading the charge, in a video that caused the press invoke the spirit of his mother Princess Diana, Harry insisted we all have a “duty” to get HIV tested “to keep other people safe”, comparing it to the COVID outbreak.
“Know your status“, the video says. Which will probably be a hashtag in the near future. (I just checked, and it actually is already.)
They’re really cranking through the gears on this one.
Even while the problem and reaction are still barely out of the research and development stage, they’re already talking about the solution.
Guess what it is?
If you said “another mRNA vaccine”, well done for paying attention
Yes, Moderna has apparently learned so much from making their rushed Covid vaccine which doesn’t work that they’re already making an HIV vaccine they hope will be just as “safe and effective”.
In a truly startling coincidence, Moderna’s HIV vaccine began clinical trials the exact same day the “new variant” of HIV hit the headlines, and the same week as the NHS’s annual “HIV Testing Week”. Funny old world, isn’t it?
Anyway, everyone get ready to line up for the AIDS shot.
by Global Research
first published by Global Research on January 28, 2022
.
UK Law Enforcement procedures have been initiated against the architects of the Covid-19 crisis.
This initiative sets a precedent Worldwide.
Should a Criminal Investigation be contemplated in regards to Canada’s Trudeau Government Covid-19 Mandates?
****
Metropolitan Police Crime Number: 6029679/21
International Criminal Court (The Hague) case number: OTP‐CR‐473/21
The world’s largest‐ever international criminal investigation is now under‐way, involving Hammersmith Police, The Metropolitan Police, and The International Criminal Court. The UK police accepted the supporting information and agreed there is enough evidence to proceed under the above crime number.
The case was lodged on 20th December 2021 by Sam White MD, Philip Hyland (PJH Law), Lois Bayliss (Broad Yorkshire Law) and retired policeman Mark Sexton.
Requests for further assistance have been made to international lawyer Robert F Kennedy Jnr (nephew of J F Kennedy), Dr Reiner Fuellmich (German corporate lawyer who won the emissions scandal case against Volkswagen Audi), Dr. Michael Yeadon (Former Pfizer Vice President), plus countless other doctors, professors, virologists, biologists, data experts and lawyers nationally and internationally; some of whom have already made direct contact with the police and have been acknowledged by Superintendent Simpson (Assistant to Cressida Dick, Head of The Metropolitan Police).
The complaints allege numerous serious crimes including misfeasance and misconduct in public office; gross negligence manslaughter; corporate manslaughter, murder, conspiracy to murder, genocide and crimes against humanity.
The evidence submitted by Philip Hyland and Dr Sam White against the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is damning and shows they did not carry out due diligence surrounding the vaccine data, trials and studies; and that they continued to ignore the death, harm and injury the vaccines cause.
Mark Sexton says:
“This is now a live criminal investigation. We were forced to act due to the complacency of the UK Government, despite them being fully aware of the catastrophic death and injury figures to adults and children alike. This is nothing short of genocide; once again it seems that profit over people is the overriding motive. There is a deliberate blanket campaign of misinformation underway. Many don’t even realise that the covid Vaccine is still an experimental product. This is the most far-reaching criminal inquiry ever undertaken. A national scandal that threatens the lives and the livelihoods of every person in the UK. If people want unassailable current evidence, I’d suggest in the interim they look at: ”
“In years to come this will be the equivalent of another Thalidomide scandal, but for now we have to act on a united front to get the truth out to the public and stop the unsafe covid vaccine rollout. We have several thousand pieces of evidence to discredit the safety and efficacy of this vaccine, but we are still encouraging members of the public to contact us to further support our claim. We therefore appeal to anyone who has suffered the death of a loved one following a Covid vaccine and anyone who has been injured by it, e.g. blindness, heart issues, blood clots, stroke, myocarditis etc”.
“We’d also like to hear from those illegally threatened with ‘No jab, no job’”.
We must act now. If you have information to assist the police inquiry, please contact Lois Bayliss of Broad Yorkshire Law: loisbayliss@broadyorkshirelaw.co.uk
[Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: For the convenience of our readers, we have prepared a transcript which can be found below the information shared by Immanuel Project. This video was originally recorded in German and a voice-over has been provided by Immanuel Project.]
by Immanuel Projectwith Dr. Stefan Lanka video uploaded to Odysee August 30, 2021
Video available at Immanuel Project Odysee & BitChute channels.
The first of our extra, contributory posts “ON RELATED ISSUES” examines explosive, critical questions, rumours and theories surrounding the topic of “Corona” and everything connected with it. When new reports do the rounds in public that have the potential to fuel (additional) fear, hatred and violence, and which above all spread dangerous misinformation from the field of medicine and science, we would like to publish a special feature on this.
In contrast to our main programme, this series offers first and foremost a statement. In order to be able to publish a comment relatively quickly, we do not go into great detail and refer you to our main programme for precise evidence of our statements, where we publish a detailed list of sources for every contribution.
Since all the topics we deal with in Project Immanuel are directly related, all the contents of our special formats can also be substantiated with the sources from the main programme.
O.R.I., No. 01: “Bioweapons – the myth of the man-made pathogen”
In the first episode of our special format “On Related Issues” we deal with the topic of biological warfare/bioweapons. Due to the latest rumours surrounding the alleged “Wuhan virus” from the laboratory, we specifically address the issue of artificial “pathogens”, i.e. those modified or created in a laboratory, and explain why these are and will continue to remain, a myth.
“Project MKULTRA, the CIA’s Program of Research into Behavioral Modification – Joint Hearing before the Select Committee on Intelligence and the Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research of the Committee on Human Resources, United State Senate, Ninety-Fifth Congress, First Session”, 03 August 1977 — https://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13inmate_ProjectMKULTRA.pdf — published on the website of the New York Times
The following video is not intended for entertainment. It’s not a documentary report or television program.
Rather, this is an attempt to approach an explosive scientific topic in a cinematic way that is objective and respectful as possible.
We deliberately avoid staging of scenes as we’ve no intention of causing emotion in the viewer. We would like to convey factual, verifiable information.
In addition, we hereby call on all viewers to question the contents of this video and not simply to believe any information presented here. Doubt, be critical and check everything.
Only that is scientific.
Immanuel Project — “On Related Issues” (ORI).
With this video we introduce you to the first in a series of extra videos that we’ll publish in addition to our regular program.
On Related Issues focuses on pressing questions, theories and theses that are making the rounds in the public sphere, and to which we would like to respond as promptly as possible.
Most importantly, topics are discussed that are only marginally dealt with, or not dealt with at all, in the main series of our project.
No. 1 – Bioweapons: The myth of man-made pathogens
Biological warfare is a fairly complex subject. The use of biological weapons is probably as old as humanity itself.
All kinds of animals or naturally occurring toxins can be used as weapons to either attack enemies directly or in some way to make it difficult for them to survive.
Throughout history humans have been devising all kinds of biological warfare that have been as effective as they have been cruel. Time and again they have been reports about the use of supposed pathogens.
As early as the Middle Ages, and even in antiquity, allegedly transmissible diseases were claimed to be a popular means of warfare.
For instance, corpses of dead humans and animals were hurled into cities with the intention to cause epidemics in these areas.
Such stories do have a kernel of truth. Hurling decaying cadavers at enemies was certainly a proven biological weapon, but it had nothing to do with pathogens.
These days when people hear the term bioweapons, they usually think of artificial pathogens from the laboratory — bacteria and viruses that either genetically modified or even created in their entirety.
In the 21st century such ideas are more topical than ever due to the alleged progress in genetics and, equally assumed, improved understanding of biology.
Horror scenarios, wild rumors and theories, as well as adventurous novels, feature films, series and video games on this subject are dime a dozen.
But what has actually been researched and developed with regard to artificial pathogens?
Is it possible that something could really be brewed up in bioweapon laboratories that could prove dangerous to humans?
No, it’s not possible. I mean, you can see now that fear is the best bioweapon there is. You simply show some photos of coffins and corpses.
That’s the most powerful bioweapon we have: misinformation. But the most dangerous thing, of course, is the superstition associated with it.
People generally believe in the concept of dangerous viruses. Scientists also believe in them. And those working in related fields are proud that they’re working on something so dangerous and important.
They don’t see that they are being completely unscientific by not questioning the concepts in which they believe.
And it is the very first written duty of every scientist to constantly question their own findings and assumptions.
Nowadays, however, we are dealing with the reversal of science. Those who point out obvious contradictions are berated. This is really the reverse of all science.
Science is important and can contribute a lot to humanity if it’s applied with integrity. But what is happening here is pseudoscience.
In his 1956 book, Sociology Vol. 1, Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy explains why people engage in pseudoscience. He shows that, because of how science now operates, we can no longer make new discoveries. As if science have been derived from Greek criminal law, what we observe we judge and explain exclusively on the basis of what we already know. And, of course, only material explanations are permitted.
We do not want to know about any other explanations. We then say ‘they cannot be true’, ‘they are unscientific, wrong and dangerous’.
Rosenstock-Huessy clearly demonstrated that we can no longer make any developments in this way. We cannot discover anything new with our unscientific approach. And it’s a typically-human characteristic that no one likes to see their achievements and findings being thrown overboard.
Rosenstock-Huessy also shows this: He demonstrates how these unscientific principles permeate academic life and how pseudo-research has been carried out in order to somehow maintain these very principles, the models which people adhere.
For example, by doing animal experiments without any control experiments. Or killing cells in a test tube, also without any control experiments. And then simply claiming that the results of these experiments have to come about because of some virus. That’s how easy it is.
And we must not forget that this was already written in 1956.
In his book “Healing Power and Truth: Concordance of Political and Cosmic Time” — what a title — he describes how mountains of corpses, such as in genocides, can quickly pile up again if one misses the moment to recognize and correct mistakes.
Wrong decisions are made, wars escalate or whatever. This is the challenge we are facing right now — to recognize these mistakes in time. So it’s very important to deal with these things. And bioweapons is a very good example of these things.
The Russians, for example, completely abandoned their bioweapons development in the 1970s because they realize that the concept of pathogens as weapons does not work.
But the claim that dangerous bioweapons exist is very effective in order to create fear. First and foremost, of course, it’s effective in populations who are panic-stricken about contagion.
For example, historically the Israelis managed to empty the entire Palestinian refugee camps without firing a single shot. They simply claimed the wells are contaminated and soon the dangerous disease will break out here.
Nothing happened at all. No shots were fired. And voila! The Palestinians were gone. That was the starting point of Israel — an act of fear.
The Israeli population also has one of the highest cancer rates in western societies. Certainly not in all parts of the country, but in many, people live in constant fear of death. There is a constant fear of terrorism, of rockets, of bombs. Of course, such an attitude to life is anything but conducive to good health.
Didn’t the Nazis in the Third Reich also have a biological weapons program? What happened to it? Was it abandoned? The reason they never seriously worked on a bioweapons program is because nothing had ever worked in that direction. What they did was try to protect themselves from alleged germs.
In this regard, I recommend reading the book by Ludwik Fleck, “Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact”. There are also many articles by him on the internet.
Ludwik Fleck was a bacteriologist and he was deported to Buchenwald concentration camp where he was forced to develop a vaccine for the SS. He wrote that he and his colleagues knew that all the assumptions about supposedly dangerous disease-causing bacteria were completely wrong.
He knew that things don’t work like — that this idea is just a misinterpretation. Anyone can read that for themselves. You can find a lot of material by and about Ludwik Fleck freely accessible on the internet.
Nevertheless, Ludwik Fleck and his colleagues had the task of developing a vaccine against a supposedly dangerous bacterium for the SS. And they knew that if they tried to explain to them that it wouldn’t work, they’d get their heads chopped off.
So they just made a vaccine for them as demanded. They let something or other decompose, added a few bacteria. And when the whole thing was bubbling away in the test tube, the poisonous mixture was filtered. Formaldehyde was added and that was it.
The vaccine was injected and the job was done. That’s what he describes. And he also describes how science actually operates, because he himself has experienced these undesirable developments and seen how they come about.
After the second World War, the Americans were of the opinion that the national socialists, the Nazis, might have used some kind of secret drugs to take the soldiers’ will away, so that they would happily go to war.
The Americans were investigating this to try to address the big problem that many of their soldiers who were supposed to bomb Korea deserted. Hardly any of the soldiers at that time had ever held a rifle, seen a tank, or had anything to do with weapons in the military. And suddenly they were supposed to drop bombs on another country.
Some biologists even suggested that the Russians had bred a socialist virus that could be used to render the American soldiers will-less. Such speculation really did exist. But, of course, it led no where.
What the USA did in the end, however, was to experiment with all the drugs that were available. This project, about which a great deal of information has come to light, was called MKUltra.
People were tortured and subjected to drugs to take away their will in order to program them. And this project existed solely because it was believed that at least some, if not all, of the German soldiers must have been given some kind of secret drug. It is frightening that even today speculation about bioweapons is used to scare people.
And here is another example. The virologist, professor Zhang from Shanghai, had received the order from Beijing to search for a coronavirus in bats that was harmless to humans and could then be used as a template for so-called sequence alignment.
He was under extreme time pressure because the panic of the people in Wuhan had to be brought under control. It was feared that the people there might storm the hospitals at some point, because anyone who had any kind of complaint such as asthma, cough, or fever immediately panicked and imagined that they had SARS.
Something like that can endanger public order very quickly. And it was going in that direction, triggered by the ophthalmologist Li Wenliang, whose own fear spread very quickly via social media.
That’s precisely why professor Zhang was given the task of producing a harmless bat virus as quickly as possible. It was already established that the few dozen cases of pneumonia that existed at the time had not infected anyone else.
From the beginning of December, when the first cases were tracked, until the 20th of January, no one was infected. No one else got you pneumonia.
So they assume that if, anything at all, it must be a virus that was difficult to transmit and could probably only be transmitted from animals to humans. So they looked for a virus in animals.
Then professor Zhang, from the Fan Wu et al. research group — these results were published in Nature, the first work on the so-called new coronavirus — created the genome strand of SARS-CoV-2, in the absolute record time of only 40 hours.
He got the fluid from a lung wash, obtained some nucleic acid out of the fluid, sequenced it, and then ran the puzzle called sequence alignment. But he didn’t have time to apply all the rules of virology. That’s why the genome from these 40 hours of record time looks more than bumpy.
Normally one takes at least three weeks for this process. And then a genome sequence appears really polished. But anyone who knows a bit about biochemistry can see that the genome of SARS-CoV-2 really does look very bumpy.
And this is exactly the argument. The people who claim that the virus must have come from a laboratory: ‘It must, therefore, be a bioweapon.’. Of course this then circulates on the internet again and fuels people’s primal fear of infection and of viruses.
Therefore, anyone who claims such a thing, has to be asked the question: Where has a virus ever been isolated? Where? Show me a relevant publication and show me the exact passages in which this is described.
Show me where this is described in the methods section of any scientific paper. These are only very short paragraphs. And if it cannot be shown, it must be rejected because it spreads unnecessary and dangerous fear.
Fear is always dangerous. Spreading fear is not justifiable.
The theory that there are pathogens and transmissible diseases have been perpetuated to the present day with this kind of assertion. But if you go into detail, you immediately see that none of this is tenable.
What one could say, perhaps at this point, is — what was done again and again in the so-called Middle Ages, or actually in all wars, is to make survival impossible for the enemy, and also for the civilian population, by destroying the crops, destroying the fields, killing the animals, so that simply scorched earth remains.
And by throwing carcasses into the wells. Then the water was heavily polluted with decomposing products of the proteins, that is with nitrates.
Every mother understands that. If a bottle of mineral water says it contains more than 50 milligrams of nitrates, no child is allowed to drink it because otherwise it would turn blue. And if a child were to drink this water all the time, it would get the type of buboes that were called the plague in the Middle Ages.
From 1981 onwards it was called immune deficiency in homosexuals or GRID (gay related immune deficiency) for short. And from 1983 onwards, it was called AIDS.
It’s as simple as that. It’s massive poisoning from nitrates in drinking water. It has nothing to do with pathogens producing any disease toxins.
Such toxins are produced when something decomposes, i.e. the proteins break down and turned into putrefaction. It is quite clear that it is not healthy to drink water with corpse poisons or to eat rotten food.
Already at the beginning of the corona crisis, rumors circulated very quickly that the alleged new coronavirus was not of natural origin, but came from a bioweapons laboratory.
Of course, China was first accused of having developed the virus. Later, the USA was accused. And then China again.
And, at some point in between, the French scientist Luc Montagnier, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 2008 for the alleged proof of the HIV virus, among others, spoke out. He claimed that the virus was definitely of artificial origin because it had genetic similarities to the alleged HIV virus.
Most of these theories were dismissed after some time. And many scientists declared that there was no reason to assume that the alleged SARS-CoV-2 was a bioweapon.
In January 2021 however, the rumor of the Wuhan virus flared up again when an international group of researchers claimed to have found new evidence that strengthen the suspicion of the bioweapon. The scientists’ conclusion sounded alarming, but were also based only on suspected elements in the alleged genetic strand of SARS-CoV-2.
These observations immediately lose their significance and, above all, their threatening nature when one realizes that the same genetic genome strand of the alleged SARS-CoV-2 is, in any case, only a man-made theoretical construct. No wonder then that some of it looks artificial and man-made.
One could say SARS-CoV-2 did indeed originate in a laboratory in Wuhan, but not in the way many people believe. The genetic material of SARS-CoV-2 comes from a computer and has never left it. It is a theoretical mental construct.
The ideas of pathogens made in laboratories are all scientifically untenable. Moreover, they even contradict principles of biology that have been known for many, many years.
It’s irrelevant whether they’re supposed to be killer bacteria or killer viruses. The terrorist attack in the USA in 2001, with allegedly genetically modified anthrax pathogens, is just as unlikely as the Wuhan virus of 2020.
To understand why biological weapons in the form of pathogens have never existed in this way and never will, one must know the following:
With regard to viruses, disease-causing viruses — i.e. a dangerous genetic substance — are, to this day, nothing more than mere theory.
No scientist in the whole world has ever succeeded in providing tangible proof of such a virus.
Even if one or the other has ever been awarded the Nobel Prize for alleged proof, their work never stands up to scientific scrutiny.
So how do you make an artificial virus when you can’t even find a natural one?
The topic of viruses is dealt with in detail in the main program of Immanuel Project.
With regard to bacteria — bacteria cannot make organisms sick in the sense that we believe they can. And they are not the parasites they are made out to be. Bacteria, which are always found in our bodies, can, under certain circumstances, be involved in ailments — some of which can even be life- threatening.
But that does not mean that they are parasites and harm us in that sense. Moreover, bacteria in living bodies either produce no toxins at all or only in such small amounts that it’s impossible to become ill from them.
One must bear in mind the conditions under which … and cadaveric toxins are produced.
So how do you grow killer bacteria? By reversing their biology? That would really be a scientific sensation.
The complex topic of bacteria is not dealt with in our main program but we will return to it in one or two special formats.
Conclusion.
There are a variety of possible biological weapons. However, pathogens are definitely not one of them. All claims about genetically modified, or even artificially created, pathogens contradicts biological principles and are, therefore, inevitably doomed to failure.
There may well still be stray scientists in the world who aim to produce the ultimate killer microbe in their laboratory, but they will fail just like the people who try to make gold in earlier times.
Their scientific basis is simply incorrect, in both the cases of the alleged viruses and bacteria. All allegations, speculations, rumors and accusations revolving around artificial pathogens, therefore, only generate fear and enemy images. And we definitely do not need to either.
There is already more than enough fear and hatred, especially in this time of corona. Prolonged fear can lead to serious health problems, particularly for people who already have respiratory difficulties.
Rather than creating more fear with unfounded claims of killer viruses from a lab, we should stick to verifiable facts. Then all open questions about the alleged Wuhan virus, its latest mutations, its similarity to HIV, and other theories about bioweapons and killer viruses, will take care of themselves.
In order to complete the control experiments on SARS-CoV-2, we are still urgently looking for bioinformaticians to repeat and document the original sequence alignment. If you are a bioinformatician, are proficient in the De Novo alignment on “viruses” and have an opportunity to access the raw sequence data from Fan Wu and his colleagues please get in touch fragen @ wplus-verlag.de
The wireless future is here. The model ostensibly turns human beings, via nano-implants, into antennas that can transmit information. They’re turning human beings into quasi-machines. Under this transhumanist agenda, the idea is to place nanotech inside our bodies we can communicate in real-time with the Smart Grid powered by way of 5G.
The 4th Industrial Transhumanist IOB Graphene Nanobot Revolution.
It’s called the ‘internet of bodies’ (IoB) or the ‘nanotech of things,’ (NToT), and it connects with the Internet of Things (IOT). One way this is accomplished is to embed graphene-made sensors into fabrics. Another is to implant or ingest the nanotech matter into the body, creating an internal technology platform.
For instance, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla described the first-ever FDA-approved ‘electronic pill,’ which will invite ‘compliance,’ by sending a signal to your ‘doctor’ that you have indeed swallowed your ‘medication.’
“What we will see is a kind of fusion of the physical, digital, and biological world,” says Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum.
Oh Klausy!
In order for all this connectivity to occur, these particles must contain GRAPHENE, a superconductive material that integrates with neurons in the body and brain. Nanotech, pioneered by Nanotech King Charles Lieber, is completely unregulated. Arguably, it already exists in food, drugs, vaccines, water., and the air we breathe. While there is no shortage of studies devoted to graphene-based nanomaterials (GBNs), systematic research on human health or environmental effects is severely lacking.
And yet integrating humans with hardware is supposedly being sold to us for our safety and health. In fact, on a site called Nano Robot Inventor, a 2008 paper titled Nanorobots to improve health care states:
“Recent developments in the field of nanoelectronics, with transducers progressively shrinking down to smaller sizes through nanotechnology and carbon nanotubes, are expected to result in innovative biomedical instrumentation possibilities, with new therapies and efficient diagnosis methodologies.”
“A transistor also allows the application of a voltage pulse, such devices might one day provide hybrid biological-digital computation, or deep-brain stimulation for Parkinson’s patients, or serve as an interface for a prosthetic that requires information processing at the point where it attaches to its owner.”
By the way, Lieber worked for communist China. Lieber has also worked on highly sensitive research projects for the US government Department of Defense (DOD).
Back in the 1930s, the CCP invented what is now known as “brainwashing.” The term is a literal translation of the Chinese term, Xi Nau, or “wash brain.” Arguably, Lieber has helped China and others upgrade to a modern version of mind control.
“ I was one of the first people — in 1998 — to figure out how to grow these nanoscale wires,” Lieber has stated.
If you do not believe me, just do a search for his brain-controlled mouse. And yet, Lieber went from supposed spy to a convicted tax evader. Who has explored the ethics of his inventions? It has already been proven that Lieber’s “injectable electronics” can be integrated within the brain with ‘minimal invasions,’ and can continue to function for at least a year. Who knows what happens after that?
The Purpose of AI: Brain-Computer Interface
At Code Conference 2016, Elon Musk stated publicly that given the current rate of artificial intelligence (AI) advancement, humans could ultimately expect to be left behind cognitively, intellectually “by a lot.” His solution to this unappealing fate is a novel brain-computer interface.
The internet of bodies (IoB) will tell us a lot, too. The sensors placed inside each person’s body will collect data…and that data has been determined to be more precious than oil.
To put things in perspective, ‘Big Harma’, with the help of Big Tech, began usurping the medical data of millions of Americans as early as 2019. You can read my article titled Dr. Google Will See You Now. Alphabet, Google’s parent company, acquired FitBit for a cool $2.1 billion. Now, in Year Three of the Rona Regime, they are coming after us.
Imagine how much information they can technically collect by giving us a ‘viability score.’ In the Netherlands, their biometric mass surveillance practices are increasingly being used to control people’s access to healthcare, sports venues, travel, shopping, and other everyday activities. Activists actually have a campaign called ‘reclaim your face.’
While globalists aim to vaccinate the world and watch as our fellow man turns into ‘Magneto Man’, evidence indicates that Big Harma, aided and abetted by VERY sick Rockefeller hospitals, are injecting us with nanoparticles meant to respond to signals while –oops – changing our very nature and DNA.
I understand, this sounds conspiratorial. If you haven’t gotten the memo that some of these jabs contain saline, why others have been sullied with microscopic nanoparticles that are conductive, consider:
In 2017, in a now-scrubbed-off-the-internet was a study from taly looking at adjuvants. Researchers found that 15 traditional vaccines (and 44 variations of these), all manufactured by leading global companies, shared a previously unreported and troubling similarity: the vaccines were “heavily contaminated with a variety of nanoparticles.”
This is an indisputable fact. You just can’t see them. A nanometer is 1/80000th the diameter of an eyelash, one-millionth the size of a pinhead.
“If your nanoparticles self-assemble correctly with Harvard’s Charles Lieber injectable nano meshes, you can actually get a nice little wireless nano network going in the target,” says Investigative Journalist George Webb, who has looked into Lieber and the Wuhan origin story since 2020. “Corona didn’t just launch DARPA’s mRNA technology, Corona also launched nanotechnology for immunology. Gold, silver, iron oxide, silicon dioxide, and graphene are all nanoparticles being researched for COVID applications.”
It’s all part of the Covid Industrial Complex.
Cinco Geo Your Existence
In January 2020, when people in Wuhan began dropping like flies, I surmised that maybe nanotech — brought to us by Charlie Lieber via a mandated experimental injection or sprayed via drones – was parlaying with the Internet of Things. Interestingly, Wuhan, the capital of China’s Hubei Province was the first 5G demonstration zone in the Central Business District (CBD), according to a 5G cooperation agreement signed between China Mobile and local authorities on September 3, 2019.
That’s how I uncovered the connection between Lieber to 5G. It was taboo to talk about 5G back in 2020, so I coined the code words, Cinco Geo, to ward off censorship. For the record, I lived across the street from a test cell tower in Beachwood, Los Angeles. I developed a fever for 65 days and couldn’t sleep. While I could not prove it was the radiation, a meter endorsed by Dr. Mercola proved the 5G technology was definitely turned ON. That was 2019.
Fast forward to 2020.
As we were locking down over the virus, cell towers across the country were going up. In fact, 5G cell tower installation was the only industry that was thriving during the early to mid-2020.
When it came to appealing net neutrality, Ajit Pai, the former Trump-appointed chairman of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) said that the government had no place in the private sector. However, when it came to 5G, the government wasn’t only a necessity, it was a requirement. For example, when I recently called Miami-Dade County to try to find out whether they had amplified the 5G signal, I was referred to the federal government.
In fact, in 2018, the FCC initiated the “5G Fast Plan” to establish the United States’ superiority in the tech race. They intended to blanket the ENTIRE country with 5G small cells placed between every 2 to 10 homes. The industry claims they need so many towers because 5G uses millimeter waves that travel small distances and can be easily blocked by walls and even foliage. To compensate for this, engineers found ways to convert the waves to beams and intentionally direct them.
For the record, the CEO of Verizon helped bust the myth of millimeter waves and said that indeed the signals could penetrate through foliage and that the waves can cross 2000 feet from transmitter to receiver. And yet small cells continued to be built.
The 5G Fast Plan
As part of the 5G Fast Plan, the FCC reformed rules that had been designed decades ago to accommodate small cells. The reforms were designed to ban ‘short-sighted’ municipalities who tried to block the deployment of the 5G technology. Local governments were given a reasonable deadline to approve or disapprove small-cell tower applications.
Small groups of people throughout the nation have attended local meetings to fight these eyesores but they don’t really stand a chance. At best, if the municipalities have money, the 5G poles are moved to another neighborhood. Of course, health studies on 5G have not been conducted.
On January 19, the day I got sick with what felt like radiation exposure, flights were suspended to the U.S., including to Miami, over 5G concerns. I threw up three times. I had watery stools. I felt anxious. I almost fainted in yoga class. And, I lost my sense of smell. I thought it was the Rona. But I wasn’t sick with the flu or cold symptoms. I had no cough or respiratory issues. My symptoms didn’t match the Moronic variant. One friend told me, ‘you must have gotten the Delta.’ I laughed to myself. Upon doing research, I also learned that the CDC acknowledges something called Acute Radiation Syndrome.
Can You See The (Smart) Light?
Did you know that every lighting installation can be a data infrastructure? Two-way communication can also be done via light signals.
Think cellphones and streetlights.
Analysts predict the smart lighting market will grow more than 21% a year between 2018 and 2023. Much of this growth will be driven by wireless installations – and the exciting new applications they support. That’s why one company is putting Bluetooth low energy (BLE) technology in their connected components, enabling every fixture to communicate wirelessly with nearby Bluetooth-enabled smartphones.
Will wireless lighting controls soon be the new normal, making the benefits of smart lighting more accessible to organizations everywhere?
Ping, Collect, Ping, Ping
Let’s recap how all this connects (pun intended).
Seamless human-machine interaction is increasing rapidly.
What if these injections were never “vaccines” against a virus? What if instead, the jabs have been a secret nanotech project developed to control the brains of the human population? (Until now, we don’t know specifically how they can modify our DNA via 5G).
Seemingly, some jabs were manufactured using nanotechnology. In Spain, it was even described as “secret nanoparticles.” These nanoparticles become magnetic when they reach the same temperature as the human body. When they remain in an under-zero-degree environment, they remain non-magnetic. Maybe one of the reasons they use the injections?
The graphene hydroxide works as an antenna for the electronic circuits they are injecting. If they can create transistors, they can also make an identifier like an RFID chip that can ping a number back, once the person is near a radiofrequency (RF) field. Graphene oxide in the brain creates transistors, and ostensibly its own network.
Thanks in big part to Lieber, molecules of GRAPHENE can interact with neurons in the brain in a remote mode using different radiofrequencies (5G could be one of these). Can they also map the brain and transmit and receive INSTRUCTIONS remotely? Do these nano devices and smart biosensors become programmable? Yes!
“… In the proposed platform architecture, different programs and commands can be sent and information retrieved from inside [the] body through wireless communication, providing important aspects on the interface and medical instrumentation of nanorobots.”
“The proposed model uses electromagnetic radio waves to command and detect the current status of nanorobots inside the body. Therefore, the cell phone is applied for the medical nanorobotics platform. This occurs as the cell phone emits a magnetic signature to the passive CMOS sensors embedded in the nanorobot, which enables sending and receiving data through electromagnetic fields. From the last set of events recorded in pattern arrays, information can be reflected back by wave resonance.”
What happens when you integrate communication with nanorobots using RFID, mobile phones, and satellites and apply it to long-distance ubiquitous surveillance and health monitoring?
The jury is still not out.
“We are in a live exercise here …. to get this right!” Sec. Mike Pompeo stated during a presser back in January 2020.
“You should have let us know,” President Trump murmured back.
Maryam Henein is an investigative journalist, and founder, and editor-in-chief of the health magazine and marketplace HoneyColony. She is also a functional medicine consultant/coach, and the director of the award-winning documentary film Vanishing of the Bees, narrated by Elliot Page. Follow her on Gab: @ladybee. Email her: maryam @ honeycolony.com.
Dr Robert Gallo made his famous announcement at a press conference on 23 April 1984 that “his” HIV virus was the probable cause of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). From that moment on, the race was on to find a pharmaceutical weapon against it.
At the height of AIDS epidemic in 2005, the rhetoric about HIV danger and death penetrated every corner of the world. The rapid test for HIV was accepted as the test for AIDS, which divided people into positive and negative camps.
Flashback to June 2015, ten years after the height of the AIDS epidemic:
AIDS-related deaths have fallen by 35 percent since the peak of the epidemic in 2005 and the number of new infections continues to decline annually. That’s the good news. Nonetheless there are thought to be around 35 million people living with HIV globally; 19 million don’t currently know their HIV-positive status. Of those people who need antiretroviral drugs, only just over a third have access. That’s the bad news.
We have the scientific know-how to end AIDS and every month seems to bring news of another biomedical advance that could change the trajectory of the epidemic once and for all.
Last week the preliminary findings of the Strategic Timing of AntiRetroviral Treatment trial confirmed that early treatment is best for HIV.
No one thought that HIV might be lab-created. No one knew that just before Gallo’s April 1984 announcement, someone had filed a United States Patent number: 9499480 for HIV/AIDS Virus invention, a designer bi-product of the U.S. Special Virus program.
No one knew that Gallo, himself, was ‘Project Officer’ for the federal Special Virus Program that ran from 1962-1978. See complete list of HIV patents. No one knows that engineered evidence is found from the ‘multiply-spliced’ nature of the HIV ‘tat’ sequence in Dr. Gallo’s 1971 Special Virus paper, “Reverse Transcriptase of Type-C virus Particles of Human Origin.”
From 1985 to 1992 there were 12,000 deaths each year from AIDS. In 1992 the number increased suddenly to 15,000. Why? Because they added 5 new diseases to the AIDS definition! The actual number of cases of AIDS was on the decline until they added more diseases to the list, and still the number of new cases grew very slowly. – Dr. Robert Wilner, Deadly Deception, 1994.
HIV — it has never been found in sufficient numbers to cause disease.” –Peter Duesberg, 1991
The HIV/AIDS hypothesis is one hell of a mistake. – Kary Mullins, inventor of the PCR test.
Today, the official narrative still claims that no cure exists for AIDS, and that only toxic FDA antiretroviral drugs, including A.Z.T., D.D.I., and D.D.C., will slow down the progression of the disease.
“Why condemn a continent to death because of HIV, when you have other explanations for why people are falling sick?” – Dr John Papadimitriou, professor of pathology at the University of Western Australia in Perth and a co-author of the Journal of Nature Biotechnolgy study that found HIV tests to be inadequate.
Comparison of HIV and Coronavirus Tests. September 2020:
Sometimes testing can give you a false sense of security. That happened in the HIV epidemic, when people got a negative test and they presented it to their sex partners and spread disease, nonetheless. – Cue Mark Schlissel, M.D., Ph.D., President of University of Michigan,
The U of M president knew of the flaws of the rapid HIV test. He knew the patterns of history. And for that he received pushback for equating the COVID-19 pandemic with the AIDS epidemic to justify the University’s decision not to widely test students. He was made to apologize for unrelated reasons, but added to his response:
My comments were intended only as a critique of the effectiveness of massive testing of asymptomatic students for the virus that causes COVID-19 in an effort to prevent its spread. – Cue Mark Schlissel, M.D., Ph.D, President, U of M 2020
The COVIDIAN Age
In the COVIDIAN Age, it is accepted that Coronavirus is a virus. However, Coronavirus is a family name that includes MERS-Cov, SARS-Cov, HCoV-229E, HCoV-NL63, HCoV-OC43, HCoV-HKU1, and many others. Coronavirus is not Corona virus. It is also accepted that people with underlying diseases are more susceptible to COVID19. This is likely due to a weakened innate immune system. Immunosuppressed people no longer have a functional defense system and are more likely to suffer from any infection, whether it be called a cold, a flu, toxic overload, or ‘COVID.’
The Twist:
Ironically, new research shows the opposite; that patients with advanced stages of AIDS show less severe COVID symptoms and recover faster than others.
A July 2021 study in the Journal Immun Inflamm Dis, titled “The clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in HIV-positive patients: A systematic review of current evidence” shows evidence that the majority of HIV patients show no severe symptoms and completely recovered from COVID19 infection.
Similar to The Age of AIDS, COVID patients will soon be offered antiretroviral drugs. On December 14, 2021, Merck and Pfizer pharmaceutical companies announced the development of COVID antiretroviral drugs. The companies claimed their drugs attack different parts of the virus. Ten days later, on December 24, 2021, the FDA authorized “emergency use” of Merck’s antiviral drug to treat COVID19. FDA had previously “authorized” the first antiretroviral Molnupiravir in late November. Note: authorization does not equal approval.
Today, the FDA claims that the antiretroviral pill “should be initiated as soon as possible after diagnosis of Covid-19 and within five days of symptom onset,” – FDA Statement, December 22, 2021
In 1994, Dr. Robert Wilner wrote: “Any antiviral therapy that is immune-suppressive and aimed at treating HIV is unnecessary, dangerous, unethical and bad medicine — you are already immune to HIV!
There is no test to find out a person’s “HPV status.” Also, there is no approved HPV test to find HPV in the mouth or throat. – CDC HPV Fact Sheet, 2022
We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available. – Journal of Euro Surveillance, 2020
Why blame a pandemic on innocent animals? It sounds like this: “ANIMAL X” could be hiding a deadly virus that could trigger a pandemic worse than the Black Death and kill more than 75million people. They tried to blame Ebola on a bunny.
Did the Species Barrier disappear to allow for animal research to develop profitable drug models?
After mRNA injectables, why are AIDS patients successfully fending off the worst COVID symptoms and recovering faster without an immune system?
Do HIV patients somehow recognize the lab-created Coronavirus as similar? Does the mRNA nanotech somehow protect people without an immune system? Is that why antiretroviral will be required for COVID patients?
Disclaimer: The author encourages you to consult a doctor before making any health changes, especially any changes related to a specific diagnosis or condition. No information in this article should be relied upon to determine diet, make a medical diagnosis, or to determine or prescribe a treatment for a medical condition. This information is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended to build synapses for thinking.
ONE: Billboard (8/2/21): “Sir Paul McCartney is spreading one simple message for his fans: ‘BE COOL. GET VAX’D’.”
Well, that’s it then. You can tell Paul dug deep to do his research on the injection. Be cool.
“The beanie- and face-mask-wearing 79-year-old rocker wrote this message on Instagram, while signing off as ‘Paul,’ underneath a picture of himself getting his COVID shot from a health care professional on Monday (Aug. 2).”
As opposed to getting his shot from a health care amateur, or a shoe salesman?
“’The vaccine will get us out of this. I think we’ll come through it, I know we’ll come through, and it’s great news about the vaccine’,” he [McCartney] said in the interview.”
Sir Paul has obviously bought the whole enchilada. Virus spreads, infects, makes people sick and kills them, get tested, isolate if necessary, lock down a whole country if necessary, the vaccine will stop the virus in its tracks, we’ll be OK.
No need to look at contrary evidence. The official doctors and the political authorities know what they’re doing.
Obey. Comply. Was that always the secret message of Paul’s music, hidden amidst the vinyl grooves?
Since God knows when, famous Brits have issued consoling messages to the lower classes. “We’ll get through it. We’ll pull together.”
It turns out lots of famous ones aren’t doing any of the pulling.
A reasonable person would realize a vaccine mandated for the whole population should be scrutinized down to it core. It’s cool, and we’ll get through it, don’t cut it.
A breezy cavalier attitude is a sign of a mental midget.
I wonder whether a hypnotic medical blind spot will turn up on a brain-scan. “You see this dark area, Paul? The neurons aren’t firing. When I shine this ray of light at your skull and it penetrates and hits that area, a message pops up: ‘Don’t think. The doctors know everything’. If I were you, I’d get that checked out. But not by a doctor.”
Judging from his Billboard quote, Paul seems to realize he’s being enlisted by the National Health Service and the government to assure the public the vaccine is safe; and he’s willing to go along.
If he were working a steady job, and a SINGER told him it was cool to take the shot, would he go along?
Having amassed fame and fortune, he’s not able to imagine that reverse-scenario anymore. That’s not the fault of his career, his composing, his singing, or his earning pounds and dollars. It’s his fault for surrendering to his elevated status.
He wouldn’t admit it, but he’s detached himself to a sufficiently remote area, from which he can shrug and support a government edict affecting millions of people without a second thought.
His stupidity is towering.
TWO: Howard Stern is a bunch of ugly sticks glued together with dried semen from one of his old wet dreams.
Once upon a time an abject failure as a broadcaster, he glimpsed a possible way out of Doom by taking on the role of psychological pornographer.
He’d assume everyone was obsessed by sex, and he’d force their inner dog to drool when he rang the bell.
Now, from a political perch, he’s decreed that all unvaccinated people should be locked in their homes and die.
That’s his style. Cut to the extreme chase. And also: see nothing, say something.
The mental midget status applies to Stern in spades. He knows zero about vaccines. He listens to the official doctors and the federal government like the kind of good little boy he hates.
As a young awkward schlub, he decided to rebel and burn down normal people by illustrating they were nothing more than prurient fish waiting to be shot in a barrel.
It was an easy choice. Once he found his radio style, he opened fire. His ratings soared; fame and fortune arrived.
He knows his success is nothing to be proud of. But success is all he has to hang his hat on. So he pretends it means something about his character.
It only means he’s one more person who’s tapped into a lowest common denominator and found dollars.
If Howard Stern tells you, you need to get vaccinated, you pretty much know it’s the wrong thing to do, on that basis alone. Directing people down bad alleys turns out to be one of Stern’s skills.
His notion of free speech is entirely self-serving. He wants to elevate his tired half-baked porn into a Constitutional issue.
He possesses a high degree of intelligence. He’s used it to recreate himself as mental midget. The only interesting moments in his career arrive when he laughs at himself because he knows what he’s done to himself.
He probably, on occasion, dreams he’s Field Marshal Fauci. And Fauci occasionally dreams he’s Howard Stern.
Coda: Now here is the REAL WORLD. LOOK AT THE PEOPLE. WATCH THIS BRIEF CLIP ALL THE WAY TO THE END. Canberra, Australia, Feb 7th, 2022
A German mathematician working with Dr Stefan Lanka has just published a report titled “Structural analysis of sequence data in virology – An elementary approach using SARS-CoV-2 as an example.” It provides even more evidence that the virologists are caught up in a world of computer simulations – simulations that are unreliable even on their own terms, not to mention being disconnected from reality. The analysis is an important contribution exposing another element of the anti-science being used to sustain this fake pandemic. Further, it is a technical dismantling of how all “viruses” are being invented and then “found,” in an ongoing game of deception.
The paper is very technical and requires some understanding of how the virologists create a “genome,” starting with a crude sample from an alleged infected “COVID-19” patient. To make it easier, I’ve produced a summary of the main findings as outlined below:
None of the genetic sequences used in producing the “SARS-CoV-2” genomes were shown to come from inside any viruses. It is unclear where the genetic fragments originated from.
The original de novo “SARS-CoV-2” computer-constructed sequence published by Fan Wu, et al could not be reproduced by the methodology described in their paper, raising questions abouthow they produced itand announced the new “virus” to the world.
The PCR protocols are calibrated to sequences of unconfirmed origin that are clearly found in many humans and apparently other things as well. The PCR process was not shown to detect a “virus,” let alone diagnose an invented illness called “COVID-19”.
The virologists are fooling themselves by running amplifications at 35 to 45 cycles, as it can result in “detecting” sequences that are not even present in the sample. In effect, the methodology can result in “detecting” whatever sequences they are hoping to find.
Fan Wu, et al could have found better matches for “HIV” and “Hepatitis D virus” than “a new coronavirus” in their 41-year-old man from Wuhan, who presented with pneumonia as one of the first claimed “COVID-19” cases. If they want to find a “virus”, it all depends on what they ask the computer to look for.
Of course, it makes much more sense when you get to the root of the problem: “SARS-CoV-2” is nothing more than a computer simulation and there was never a virus to start with – the entire thing is a global fraud. Virology seems to be unaware that it is sinking further into an epistemological crisis and no more so than in the area of genomics, as outlined in this article by Mike Stone. In Stone’s article, I noticed in the comments section that Dr Valendar Turner of The Perth Group pointed out that the late Sir John Maddox, former editor of Nature, had issued a pertinent warning in 1988. It seems that those who become immersed in the world of indirect molecular detection techniques risk no longer seeing the wood for the trees as he presciently stated:
“Is there a danger, in molecular biology, that the accumulation of data will get so far ahead of its assimilation into a conceptual framework that the data will eventually prove an encumbrance? Part of the trouble is that excitement of the chase leaves little time for reflection. And there are grants for producing data, but hardly any for standing back in contemplation”.
Maddox, J. Nature 335, 11 (1998)
We will endeavour to keep exposing these anti-scientific methodologies and encourage others to ask themselves if the multi-billion dollar virology industry and the associated bogus “treatments” coming from the behemoth pharmaceutical complex are actually helping anyone with their health. For those of us that can see there is no sound basis to any of it, there is no way we would heed any advice from the doctors and scientists who promote these sick models. And perhaps more importantly, we know not to take any of the fraudulent and increasingly perverse pharmaceuticals that are products of this pseudoscience, and used as vehicles to deliver nefarious and undeclared constituents. Once again, you can avoid all of these problems by pointing out:
Where is the virus*?
*A tiny particle that is an obligate intracellular parasite (i.e. replication competent and transmissible) containing a genome surrounded by a protective, virus-coded protein coat.
This clip is from the Corona Investigative Committee’s “The Virus of Power” series of interviews , Session 90, which took place on February 4, 2022. See the entire Session 90 here (6+ hours long).
In this interview, Dr. Kaufman and Dr. Lanka challenge “germ theory” and the “science” at the foundation of virology. Of course, this is highly controversial because it shakes the foundation of modern medicine, questions the endless stream of vaccines and toxic medicines produced by big pharma — not to mention the generations of doctors, scientists and medical professionals who have dedicated careers to this “science”.
Committee member Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, who has been invaluable in exposing the pandemic fraud and is a key source of medical insight for the committee, challenges Dr. Kaufman and Dr. Lanka, and vehemently defends the prevailing view regarding viruses as cause of disease. See Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg’s presentation during Session 90 here. His presentation occurred earlier in the session, prior to this conversation with Drs. Kaufman and Lanka.
Below the Corona Investigative Committee video, we are providing documents, videos and articles for understanding the work of Dr. Lanka, Dr. Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan and others.
Please do your own research and come to your own conclusions.
Video by Oval Media can be found at Corona Investigate Committee Odysee channel.
La Quinta Columna has detected graphene and microtechnology in samples it has observed, and now, in a recent program, exclusive images of Morgellons were shown. These parasites have the particularity of being seen in certain colors and, in this case, they can be observed in red.
More details in the new video that Orwell City brings to English.
Ricardo Delgado:
I’d like to make an appeal to the entire independent scientific community —also independent of the official system— that wants to look into the microscope. Keep the slides in an airtight container, and don’t throw them away. I mean, keep the slides with those drops and with the coverslip on them in an airtight container and observe them again after three days and then after a week because there’s still an evolution. This is going to give us many surprises. A lot.
I have already told you that I’m almost afraid and panic to look at the microscope because every time we look, we find something new. And today, I was equally surprised given the nature of what we’re going to see. And despite having assimilated the knowledge of everything we have already said, which is quite a lot.
Let’s share and watch that video which, as I say, is not to be missed. The video is entitled Graphene, Microtechnology, and also, now, Morgellons in the Pfizer vaccine. We’re going to explain it a little bit throughout the video, and you’re going to see how that “fiber” responds to human breath. This type of fiber that has been found in face masks at the time. A German researcher who was quite tall physically, too… I don’t remember his name right now, but back in 2013, he made a famous video that went viral on the internet. And he talked about how that technology, human or not, and linked to the whole process of vaccination and aerial spraying, is related to the whole global operation against the human being. Against the species itself. Of course, military intelligence is always ahead. Let’s watch it. Attention.
Video: Graphene, microtechnology and Morgellons in Pfizer vaccine. Haxon Aquiles II microscope.
Ricardo Delgado:
Well, that’s a big chunk of graphene. The rest… We’re already used to seeing the other stuff. So far, as shocking as it may be, we’re very used to seeing it. Right?
Here you see the edge of the droplet. The upper part corresponds to the slide, okay? And here’s the one of the desiccation of the droplet itself.
Pay attention to this image because here’s a fiber that we initially identified as a graphene ribbon surrounding a microcircuit. Right now, we see this at 1200 magnification.
Come on, it’s getting a little bit more complicated. Attention to this fiber here. It’s actual color is reddish. Pay attention to this fiber because it’ll give us many surprises. OK?
What’s this? The Pentium 5?
These images go directly to the Minister of Health and Family, Jesús Aguirre, who didn’t want to know anything about this or the Campra report when it was presented in the plenary session of the Andalusian Parliament. Mr. Jesús Aguirre, can you explain to us what this is? Can the Parliament of Andalusia explain to us what’s being injected into the people? What’s this? The motherboard of a computer? What’s this? Can you tell us? This is an… aberration, isn’t it? Anyway.
Again the tape or the filament. Pay attention to the filament. Here again, you’re looking at a fiber that has appeared after evaporation of the sample. We want to do still a lot more experimentation with what we have here in the microscope because, in fact, it’s placed on the microscope slide itself, right? Let’s continue. Don’t worry, because we’ll leave the link to the full video later.
Here’s a famous cord that joins these microcircuits together. I see that now the interesting part starts, eh? You haven’t seen anything yet. Attention! Look at its color. Well, a reddish color. See? That’s the natural color of this fiber. We’ll see what it does later. Terrifying. Monstrous.
Here, we focus a little bit to see its tip. See that “spatula”? Well, then you’re going to see the movement of that spatula and how it twists on itself. Now. Now you’re going to see how it responds to three breaths. This is important for me to explain because, look, you see… First, we blew air with a fan. And there was minimal transverse movement. However, when we breathe (vapor, something organic), the movement is incisive. It’s different. That is, it interacts directly with human biology, in this case. The famous Morgellons. Let’s see how they do it. So, you’re going to see three incisions that correspond to at least three breath puffs. At least three okay? Let’s watch this.
Everything is fine, isn’t it? Look how “beautiful” it is. Ready? The second one. Yes, indeed. This is inside the Pfizer vaccine. In one of the drops. Specifically in two droplets. In one of them. There are several of these. And they respond to body heat when you proceed with the breath. But I say it again because this is very important. If you, for example, beat the air with a fan, with a leaf, there’s a lot more air, but there’s minimal movement, and it’s transverse. However, when they give off breath, there’s an interaction in the sense that this, let’s say, goes after it very quickly. As if it’s attacking, effectively. It has the behavior of a parasite. Let’s continue.
Here. Now, I’m illuminating it with normal light, bright. Okay?
Likewise, now what I’m doing is I’m bringing a magnet closer. Pay attntion. Look at the way it’s twisting its head or whatever it is.
You make a list of symptoms. You say many people are experiencing this cluster of symptoms.
You give a label to this list of symptoms. A name. The name of a disease or a disorder or a syndrome.
Over time, through promotion, the name sticks.
You fund research to find the cause of the disease. This research can stretch out for a long time. Possibly forever.
Meanwhile, you develop and sell drugs to treat the disease. Money.
You keep reporting “progress” on finding the cause. “At first, we looked for environmental factors. But now we know the basis is almost certainly genetic. We’re homing in on the specific genetic dysfunction…”
Over time, what’s forgotten is this: is there really a single disease with a single cause?
And think it through; if you can’t verify a single cause, you don’t have a disease. You just have the original list of symptoms.
Alzheimer’s would be an example. Microcephaly (babies born with small heads and brain damage) would be another. The disease names seem to carry the day. “Well, if there’s a name, a label, there must be a unique disease.”
Wrong.
If there’s a name, a label, there is money.
Money for research, for drug development, money from drug and vaccine sales.
Researchers are tasked with making the list of symptoms seem compelling. “We’ve done brain studies. There are remarkable similarities among patients who have Disease X. As you can see from these scans, in Figure A…”
Still, no dice. No verified cause. Therefore, no justification for using the disease label or claiming you have found a unique disease.
But it doesn’t matter, because the business model is working well.
Here’s another example. ADHD. Has a single cause been found for this list of symptoms? No. Therefore, there is no laboratory test for ADHD. No test to confirm the diagnosis of ADHD. Because a test would detect the cause is present in the patient—and there is no cause to look for.
In fact, if you examine the complete catalog of all so-called mental disorders—about 300 of them—there is no defining lab test for ANY of them. Not a one. Each so-called disorder is simply a list of behaviors which have been clustered together by committees of psychiatrists and given a name. ADHD. Bipolar. Clinical depression. And so on.
But it doesn’t matter. Because the business model is working. Money is pouring in. Drugs are selling.
Let’s take this even further. A hundred years of Rockefeller medicine have “established” that there are thousands of separate and distinct and unique diseases, disorders, and syndromes. And each one has a cause. For many diseases, the cause “hasn’t been discovered yet.” Meaning: “We’re writing fiction. We have no justification for calling these diseases, diseases.”
For many other diseases, researchers claim, the causes have been found. The most popular type of cause? A virus.
A virus that had never been seen before. A virus that was “discovered” in a lab.
A lab—as I’ve discussed in depth—that lets in no outsiders, no truly independent observers, to see, in detail, what’s actually going on.
For that reason, and several others, there is no solid reason to believe these viruses, these causes are actually being discovered. Are actually real.
Which leaves us with thousands of lists of symptoms.
But there is always a business model. The full Rockefeller model is worth trillions of dollars. More dollars every day.
The drugs and the vaccines are the $$$ payoff.
I’ve spent decades demonstrating their toxicity.
Here’s a very interesting medical trick. A criminal trick. The researchers say a brain disorder called ABC exists but they haven’t found the cause yet. A parent has a child with severe problems and takes him to the doctor. The doctor pronounces a diagnosis: “Yes, your boy has ABC.”
The parent goes away and does some research. The list of symptoms for ABC could be the result of a vaccine. In fact, the boy developed his severe problems quite soon after vaccination.
She goes back to the doctor and says, “I think my son was damaged by the vaccine.”
The doctor says, “That’s impossible. Your boy is suffering from ABC. And you see, we’ve done studies of boys with ABC, and many of them were never vaccinated. So when you say the cause of your boy’s ABC was a vaccine, we’ve ruled that out.”
The parent doesn’t know what to do.
Of course, the trick is, ABC was never proved to be a unique disorder in the first place. It’s really the NAME of an unproven disorder. The studies the doctor is referring to are completely irrelevant.
ABC is a disorder without a proven cause. Therefore, it is no disorder at all. It’s just a list of symptoms.
The parent’s boy has many of those symptoms. He acquired them—and the damage he suffered—from a vaccine. If you wanted to put a name to what the boy has, call it what it is: vaccine damage.
Not ABC.
Part of the business model for ABC is: “We use that disease label so we can avoid having to pay out huge compensation-dollars for damage caused by a vaccine.”
If the impact of this trick isn’t getting through to you, let me give you a grossly exaggerated analogy.
Engineers claim there is a phenomenon called River Floundering. It is unique but the cause hasn’t yet been found. The basic symptom is: boats on rivers develop the propensity to sink.
Joe takes his boat out on a river. Overhead, a bridge collapses and destroys his boat. Joe barely escapes with his life. After six months, he emerges from the hospital and sues a number of parties.
But he loses his case. In court, experts testify that his boat was suffering from River Floundering. That’s why it sank. Many studies of Floundering show bridges-collapsing did not occur when “the sinking happened.” Therefore, the collapsing bridge was not the cause of Joe’s boat’s disorder, River Floundering.
Most readers here have probably heard of the F-35 crash that occurred recently in the South China Sea. The public narrative has it that a pilot was landing his F-35 on the carrier USS Vinson, but the glide path was too steep, and the plane did not catch the grappling wires, and tumbled over the side of the ship as the pilot ejected. The current coverage of the story has it that the US Navy and the Chinese navy are in a race to recover the airplane.
But according to this article shared by V.T., that may not be all there is to the story:
According to this article, the pilot of the aircraft was experiencing chest pains as he approached the carrier, and actually blamed the vaccine for the pains (and the abortive landing) in communications with the carrier:
Aviators approaching within a mile of their carrier “call the ball,” a radio transmission indicating they have spotted the “meatball,” a nickname for the visual reference used by pilots to keep the proper glide slope during the approach to an aircraft carrier.
As the F-35C pilot neared the USS Vinson, he “called the ball,” but also said he was experiencing sudden and intense chest pain, as if “someone hit me with a baseball bat.” The Landing Signal Operator aboard the USS Vinson noticed at once that the F-35 was above glideslope and would miss the wires. He ordered the pilot to “wave off” just as the pilot’s crackled voice said on the radio, “Fucking vaccine.” The pilot had barely enough strength to eject safely, though several boatswain’s mates on the flight deck were injured when the plane struck the deck.
The pilot was recovered and taken to medical, where a physician determined he had suffered an acute case of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, a common and potentially deadly side effect of Covid-19 vaccinations. The USS Carl Vinson, a Nimitz-Class carrier, has a fully functional medical ward on its 2nd deck, complete with diagnostic equipment, including CRT and MRI scanners, found in contemporary hospitals.
The pilot, current condition unknown, got his booster shot aboard the USS Vinson 72-hours prior to the accident. He had no comorbidities, and passed a medical examination on 9/5/2021.
Other aviators aboard the Vinson described him as “an accomplished and competent aviator with thousands of hours of flight time in a broad range of aircraft, and dozens of successful carrier landings.”
This information came to RRN via a senior Navy officer who said the U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General’s Corps received a briefing on the accident.
This story intrigued me, because one of the areas that I have received some articles about, is precisely the so-called “vaxxidents”, accidents caused in whole or in part because of complications and adverse reactions from the covid injections. (Like Catherine Austin Fitts, I prefer not to refer to these injections as vaccines. They are not in any classical sense. They are experimental drugs at best, and hence my term “injections” and my preferred term “quackcines”.) I’ve had a veritable mountain of such stories, most of them unverifiable. This one, while anecdotal I strongly suspect has some fire behind the anecdotal smoke, because I’ve had other people share similar stories of pilots experiencing strange things after their injections.
This story disturbs for a far deeper reason, for if true, then it means that the whole issue of the injections and this administration’s attempts to force them on the military has become a national security issue because of the possibility of more such reactions. Let’s remember, US Army flight surgeon Lt. Col Teresa Long warned about precisely such sudden cardiac events in the case of pilots: https://americanmilitarynews.com/2021/09/army-flight-surgeon-says-pilots-risk-sudden-cardiac-death-from-covid-vaccine-side-effect/
There has been much discussion on the idea of vaccine passports, but the reality is the opposite: if you’re flying a commercial airliner, would you, or would you not, like to know the vaccine status of your flight crew? Given Lt. Col. Long’s story, and now the allegations surrounding the USS Vinson F-35 crash, the answer to that question seems obvious. So now the real question is, how long before the military – as a matter of national security – refuses the injections? And how long before all this translates to the commercial airliners doing the same? And how long from there to the holding of the perpetrators and their media lackies accountable?
What proof would I accept? What sort of proof would convince me that SARS-CoV-2 exists?
Suppose, for example, a study described how researchers actually DID separate a virus from all the material surrounding it in their cell-soup in the lab?
Would that be enough?
And the answer is no.
Why?
Because I don’t trust studies based on research conducted in elite labs where no independent outsiders are allowed. And that’s the situation, when it comes to purported virus isolation.
These labs are like the famous bunkers where key government officials are taken, in the event of a massive attack against the country.
Try getting in off the street.
And who are these researchers in the super-secret labs? To put it another way, what sort of establishment do they represent?
Is it a clean establishment with a track record of honesty? Or is it a cartel with a criminal history?
If it’s a cartel, why should I accept the “scientific methods” of these researchers or their honesty?
As my long-time readers know, I’ve spent decades exposing lies and crimes of the medical cartel. Chapter and verse. (For example this: Medical weapons of mass destruction)
When it comes to vital issues that mean the difference between life and death—drug/vaccine-fueled destruction of human life; mistreatment and errors in hospitals; faked disease case and death numbers; inaccurate, meaningless, and deceptive diagnostic tests; the fabricated existence of a whole range of phony diseases and disorders and syndromes; the true numbers of medically caused deaths—medical authorities have been lying and sliming their way out of accountability for MANY decades.
And all this doesn’t touch on the history of public health declarations of epidemics that have turned out to be duds.
Nor does it include the overall history of Rockefeller medicine, which is based on the fatuous notion that there are thousands of separate and distinct diseases, each one of which is caused by a germ that must be treated by a profit-making drug.
Nor does it include the history of vicious suppression of innovative treatments developed by individuals who’ve worked outside the mainstream.
Therefore, suspicion is warranted. Is absolutely necessary. And “suspicion” is a vast understatement.
I refuse to trust the researchers who simply claim they’re isolating viruses.
When it comes to the so-called basic building blocks of MANY so-called diseases—which ARE “the viruses”—all the discovery-research HAS BEEN conducted by insiders in their off-limit labs. Without independent witnesses. Without educated witnesses who can watch and question each and every step of “the accepted method” for isolation of new viruses.
Frankly, you would have to be crazy to accept anything coming out of these insider-club labs.
So NO. I don’t accept such findings.
Before I describe how outsiders SHOULD be allowed to witness and participate in secret lab work, let me give you two quotes to consider.
They come from decidedly mainstream and elite editors of elite medical journals. These editors have read and explored and probed and lifted the fake cover from published medical material for decades. Material they themselves have published. Therefore, these are CONFESSIONS.
ONE: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)
TWO: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…”
“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)
Suspicion is warranted. It’s absolutely necessary. And again, “suspicion” is a vast understatement.
More than a year ago, I mentioned how virus-isolation research—if the word “research” applies at all—should be done.
And I issue this now, as a challenge, to the entire insider-club of virologists, all of whom claim their established method of finding and sequencing new viruses is scientific and rigorous:
Let’s have a film crew on site. As you work. In your lab. Looking over your shoulders and recording every move you make.
And with the film crew, let’s have several knowledgeable, outside, independent researchers. People whom you would ordinarily refuse to give the time of day. People who are insightful. Possibly, people like Dr. Stefan Lanka, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan.
As the film crew works, and as you conduct and describe your step-by-step “isolation” of a new virus, these outsiders can stop you at any moment and question you. In depth.
“Why did you just do that?” “Why didn’t you record that step?” “Explain that answer you just gave me. It makes no sense.” “Exactly what did you just withdraw from the solution in the dish, and how do you know what it was?”
This is not a public relations exercise or an educational documentary for medical students. This is REAL. This is research about your research. No holds barred.
You give a slippery answer to a question; you evade with a vague generality; you try to pull rank; you get nailed to the wall. On film.
THIS is the procedure I want.
All the way from start to finish. Including the so-called sequencing of the “new virus.”
And then we would know a great deal more about what you’re actually doing and not doing in your labs. In the absence of what I’m proposing and demanding, THERE IS NO REASON TO ASSUME THE PROCESS OF VIRUS-ISOLATION IS LEGITIMATE.
Virologists, your work affects every human on Earth. Profoundly. To see this, all a person has to do is look around him these days, at what is called “COVID.” It proceeds from your so-called discovery of SARS-CoV-2.
I view you virologists as I would view the court magicians and soothsayers and high priests who surrounded and advised the leaders of tribes and nations in ancient times.
Those “experts” huddled with the leaders in their very private rooms and spun stories and predictions, and recommended strategies to deal with supposed ongoing and looming crises.
And then the leaders took actions that affected the lives of all the people.
So it is now. With you virologists.
So my demands are entirely within bounds. If you have a shred of honesty, and if you stop and think about it, what I’m demanding is prosaically simple:
You account for every step you take. In real time. Where you work. Right there, you submit yourselves to the detailed scrutiny of independent outsiders.
That’s my bottom line.
And I challenge any scientist, analyst, investigator, doctor, researcher, reporter, alt. reporter who says what I’m demanding is not necessary. You’re wrong. You’re dead wrong.
You either haven’t thought things through, or you’re lying.
Someone is going to tell me what I’m demanding, as proof, is impossible. It would never happen. “They” would never let it happen. They would never let independent outsiders into their holy labs.
You think I don’t know that?
If outsiders can’t get into their labs, what does that tell you?
And someone will say, “We just have to rely on the best evidence we have.”
No we don’t. Because the best available evidence is no evidence.
In a vast sea of death-dealing medical lies, a sea that has existed for more than a hundred years (actually much longer), if experts tell you they’re discovering viruses in labs you can’t enter, and they say you must believe them, and you buy that…
I have condos for sale on the far side of the moon. Full cash only, no payments.
Here it is: Virologists are saying and writing they’ve found a purple man with pink hair and green lips and four arms living a thousand miles under the surface of a planet in the next solar system over. And he causes disease.
Then they’re saying, “Prove us wrong.”
On top of that, they’re saying, “You can’t watch us work while we discover such creatures.”
Conclusion: the purple man doesn’t exist.
Virologists, text me when you’ll let my people into your lab.
Until then, get lost.
Dear reader, the elephant in the room is trust, not data.
When it comes to the “discovery of viruses,” there are no reliable data. We, on the outside, are told that what happens behind locked doors is irrefutable. Period.
We’re told we just can’t understand what the pros are doing. The problem is our lack of knowledge, our lack of training.
We’re the peasants toiling in the valley. Our better, the baron, is up in his castle on top of the mountain. He’s planning our lives, he’s taking care of us.
Sure. Of course. Uh-huh.
Sounds familiar. It’s pretty much the history of the world.
Or it was, until people who came before us finally staked out a territory called freedom, which involved opening locked doors and finding out what lay behind them.
Consider a parochial example: the mafia. They, too, plan behind closed doors. They concoct methods of carrying out crimes. They record their profits. Then, finally, a prosecutor announces, “We were able to get into their books. We saw the details. We made arrests.”
I want my independent accountants to get into the virologists’ books. But not after the fact. I want my people to BE there while the virologists are creating the books, entry by entry, in the lab.
“Why did you just make that entry? Where did your conclusion come from? Who are you trying to kid? You’re just fabricating this stuff? You know, that’s called RICO. That’s a RICO case. Continuing criminal enterprise. They’ll send you away for a long time…”
And all of a sudden, the high and mighty virologist, who’s been able to con the world with his hustle, who knows how to come off sounding superior in every way, feels a dent in his armor. A big dent. He smells his own blood.
And he starts talking.
He wants to make a deal. He’ll roll over on his colleagues. He’ll expose the whole sham.
“…You don’t understand. It’s the money. It’s all about the money. Where it comes from. We have to do this kind of work. Otherwise, we starve. They cut us off. I know the people on the funding committees. I’ll give you their names. They take orders, too. The whole thing is a system. I can draw you a map. I can’t go to jail. I have a family. I’m paying eighty grand a year just to send my kids to college. There’s the mortgage, and the cottage on the Cape…”
The whole bluff POPS and deflates, and we begin to hear words we understand, at last. The words of confession. The down-to-earth sordid truth.
There was never a towering mystery in the castle on the hill.
There was just the passing of the buck. The soiled buck. From hand to hand.
The “science” was the front.
“…You see, it works this way. The pharmaceutical companies have to have new viruses. For every fake virus, they develop a real drug and a real vaccine. It’s marketing. That’s what they’re doing. That’s what they’ve always been doing. This is much bigger than anyone realizes. I’m just a little fish. The big boys run the whole show. They pay the Congress and the FDA. They pay everybody…”
He keeps talking. He can’t stop. He’s way past “isolation, purification and sequencing.” They’re in his rear-view mirror. Now he’s fighting for his freedom from prison. Now he’s telling the truth.
And the ever-present storm clouds over the valley where we peasants toil are blowing away. The air is fresher.
We’re breathing easier.
The big-cheese baron is really a shrunken little man—when he takes his perp walk in chains.
The Fifth Column [La Quinta Columna] recently published their findings and conclusions on the strange self-assembling nanotech they discovered in the Pfizer mRNA vaccines via optical microscopy analysis.
The objects they found in the vaccine correspond with known items in the scientific record.
And the conclusion they come to seems quite clear: That the well documented scientific goal to use nanotechnology in living human beings to form networks capable of controlling several nanomachines is currently being deployed in the CoV-19 vaccines — which amounts to the most intrusive assault against humanity in all of recorded history.
While the media and government lie and cover for Big Pharma, the official ingredients are still unknown.
But we have thousands of brilliant scientists worldwide studying these experimental vaccines. Some have died in highly suspicious ways. But most have been able to share their findings.
And the work shows us that graphene oxide is a key component in all of this.
There have been dozens of official documented studies on the use of graphene oxide related to how we see it being used here today. Among other things, as a power converter.
Graphene, a one-atom thick layer of hexagonally-arranged carbon atoms, is the thinnest and strongest material known to man and an outstanding conductor of heat and electricity.
It can boost gigahertz frequencies into terahertz, which is exactly what these new nanotech machines need for power.
In order to do this, the graphene first needs a frequency to power it. And the optimal frequency to externally power graphene is known to be 26 gigahertz, which is also the frequency put out by 5G.
In this model the graphene within the body is activated by microwave signals in the gigahertz range. Which it then boosts into the terahertz range. Which then powers the novel nanotech machinery to self assemble within the human body.
Once assembled, what do these nanotech machines do?
The images, compared to the scientific literature, suggest that they are the foundation of an internal electronic system with an endless potential for bio-manipulation of the human host.
Nano routers that emit MAC addresses, able to be registered via Bluetooth. Nano in plasma antennas to amplify signals. Nano rectennas acting as a rectifier bridges from AC to DC current. Codex and logic gates for encryption of communication.
The raw materials for all this self-assembly is also graphene oxide. And when we compare known side effects of graphene oxide to the side effects of the CoV-19 vaccines, we find them to be the same.
Once graphene oxide is injected into the body, it acquires magnetic properties — predictably around the injection site, the heart and the brain.
Graphene is seen as a pathogen by our immune system and will often result in paralysis and stroke. Graphene is known to cause blood clots and heart conditions. Graphene oxide can generate small discharges causing cardiac arrhythmia.
There is so much going on with these experimental vaccines and the evidence seems clear that there is a mass experiment going on — with certain batches marked more deadly than others, and with certain batches that contain a bold new technology akin to a manmade parasite intended to control the host human, if it doesn’t kill them first in the process.
Perhaps that is what the mad scientists and psychopaths are after — human genetics that can withstand this new invasive and deadly nanotech.
Peter Duesberg is a molecular biologist and a molecular and cell biology professor at the University of California, Berkeley. At one time, he was an acclaimed scientist who was the world’s foremost expert on AIDS. That all changed when he was blackballed by Anthony Fauci and the scientific establishment for the temerity of revealing the truth that HIV does not cause AIDS. Duesberg was slandered as a homophobe for revealing the scientific evidence that AIDS was caused by the use of certain dangerous recreational/pharmaceutical aphrodisiacs by the sodomite community that over time broke down the immune systems of the users who then developed AIDS. He revealed that the prevalence of AIDS in Africa is simply explained by recategorizing as HIV the endemic immune deficiencies that were always understood to be caused by malnutrition, tainted drinking water, and various infections.
Dr. Duesberg reveals how Fauci pushed the toxic drug called AZT (Zidovudine) to people who were found to have antibodies to HIV. Those patients were poisoned by the drug (AZT) that was supposed to treat them. AZT, in actuality, caused AIDS, which eventually killed the patients. That is much like the present regime of treating COVID-19 with unsafe and ineffective mRNA vaccines and toxic therapeutics like Veklury® (remdesivir) while suppressing safe and effective therapeutics like hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin.
Duesberg’s book exposes the incompetence, megalomania, and in some cases criminality of Anthony Fauci, and other NIH, FDA, and CDC officials. It reveals the genesis of the establishment of what has become a cabal of ruling technocrats in government which has now brought Orwellian oppression across the United States and indeed the world through the COVID-19 scare and mandatory experimental vaccinations.
There were very powerful interests who tried to kill Duesberg’s book before it ever saw the light of day. The publisher, Regnery, in its preface to the book explains how Peter Duesberg went through two publishers who backed out of publishing the book at late stages, apparently due to some hidden pressure from an unseen hand.
This book is now out of publication. But there is still robust demand for the book which has driven the price up. While Amazon offers the audible version of the book at a reasonable price, as of January 28, 2022, the hardcover version was priced at $1,260.00 and the paperback was priced at $536.00.
Regnery is the third publisher to have contracted to publish Inventing the AIDS Virus. Addison Wesley initially announced the book in 1993. St. Martin’s signed it in January 1994 and subsequently assigned its contract to us in January 1995. We announced it, initially, in the fall of 1995 and finally published it in February 1996. Bryan Ellison, Duesberg’s former research assistant and original co-author, became disenchanted with Duesberg’s and his publisher’s insistence on careful documentation and self-published his own version under the title Why We Will Never Win the War on AIDS in 1994. We sued Ellison for breach of contract and copyright violation and, after a two-week federal court jury trial, were awarded a six-figure verdict and an injunction against Ellison’s edition. Inventing the AIDS Virus has been edited by at least five editors, has been agonized over by the publishers of three major publishing firms, and concurrently praised and damned by countless critics.
Excerpt from the foreword by Nobel Laureate Kerry Mullis, creator of the PCR test:
We have not been able to discover any good reasons why most of the people on earth believe that AIDS is a disease caused by a virus called HIV. There is simply no scientific evidence demonstrating that this is true.
We have also not been able to discover why doctors prescribe a toxic drug called AZT (Zidovudine) to people who have no other complaint than the presence of antibodies to HIV in their blood. In fact, we cannot understand why humans would take that drug for any reason.
We cannot understand how all this madness came about, and having both lived in Berkeley, we’ve seen some strange things indeed. We know that to err is human, but the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is one hell of a mistake.
I say this rather strongly as a warning. Duesberg has been saying it for a long time. Read this book.
Kary B. Mullis
Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 1993
Prior to his untimely death on August 7, 2019, Kerry Mullis had this to say about Anthony Fauci and his ilk:
“Guys like Fauci get up there and start talking, you know, he doesn’t know anything really about anything and I’d say that to his face. Nothing. The man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope and if it’s got a virus in there you’ll know it. He doesn’t understand electron microscopy and he doesn’t understand medicine and he should not be in a position like he’s in. Most of those guys up there on the top are just total administrative people and they don’t know anything about what’s going on in the body. You know, those guys have got an agenda, which is not what we would like them to have being that we pay for them to take care of our health in some way. They’ve got a personal kind of agenda. They make up their own rules as they go. They change them when they want to. And they smugly, like Tony Fauci does not mind going on television in front of the people who pay his salary and lie directly into the camera.”
Notice the book, Inventing the AIDS Virus, on the table in front of Mullis during the interview.
Congress passed the National Vaccine Injury Act (NVIA) of 1986, which granted immunity to the pharmaceutical companies for injuries caused by the vaccines they manufactured. As explained by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth1, the reason for that protection is that Congress deemed vaccines to be unavoidably unsafe, 2 thus no manufacturer would make a vaccine if they had to suffer the liability for injuries they would unavoidably cause. 3
Mary S. Holland explains the issue: “The success of the national vaccine program has come at a cost. Some children are permanently disabled or die from their vaccine exposures. … Between 1980 and 1986, people who claimed vaccine injury brought over three billion dollars of damages claims to U.S. civil courts against vaccine manufacturers.” 4
In response to the litigation that held them accountable for the injuries caused by their vaccines, the vaccine manufacturers lobbied Congress, and in 1986 they were able to get the NVIA law passed. That law had the effect of protecting them from civil liability for injuries caused by vaccines that they manufactured.
The underlying legal reasoning of Congress for the 1986 NVIA law was a concept borrowed from the Restatement of Torts law that vaccines were “unavoidably unsafe.” Holland explains that “[t]he Restatement describes all vaccines as ‘unavoidably unsafe’ products and implicitly recommended that manufacturers not be liable for injuries if doctors administered them properly.”5
The NVIA set up a system of government compensation for vaccine injuries that has in practice served more to prevent compensation than anything else. Robert F. Kennedy explains:
Parents, legal guardians and legal representatives can file on behalf of children, disabled adults, and individuals who are deceased. According to the vaccine-injured and their loved ones, the program has failed miserably as a litigious, broken system where the injured are up against a government vaccine program, government owned vaccine patents, government health officials who administer the program and government paid attorneys from the Department of Justice. There is no judge, no jury of your peers and no discovery. Claimants feel the system is set up for their claims to fail.6
The U.S. Supreme Court in Bruesewitz, supra, ruled that language in the statute categorically preempts even design defect claims against vaccine manufacturers. Holland explains that U.S. Supreme Court ruling “removed incentives for pharmaceutical corporations to conduct the extensive research and development necessary to ensure that FDA-approved vaccines remain as safe and effective as possible after licensure. FDA approval alone has not been a sufficient guarantee of drug safety, owing in part to the FDA’s limited authority to compel further safety research after final approval.” 7
Holland reveals the real-world consequences of the NIVA for vaccine recipients:
[Gayle] DeLong showed that the proportion of people that reported a serious complication from a vaccine after [enactment of the NVIA in] 1986 is more than double the proportion of people who experienced a serious complication from a disease before a vaccine for it was available. The difference is statistically significant and is likely greater because of underreporting.
DeLong’s analysis suggests that the Vaccine Act “gave firms greater incentives to capture the regulator: If consumers cannot sue firms for product liability, the only barrier to sales is regulatory approval.” 8
The NVIA protects vaccine makers from liability for “unavoidable” injuries caused by vaccines. The NVIA states in pertinent part:
No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings. 9
In order to make sure the immunity from liability pill goes down easier for the public, the NVIA mandated that the Secretary of HHS “promote the development of childhood vaccines that result in fewer and less serious adverse reactions than those vaccines [presently] on the market.”10
That requirement was supposed to be performed by a task force made up of the “Director of the National Institutes of Health [NIH], the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration [FDA], and the Director of the Centers for Disease Control [CDC].” 11
The NVIA statute required that “within 2 years after December 22, 1987, and periodically thereafter, the Secretary [of HHS] shall prepare and transmit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Labor and Human Resources of the Senate a report describing the actions taken pursuant to subsection (a) during the preceding 2-year period.”12
The NIH, FDA, and CDC scoundrels thumbed their noses at Congress. They violated the law by not filing the required reports with the U.S. Congress. Why did they not file the required reports? The only logical reason is that they did not meet as required, and they did not “promote the development of childhood vaccines that result in fewer and less serious adverse reactions than those vaccines [presently] on the market” 13 as required by the statute.
That is clear evidence that the component agencies of HHS (CDC, NIH, and FDA) have no interest in the development of safe vaccines for children.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. discovered the scofflaws at HHS when he filed a Freedom of Information Act request with HHS requesting the reports prepared and transmitted to Congress as required by the NVIA. HHS refused to comply with the request. He sued HHS. 14 After being served with the lawsuit, HHS admitted that they never filed any required reports with Congress. 15 That means that the component agencies of HHS (CDC, NIH, and FDA) never formed the required task force and made no effort to see that vaccines were made safer.
The CDC, NIH, and FDA never met to develop a plan for safe vaccines for children. Why? Because CDC, NIH, and FDA know that the pharmaceutical companies have no interest making vaccines safe for children! Vaccines are unavoidably unsafe and the vaccine makers like it that way. Pharmaceutical companies get rich when people are made sick. It is a racket where they cause injury via their vaccines and then make the patent medicines to address the symptoms of the injuries they have caused. There was a fly in their ointment, and that was civil liability for the injuries they caused. The immunity granted by the NVIA solved that problem. Since the NVIA, the pharmaceutical companies have been off to the races creating one ineffective and unsafe vaccine after another.
As explained by Texans for Vaccine Choice, “[t]he [NVIA] removed all liability from vaccine manufacturers when their products injure or kill. Realizing that removing consumer accountability would eliminate any motivation for manufacturers to ensure their products are as safe and effective as they can possibly be, the Mandate for Safer Childhood Vaccines clause was added to the the Act as a check-and-balance.” But we now know that there is no check-and-balance. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. explains:
This speaks volumes to the lack of seriousness by which vaccine safety is treated at HHS and heightens the concern that HHS doesn’t have a clue as to the actual safety profile of the now 29 doses, and growing, of vaccines given by one year of age. 16
The CDC, when asked, was unable to provide any evidence that any childhood vaccine has ever been tested for safety using a placebo control. Indeed, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. points out that “not one of the 72 vaccines on the schedule mandated for our children, have been tested with a placebo.” There is a reason. No vaccine could ever survive being tested for safety and effectiveness against a placebo. The pharmaceutical companies know that their vaccines are not only ineffective, they are injurious. Research has shown that childhood vaccines cause injuries. 17 And that is by design. A design for which the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled the drug companies have immunity from civil liability.
The CDC, NIH, and FDA know it is a fool’s errand to try to convince the drug companies to manufacture something safe when to do so would undermine the drug companies’ pecuniary interests. The surreptitious goal of the drug companies is to make people sick through vaccines. That is why the CDC, NIH, and FDA had nothing to report to Congress regarding their efforts to develop vaccines with “fewer and less serious adverse reactions.” The goal of the vaccine makers is to cause injury. The pharmaceutical companies, CDC, NIH, and FDA all know that vaccines will unavoidably cause injuries. They have no interest in mitigating the damage caused by vaccines because those injuries make the pharmaceutical companies rich through the patent medicines they sell to address the injuries caused by the vaccines.
For example, on December 13, 2021, Pfizer announced:
Pfizer will acquire Arena, a clinical stage company developing innovative potential therapies for the treatment of several immuno-inflammatory diseases. Under the terms of the agreement, Pfizer will acquire all the outstanding shares of Arena for $100 per share in an all-cash transaction for a total equity value of approximately $6.7 billion. The boards of directors of both companies have unanimously approved the transaction. 18
Pfizer is acquiring a company that makes drugs that treat the very immuno-inflammatory injuries caused by Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. Arena has drugs in the pipeline to treat cardio inflammatory diseases like myocarditis; the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine has become notorious for causing myocarditis. 19 Also notable is Arena’s development of a drug (Termanogrel) to address microvascular obstructions, which several doctors have identified as the root cause of many illnesses resulting from Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. 20 For example, Dr. Charles Hoffe, MD — who practices in British Columbia, Canada — explained in very simple terms how the mRNA COVID vaccines create the spike proteins which cause widespread microscopic blood clotting that will eventually kill many people within three years of taking the shots. 21 Pfizer now wants to get in on the action of offering overpriced patent medicines to give to desperate patients suffering from the deadly side-effects of their vaccine. How much more Machiavelian can you get?
Please be mindful that the COIVD-19 vaccine manufacturers are also protected from civil liability. The COVID-19 vaccines will be subjected to the even more exacting standards and limited compensation of the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act), which authorizes the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) to provide benefits to injured parties. A notable limitation under the CICP is that an injured party will be subjected to the statute of limitations that forecloses all legal actions not filed within one year of vaccination. 22That is compared with the statute of limitations for an approved vaccine under the National Vaccine Injury Act (NVIA) of 3 years from the occurrence of the first symptom of injury from the vaccine. 23
Experts specializing in vaccine injury cases say that the bar for obtaining compensation is very high under the PREP Act. 24 Over the last ten years, 94% of injured patients who filed claims under the PREP Act received no compensation. 25 In reference to the virtually insurmountable hurdles erected under the CICP, Renée Gentry, director of the Vaccine Injury Litigation Clinic at the George Washington University Law School, said COVID-19 vaccine claimants have two rights: “You have the right to file,” she said. “And you have the right to lose.” 26 Altom Maglio, whose 22 lawyer law firm, Maglio Christopher & Toale, specializes in vaccine injury cases, says that you’re out of luck if you’ve suffered an injury related to any of the COVID-19 vaccines in receiving any compensation for your injury.27 That all is not intended to suggest that the NVIA is fair. The NVIA has its own problems. Two out of three claims filed under the NVIA are denied.28
A “declared public health emergency” as described in the PREP Act is the legal landscape under which the COVID-19 vaccine is being developed. Under the PREP Act, there is a moral hazard where manufactures of the COVID-19 vaccines will be protected from any liability for injuries caused by their COVID-19 vaccines. They have no financial incentive to make a vaccine that is safe or effective. They can sit back and count their billions in profits as they injure the public with impunity. The demand for the product is guaranteed by a marketplace that is rigged by the U.S. and state governments, which will pay for the vaccine and then mandate that the public consume that vaccine. The attitude of the vaccine manufacturers toward the consumer who is injured is “oh well, too bad, so sad, it sucks to be you.”
“For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.” 1 Timothy 6:10.
3 National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, Children’s Health Defense, https://childrenshealthdefense.org/national-vaccine-injury-compensation-program/ (last visited on January 6, 2021).
6 National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, Children’s Health Defense, https://childrenshealthdefense.org/national-vaccine-injury-compensation-program/ (last visited on January 6, 2021).
8 Mary S. Holland, Liability for Vaccine Injury: The United States, the European Union, and the Developing World, Emory Law Journal, Vol 67, 2018, https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/elj/vol67/iss3/3/. Quoting Gayle DeLong, Is “Delitigation” Associated with a Change in Product Safety? The Case of Vaccines, Rev. Ind. Org. (June 14, 2017).
14 RFK, Jr. Proves HHS is in Violation of the “Mandate for Safer Childhood Vaccines” as Stipulated in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Act, Children’s Health Defense, September 13, 2018, https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/federal-failures/rfk-jr-proves-hhs-is-in-violation-of-the-mandate-for-safer-childhood-vaccines-as-stipulated-in-the-vaccine-injury-compensation-act/. ICAN v. HHS, Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, April 12, 2018, https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/rfk-complaint-against-united-states-department-of-health-and-human-services.pdf. See also ICAN & RFK, Jr. Call Out DHHS for Vaccine Safety Violations, Texans for Vaccine Choice, July 18, 2018, https://texansforvaccinechoice.com/ican-rfk-jr-call-out-dhhs-for-vaccine-safety-violations/.
15 ICAN v. HHS, Stipulation, July 9, 2018, https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/rfk-hhs-stipulated-order-july-2018.pdf.
16 RFK, Jr. Proves HHS is in Violation of the “Mandate for Safer Childhood Vaccines” as Stipulated in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Act, Children’s Health Defense, September 13, 2018, https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/federal-failures/rfk-jr-proves-hhs-is-in-violation-of-the-mandate-for-safer-childhood-vaccines-as-stipulated-in-the-vaccine-injury-compensation-act/.
17 Edward Hendrie, Study Shows That Vaccinated Children Are Significantly Less Healthy Than Unvaccinated Children, December 20, 2020, https://greatmountainpublishing.com/2020/12/20/study-shows-that-vaccinated-children-are-significantly-less-healthy-than-unvaccinated-children/. Edward Hendrie, Vaccines Increase Mortality of Infants, August 17, 2020, https://greatmountainpublishing.com/2020/08/17/vaccines-increase-mortality-of-children/. Edward Hendrie, Vaccines Cause Autism and Allergies, August 5, 2020, https://greatmountainpublishing.com/2020/08/05/vaccines-cause-autism-and-allergies/.
18 Pfizer to Acquire Arena Pharmaceuticals, December 13, 2021, https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-acquire-arena-pharmaceuticals.
19 Edward Hendrie, Follow the SILENCE: Paper Proving That COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Myocarditis Is Removed From Publication Without Explanation, October 31, 2021, https://greatmountainpublishing.com/2021/10/31/follow-the-silence-paper-proving-that-covid-19-vaccines-cause-myocarditis-is-removed-from-publication-without-explanation/. See also Edward Hendrie, The FDA and Pfizer Concealed Evidence That COVID-19 Vaccines Will Cause Myocarditis in Children, November 7, 2021, https://greatmountainpublishing.com/2021/11/07/the-fda-and-pfizer-concealed-evidence-that-covid-19-vaccines-will-cause-myocarditis-in-children/.
20 Pfizer buys immuno-inflammatory firm Arena Pharmaceuticals for $6.7b, December 13, 2021, Outsourcing-Pharma, https://www.outsourcing-pharma.com/Article/2021/12/13/Pfizer-buys-immuno-inflammatory-firm-Arena-for-6.7b.
21 Edward Hendrie, Doctor Finds That His Patients Have Permanent Organ Damage from Blood Clots Caused by COVID-19 Vaccines, Great Mountain Publishing, October 23, 2021, https://greatmountainpublishing.com/2021/10/23/doctor-finds-that-his-patients-have-permanent-organ-damage-from-blood-clots-caused-by-covid-19-vaccines/, quoting CFT Team, Doctor Warns How COVID mRNA ‘Vaccines’ Will Cause Delayed Strokes & Heart Attacks — ‘The Worst Is Yet To Come’, July 14, 2021, https://christiansfortruth.com/doctor-warns-how-covid-mrna-vaccines-will-soon-cause-strokes-heart-attacks-the-worst-is-yet-to-come/.
22 Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program, Request for Benefits Form Instructions, OMB Control No. 0915-0334, Expiration Date: 3/31/2023, https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/hrsa/cicp/cicp-request-form-instructions.pdf.
24 McKenzie Sigalos, You Can’t Sue Pfizer or Moderna If You Have Severe Covid Vaccine Side Effects. The Government Likely Won’t Compensate You for Damages Either, CNBC, December 17, 2020, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effects-compensation-lawsuit.html.
25 McKenzie Sigalos, You Can’t Sue Pfizer or Moderna If You Have Severe Covid Vaccine Side Effects. The Government Likely Won’t Compensate You for Damages Either, CNBC, December 17, 2020, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effects-compensation-lawsuit.html.
26 Megan Redshaw, Injured by a COVID Vaccine? Want Financial Compensation? Too Bad, Says Injury Compensation Law Firm, The Defender, July 1, 2021, https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-vaccine-injury-no-compensation-program/.
27 Megan Redshaw, Injured by a COVID Vaccine? Want Financial Compensation? Too Bad, Says Injury Compensation Law Firm, The Defender, July 1, 2021, https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-vaccine-injury-no-compensation-program/.
28 Vaccine Injury Fund: Lessons From a Vaccine Lawyer-“Covered” Vaccines in the Court (and the DtaP), Widman Law Firm, https://www.widmanlawfirm.com/vaccine-injury-fund-lessons-from-a-vaccine-lawyer-covered-vaccin.html (last visited on August 28, 2021).
Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: An update has been added below the original video found at Our Great Awakening YouTube channel. We’ve added that update below the article that was originally posted at Bonds for the Win on Jan. 19th. See Bonds for the Win website for additional information on Public Official Surety Bonds, the power of surety bonds, how you can obtain a copy of a surety bond, and how as a private citizen you can file a letter of intent against a public official to hold them accountable for breaking their oath of office.
A mother named Violet with a 16-year-old boy who has autism begged the schools to let her son have an exemption.
They refused. When forced to wear the masks he became distraught and he harmed himself so badly that he had to be hospitalized in a mental institution.
Violet obtained the bond for the superintendent of her school district. Turns out – The superintendent was carrying a $4 million liability per bond claim!!
So next Violet served the superintendent with a letter of intent to file a claim against her bond if she didn’t pull back the mask mandates, admit she was wrong, and resign within five days. The superintendent did nothing.
After day 6 Violet filed the claim against her at the bond company.
The very next day we have a recording from the lawyers who represent the district explaining that they have to get rid of the masks, all state and federal funding is BLOCKED, and the superintendent is on her own with regard to the $4 million claim!!!
They also put out a request for parent volunteers to substitute for teachers because their funding is CEASED due to an OPEN claim against them.
Violet felt bad that the teachers were out of work so she retracted the claim
She assumed the Superintendent would operate on good faith
But instead she re-inforced mask mandates
We still have her bond
Stay tuned….
DON’T LET UP ON THESE PEOPLE!!!! They have been bribed/blackmailed and they will go right back to their ways until they see a consequence for their actions.
Stay strong patriots, we might need to create a few examples of individuals who end up having to file for bankruptcy. Its a small price to pay to FREE GOD’s CHILDREN from mask slavery!!!
Yesterday, I disclosed the secret identities of Neil Young and Joni Mitchell: mental midgets.
Today, I continue.
Each of these three new candidates approaches the generalized huge pile of horseshit in the town square from a different angle, and scoops up and flings different segments at the public.
Biden has been wrapped up and sold for some time. He’s captive. He’s a mouthpiece for Build Back Worse, economic destruction, censorship, COVID dictatorship, the dissolution of separate nations, and Cultural “Justice” (which means everybody loses in the end).
The cherry on the cake is, he can’t find his way from the shower to his bedroom in the White House residence. He’s demented. He suffered a very serious brain aneurysm in 1988, and hasn’t been the same since.
Before ’88, he was a snappy fast-talking senator who specialized in foreign policy. He was a guy everybody in government listened to, but studiously ignored. Now he’s in and out of several different worlds, none of them of his own choosing.
Midget.
Fauci has a trick which appears to make him look smart. He can select (or invent) inaccurate and ambiguous findings from medical studies and issue them as slam-dunk sound bites.
Fauci plays a scientist on television.
This is not hard to do. Any slightly above-average news anchor could fill his shoes. All he’d need is an overriding theme to guide him. “At any given moment, fabricate and announce the worst possible pandemic update.”
Fauci is a useful front man for Pharma, Bill Gates, the World Economic Forum, and the coagulated lung-obstructing mass of Rockefeller Globalists.
Midget.
Donald Trump, in 2020, turned over the Presidency of the United States to Anthony Fauci. That’s all you really need to know about Trump.
Thereafter, by proxy, he presided over the saturation bombing of the American economy—the economy he’d pledged to rescue and make great again.
He promoted the manifestly insane Warp Speed Plan to develop (the disastrously destructive) COVID vaccines. He knows nothing about vaccines, science, COVID, or any other related subject.
His view is: If a big corporation can make something and sell it in quantity, the product is great, the people who made it are great, and it’s great that they’re great.
He’s still out there on the campaign trail promoting the vaccine. He knows, by the booing from his followers, that many of them hate the vaccine, but this never prompts him to look below the surface and find out why.
He doesn’t look below the surface because he doesn’t want to, and he can’t. He doesn’t have the necessary attention span. He’s unable to coordinate information on his own. He relies on others to talk to him and tell him what’s what. These others tell him the vaccine is effective.
In the late winter of 2020, Fauci and Deborah Birx approached Trump with a computer projection from one of the biggest failures in his field, Neil Ferguson.
Ferguson had his own department at the Imperial College of London. The department was funded by Bill Gates. Ferguson predicted 2 million COVID deaths in the US by the summer of 2020.
Trump never questioned this projection. He never called a serious meeting of economic advisors to flesh out the long-term effects of lockdowns.
He quickly supported a national State of Emergency, signaling that the US was ready to shut down its economic engine and huddle in fear.
Midget.
Obviously, many others belong on this list. For example, Justin Trudeau, who is presently living in a velvet bunker to avoid the onslaught of the Canadian trucker convoy. If he’d been born into a different family, Justin would be lucky to be pumping gas at a lonely station in the Northern wilderness. His only recognizable talent is as a salesman—but in his case, he sells his country at the drop of a hat.
The basic takeaway here is, we are the Gullivers surrounded by the Lilliputians.
Treat them like the little scuzzballs they are.
And that concludes today’s episode of When Incompetent and/or Hostile Morons Rule Society.
Tune in tomorrow, when I ask the question: Why do “alt. people” reject every piece of the official COVID narrative, except the piece that starts with “the virus exists,” an announcement which emanates from elite labs no truly independent observer is permitted to enter?
Or to put it another way: If you were a moral coward whose professional and personal survival depended on applying your “scientific expertise” to an issue that had only one acceptable response, would you stand up and offer an opposite response, against all odds, or might you become a “trusted expert” who dispenses virological horseshit to “alt. people” who yearn to confirm the existence of the virus?
Guess the correct answer, and your name will be entered in our raffle. The final winner will fly to the North Pole to visit a fascinating cult whose only allowed inter-communication is the chant, VIRU, VIRU, VIRU. Now THESE are some outstanding midgets.
Also, be sure to tune into our other show, modeled after the popular series, Alaskan Bush People. Our offering is The Texas Bush People: War, Baseball, No Discernible Qualifications, George W Tells Everybody to Get Vaccinated. More midget-ness from The Great Family of American Politics.
“Viruses are small obligate intracellular parasites, which by definition contain either a RNA or DNA genome surrounded by a protective, virus-coded protein coat.”
Medical Microbiology, 4th edition, 1996
The question regarding the existence of pathogenic viruses remains an important one as the belief in such viruses dictates billions of dollars of resources and research funds. In the past two years we have also seen how an alleged virus can be used as a political tool to bring populations to heel. It is not the first time this has happened: for example, the “discovery” of HIV in the 1980s set up a multi-billion dollar industry and has also been used politically in most corners of the world. (The fallacies regarding the existence of the HIV particle and it causing AIDS are outlined in Virus Mania. For those wanting to dive more deeply into the arguments, I would recommend The Perth Group’s magnus opus on this topic.)
Independent journalist Jeremy Hammond who promotes himself as exposing “dangerous state propaganda” surrounding COVID-19 and the dangers of the vaccines, thus made the following curious statement in 2021:
“the false claim that SARS-CoV-2 has never been isolated (i.e., never proven to exist) greatly harms the credibility of the health freedom movement and is grounded in total ignorance of the science (the virus is constantly being isolated and whole genome sequenced by scientists all over the world)”
Jeremy Hammond, 9 March 2021
I would argue that the ignorance falls in Hammond’s lap as he appears to reach his conclusion by essentially repeating the claims made by virologists and reassuring the audience that their methodologies are valid. In recent weeks we have also seen Dr Joseph Mercola presenting Hammond’s interview and Steve Kirsch’s blog (that also makes appeals to virology authority) as “evidence” that SARS-CoV-2 exists. Kirsch states that he relies on “expert opinions of people I trust” which means that he has put the argument into the hands of others rather than investigating the issue himself. But is it wise for these health freedom fighters who are battling establishment COVID “experts” to not also question the establishment virologists?
Dr Andy Kaufman produced a point by point refutation of Hammond’s support of modern virology’s “isolation” methodology here, while Dr Tom Cowan warned that we are just getting started with dismantling virology’s nonsense here. Dr Sam Bailey has published many videos covering the virus isolation issue – most of which have been banned from YouTube but can still be found on Odysee. Additionally, in an essay I co-authored with Dr John Bevan-Smith, we describe the first pillar of the COVID-19 fraud as virology’s misuse of the term “isolation”. In summary, because virologists were unable to physically isolate any viruses last century, they simply changed the definition of the word so that even virologists admit the term is now used loosely. A strange state of affairs when the scientific method calls for precise terminology.
My observation over the past two years has been that many scientists, doctors, and journalists are happy to jump over this “isolation” chasm and cite the “coronavirus genomes” deposited in databases as proof that the virus must exist. For example, Steve Kirsch writes in his blog that:
“I know that Sabine Hazan verified that the sequence of the virus obtained from ATCC matched exactly what she found in people who have the virus.”
Steve Kirsch, 10 January 2022
He cites Hazan’s paper “Detection of SARS-CoV-2 from patient fecal samples by whole genome sequencing” as the evidence for this statement. Kirsch admits that he doesn’t know how the genomes were created, but his…
“scientist friends seem happy with them. At $2,000 a shot, I don’t think they’d market the product if it was contaminated and useless. Am I wrong?”
Steve Kirsch, 10 January 2022
Unfortunately, he appears to have been duped by the high-tech façade of virology’s genomics genie where “viruses” are created from various detected genetic sequences. In fact, sometimes the sequences are not really detected at all, as Dr Stefan Lanka is exposing in what may be virology’s death blow.
We can use Hazan’s paper as an example of the flawed methodology used in creating these “virus genomes”. The research team obtained faecal samples from 14 participants and proceeded to see what genetic sequences they could detect in the samples. We strike the first issue in the ‘methods’ section when they state that “included throughout sample processing was the SARS-CoV-2 positive control from ATCC (Heat-inactivated SARS-CoV-2, VR-1986HK; strain 2019-nCoV/USA-WA1/2020)” How did they know that the sample contained the inactivated virus? Because the ATCC (American Type Culture Collection) claims that it does on their website where they state “this strain was originally isolated from a human case in Washington state and was deposited by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.” And how did the CDC know that they had the virus? Because they claimed they found it in this paper here.
But where was the virus?
In the CDC’s paper, they say that they collected “clinical specimens from a case-patient who had acquired COVID-19 during travel to China and who was identified in Washington, USA”. It was concluded that the patient had COVID-19 based on a PCR result that detected some sequences said to come from SARS-CoV-2. But at this point they had no proof of any virus – all they had was some detected genetic sequences from a patient with an alleged viral infection. After performing a test tube tissue culture experiment on their clinical sample and claiming that there was evidence of a virus due to non-specific cytopathic effects, they began to construct their “genome”. They state that “we used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for confirmatory testing and sequencing.” This is another sleight of hand because the “viral lysate” was not demonstrated to come from a virus, it is simply a soup of broken up culture cells and other additives.
Similarly misleading was the claim they “extracted nucleic acid from isolates”. They have implied that they have isolated a virus and that they know which RNA sequences came from inside it. However, this would require the alleged viral particles to be truly physically isolated by purification, which they failed to do. And I say alleged because even if they purified the particles, it would still have to be shown that they meet the definition of a virus – including being parasitic and the causal agent of disease – something that was not demonstrated by these authors or any others.
In any case, how did they know which genetic sequences belonged to the “virus” in the first place? They “designed 37 pairs of nested PCRs spanning the genome on the basis of the coronavirus reference sequence (GenBank accession no. NC045512).” And where did this “reference sequence” come from? This relates to Fan Wu, et al’s paper describing the 41-year-old man who was admitted to the Central Hospital of Wuhan on 26 December 2019 with bilateral pneumonia and despite no new clinical features, was said to have a condition that was later called “COVID-19”.
The specimen was of crude lung washings, so it contained a mixture of human cells and potentially all sorts of other micro-organisms and genetic fragments. They simply asserted that there was a virus in the brew. From this mixed sample they blindly generated tens of millions of different sequences and then put their software to work to see how they could fit them all together. To do this “fitting” the software searched for “contigs” or areas where different fragments appear to have overlapping sequences. Of the hundreds of thousands of hypothetical sequences generated in this fashion they identified that the longest “continuous” sequence the computer could create was about 30,000 bases long and concluded that this software creation must be the genome of the presumed new virus.
They thought this was the genome because their hypothetically generated 30,000 base sequence was 89.1% similar to, “a bat SARS-like coronavirus (CoV) isolate—bat SL-CoVZC45”. The “genome” for the bat CoV “isolate” was generated in 2018 after “19 degenerated PCR primer pairs were designed by multiple alignment of available SARS-CoV and bat SL-CoV sequences deposited in GenBank, targeting almost the full length of the genome.” So in other words, they already knew the sequence to look for based on sequences that had previously been deposited in GenBank. But how did the producers of these already deposited sequences know that they had found viral genomes? Welcome to the circular reasoning of modern virology.
To explain the loop that virologists appear to be trapped inside, this 2019 paper published in Virology is illustrative of the problem:
“Three main methods based on HTS [High-throughput sequencing] are currently used for viral whole-genome sequencing: metagenomic sequencing, target enrichment sequencing and PCR amplicon sequencing, each showing benefits and drawbacks (Houldcroft et al., 2017). In metagenomic sequencing, total DNA (and/or RNA) from a sample including host but also bacteria, viruses and fungi is extracted and sequenced. It is a simple and cost-effective approach, and it is the only approach not requiring reference sequences. Instead, the other two HTS approaches, target enrichment and amplicon sequencing, both depend on reference information to design baits or primers.”
Maurier F, et al, “A complete protocol for whole-genome sequencing of virus from clinical samples,” Virology, May 2019.
Essentially this gets to the root of the problem. The “viral” reference genomes are being created through metagenomic sequencing but this is done on crude specimens (such as lung washings or unpurified tissue cultures) and then declarations that the selected sequences are viral in origin. So already there are two problems: firstly, there was no step (i.e. purification) to show that the sequences come from inside “viruses” and secondly, as described above, the computer generated “genomes” are simply assembled hypothetical models from small genetic fragments, not something that has been proven to exist in nature as a whole 30,000 base sequence. However, these in silico models then effectively become the “virus” and an entity such as SARS-CoV-2 is created. Once the first of such a sequence is deposited on a database, the “virus” can be “found” by others through the same flawed metagenomic techniques. Or as stated in the Virology paper, it can be “found” through target enrichment and amplicon sequencing (usually PCR), but this requires you to have a reference sequence…that is, a template that was invented in silico by metagenomic sequencing where the provenance of the genetic fragments was unknown.
There is no part in the above process that establishes either:
1) the genetic composition of any imaged or imagined particles; or
2) the biological nature of such particles, i.e. what they actually do.
It’s a good-looking nano-particle alright, but what is it made of and what does it do?
So, now can we return to Hazan’s paper to see that it is a pointless exercise in virological nonsense. They state that along with their “SARS-CoV-2 positive control from ATCC”, the “patient genomes were compared to the Wuhan-Hu-1 (MN90847.3) SARS-CoV-2 reference genome”. Accession number MN90847.3 refers to the updated “genome” said to have been found in the 41-year-old man from Wuhan as discussed above in Fan Wu, et al’s paper. The circle is complete – at no stage was it demonstrated that there was any virus by following this evidence trail of “genomes”. Fan Wu’s team never found a virus, they simply asserted that their genetic sequence computer simulation was a “new RNA virus strain from the family Coronaviridae” without proving that the sequence existed in nature or came from inside a virus. Hence, there was no “detection of SARS-CoV-2 from patient fecal samples” as the title of the Hazan paper claimed, unless “SARS-CoV-2” means genetic sequences of who-knows-what from who-knows-where. It doesn’t matter where or how often these sequences are detected – they have never been proven to be viral in nature. So, when Steve Kirsch stated that Hazan “verified that the sequence of the virus obtained from ATCC matched exactly what she found in people who have the virus,” he is mistaken.
The border crossing between Coutts, Alberta (CA) and Sweet Grass, Montana (USA) continues to be blocked as truckers allied against COVID-19 restrictions and vaccine passports are united. The Alberta protests are in support of the larger trucker protest taking place in Ottawa.
Canadian authorities in the province of Alberta have tried and failed to get the Canadian truckers to back down from their border blockade. The U.S. truckers are supportive of their Canadian allies, and both groups are united in the effort. The blockade is a protest against US and Canadian governments mandating that truckers must be “fully vaccinated” against Covid-19, which came into effect on January 15.
According to Coutts Mayor Jim Willett, about 100 trucks were blocking Highway 4 on the Canadian side, causing a miles-long backup on Interstate 15 in Montana. About 50-100 trucks have reportedly been stuck on the US side since Saturday.
In an effort to remove the blockade, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) have cut off the supporters who were bringing food and supplies to the truckers. The familiar and typical ‘cut off the supply line‘ maneuver.
BREAKING: After promises from RCMP of allowing food and supplies to the blockage of truckers, the checkpoints still aren't allowing them through. They are making them WALK in the freezing weather into Coutts from Milk River, Alberta. pic.twitter.com/Vkf0EXeUWu
I was not planning on doing any more articles nor devoting any more of my time to Steve Kirsch after my response to his claim that “SARS-COV-2” has been isolated. It was clear to me after reading his blog post that he did not understand what he was writing about. Even if it wasn’t clear to anyone reading, Steve took the liberty of outright admitting that he did not understand the topic as he relied on “experts” to tell him what to think and believe:
I rely on expert opinions of people who I trust for certain issues like whether or not the virus has been “isolated.” -Steve Kirsch
After the blog post came out, there were some exchanges between Steve and Christine Massey, who has done an amazing job of destroying the “virus” isolation lie with her Freedom of Information requests. She confronted Steve about his “isolation” claim and brilliantly pointed out why he was wrong. Instead of conceding that she was right and that he clearly did not understand the topic, Steve hunkered down on his ridiculous claim and pushed her for a 5 hour live debate with his “experts” in order to let the audience decide which side was right in the “SARS-COV-2” isolation argument. Disregarding the ridiculousness of the 5 hour time frame and the desire for the audience to decide a winner, Steve was attempting to sit on the sidelines and play matchmaker by pitting his “experts” against Christine. Once she enlisted the help of a team of her own experts, Steve seemingly panicked and decided to exit stage left.
This is just a brief summary of what transpired over the course of a few weeks in January 2022 and I may not have done the exchange justice. However, while the debate-that-never-was is an interesting story, it is not my main focus. In fact, I would have left this whole Steve Kirsch situation in the wastebasket where it belongs until I saw his parting shots at the “virus does not exist” community. In his attempt to save face by passing the responsibility of debating Christine and her experts off to his readers (which shouldn’t be shocking as he is seemingly skilled at passing responsibility off to “experts”), Steve shared some additional outlandish claims made by his “experts” regarding “virus” purification. Here are a few brief highlights from his post:
Does anyone want to debate “Does the virus exist?”
If course it does, but there are followers of Sam Bailey, Stefan Lanka, Thomas Cowan, Andrew Kaufman, and Christine Massey who claim it doesn’t.
“I’m not willing to invest my time in this debate, but if you want to challenge Sam Bailey, Stefan Lanka, Thomas Cowan, Andrew Kaufman, and Christine Massey, please let me know in the comments.”
“Basically, purifying a virus is difficult and there is no reason in today’s world to do it, so it isn’t done. The FOIA requests they issue are a publicity stunt that they know will fail. That’s very disingenuous of them not to reveal that.”
“Also, the people I talk to fully acknowledge there is no purified virus, but that it isn’t needed because they can do everything they need to do without it. Lanka et al. claim it is needed. So it’s now just a matter of opinion. Neither side is going to convince the other side. That’s what happened.”
“The reason nobody has purified the virus is there is no need to do so in today’s world where gene sequencing is readily available.”
First, I would like to point out Steve’s apparent Freudian slip while attempting to declare the “virus” exists: “If course it does.” Not a typo on my part. I’m not here to play grammar police as I make plenty of spelling errors myself. I just thought it was an amusingly ironic way to start his post. Since Steve is unwilling to invest his time in a debate, maybe he could devote it to proofreading?
Now that the fun is out of the way, let’s get to the nitty-gritty on “virus” purification. According to Steve’s “experts,” the purification of a “virus” is too difficult and is no longer necessary. They believe that in today’s world of molecular virology, purifying “viruses” does not need to occur as a genome can be obtained from the genetic soup full of host and other unknown “non-viral” RNA/DNA. They believe that it is possible to obtain a genome for an unknown “virus” by piecing it together from the millions of reads of random RNA aquired from these unrelated sources within the sample. Thus, Steve and Co. want you to believe that purification, i.e. the very steps used to rid a sample of contaminants, pollutants, foreign material, etc. in order to isolate it, is not necessary any more as technology has advanced beyond these primitive methods. Putting aside the fact that the admittance by Steve and Co. that purified “SARS-COV-2” does not exist destroys their previous claims of “virus” isolation, does Steve’s “expert” advice on purification hold up?
No. Not at all. At least, not according to these experts:
“That such “purification” is an indispensable prerequisite for detecting viruses and creating valid antibody and PCR tests based on them is also stated by scientists who are the most renowned in the world, among them:
White and Fenner: “It’s an essential pre-requisite.” Luc Montagnier: “It is necessary.” Robert Gallo: “You have to purify.” Marcel Tanner: “If a pure SARS-CoV-2 isolate cannot be documented by the IVI [=Institute of Virology and Immunology] in Bern, then we have a problem.” (siehe here). Françoise Barré-Sinoussi: “… you have to purify the virus from all this mess.” Jean-Claude Chermann: “Yes, of course… Absolutely.” David Gordon: “It’s a natural step from obtaining the virus in cell culture to then obtain purified virus.” Dominic Dwyer: “The purification, as far as one can go, is important in analysis of any virus or bacteria, for that matter well.” Wan Beom Park: “In the outbreak situation, isolation of causative virus is indispensable for developing and evaluating diagnostic tools, therapeutics, and vaccine candidates.”
I’m not positive who Steve’s “experts” are, but the people listed above are well-known and respected scientists and virologists. While they may disagree with the fact that “viruses” do not exist, they all accept that purification of a “virus” is an absolutely necessary and essential step. It is a prerequisite.
Those listed above are not the only experts claiming purification is necessary. An interview with Professor: Dr. Osamu Nakagomi from the Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences Molecular Epidemiology, who is an expert on the subject matter, states as much as well:
Fundamentals of Ultracentrifugal Virus Purification
“In recent years, in virus research, it has become a standard practice to purify and analyze genomes and identify viruses from samples using commercial kits. Since for the established viruses their genomes have already been known, virus identification is possible even in a mixed state. However, to carry out detailed investigation on the nature of viruses, it is first necessary to refine the virus particles in order to yield a high level of purified materials.”
Please discuss the necessity of ultracentrifugation in virus research.
“When extracting virus genome using the classical method, the virus particles must first be purified. Then the virus genome extracted from the particles is examined. Ultracentrifugation plays an important role in the process. Purifying the virus particles makes it possible from the beginning to ensure that we are dealing with the rotavirus genomes in the virus particles.Currently such analysis is performed almost all the time after hastily extracting the genome without actually purifying the specimen. This practice is common since the genome of rotavirus is well established and it is a common knowledge that if the genome (Fig. 1 ) characteristic of rotavirus is present, there is no doubt that the genome is present in rotavirus particles as well. However, suppose, for example, that we are dealing with the problem of determining what kind of host cell organelles or virus proteins and genomes are aggregated in an infected cell, ultracentrifugation becomes indispensable. Moreover, while studying new viruses, it becomes increasingly necessary to investigate whether or not the genome is present in the particle. In such cases, purification with an ultracentrifuge becomes a necessity. Information on the buoyant density, size and sedimentation coefficient (Svedberg value, S value), all of which are taken into consideration in ultracentrifugation, is in fact the fundamental aspect of virology which taken together are called the physiochemical properties of viruses.”
I wonder if Steve and Co. would be able to point out “SARS-COV-2” from these unpurified EM images if we took out the labels?
As can be seen by Dr. Osamu Nakagomi as well as the experts listed above, purification is entirely necessary, especially in instances with “novel viruses” such as “SARS-COV-2,” which Steve and Co. admit has never been purified. Without purification, there are numerous host cell organelles and other proteins, microrganisms, bacteria, etc. within the sample and thus there can be no claims of isolation. There would be no way to be able to determine that the RNA used to create the “SARS-COV-2” genome came from one source. In fact, the only time Dr. Nakagomi states purification is not necessary is when the genome is already known and established, thus purification is a neccesary step to obtain the initial genome. Yet this creates a bit of a conundrum. Where has it ever been shown that the particles assumed to be “viruses” were ever purified and isolated directly from a sick human in order to obtain the original genome for any “virus?” At some point in the history of “viral” genomes, this purification and isolation process must have been carried out before any genome for any “virus” could have been obtained and considered accurate and reliable. However, it has never been done, especially for “coronaviruses” as I outlined here.
The “SARS-COV-2” genome was nonexistent and there was no prior knowledge of its sequence. The genome was created from unpurified broncoalveloar fluid (BALF) from one patient and cobbled together in a computer from other unpurified reference genomes made in a similar way. In a document by the WHO regarding sequencing genomes using metagenomics, such as was done for the original “SARS-COV-2” genome, it is admitted that high “non-viral” host material will also be sequenced. They claim that purification steps such as centrifugation and filtration are supposed to be done yet even purifying samples will still lead to a high number of “off-target, non-viral” reads:
Genomic sequencing of SARS-CoV-2
“Depletion of host or other non-SARS-CoV-2 genetic material in a sample leads to a higher proportion of SARS-CoV-2 reads in generated sequence data and therefore a higher chance of recovering a full genome.SARS-CoV-2 metagenomic approaches therefore typically include steps to remove host and bacterial cells, through either centrifugation or filtration prior to RNA extraction, or chemical or enzymatic removal of unwanted DNA/RNA. This is easier for liquid samples, from which cells can be more easily separated, such as bronchoalveolar lavage (Table 4). Ribosomal RNA (rRNA) and DNA content are also commonly depleted during library preparation for virus RNA sequencing, and carrier RNA is often omitted from extractions or replaced with linear polyacrylamide. Despite such measures, samples may still contain high quantities of off-target host DNA/RNA that may also be sequenced. Metagenomic approaches therefore generally benefit from input of samples with high virus loads (such that a reasonable proportion of the genetic material in the sample is virus).”
“Metagenomic sequencing typically produces high numbers of off-target, non-virus reads. It is also often (though not always, depending on the sequencing platform and multiplexing) more costly than targeted capture-based or amplicon-based sequencing approaches, because more data have to be produced to generate one SARS-CoV-2 genome. Moreover, pretreatment steps that are particularly beneficial for metagenomics, such as centrifugation, are not typically performed for molecular diagnostic assays so new extractions that incorporate pretreatment steps may have to be performed for metagenomic sequencing.”
Another source on the advantages and disadvantages of genomic sequencing states that contamination, such as that by bacteria which is sure to be present without purification, will lead to inaccurate genomes:
“Factors outside the control of the service provider tasked with isolation and sequencing of DNA can negatively influence the quality of the genome sequence and therefore its interpretation. This can include the quality of the DNA sample provided for analysis, such as low quantity, high bacterial contamination, or sample degradation. Such factors can even prevent the procedure from being undertaken. In such a circumstance, the client might be obliged to deliver a new sample.”
Since Steve and Co. admit that “SARS-COV-2” has never been purified, yet purification is a prerequisite for “novel viruses” in order to obtain an accurate genome, how can they claim that this step is unnecessary?
It’s probably due to the other fact which Steve admitted to: purification is difficult. However, I would go one step further and say that when dealing with nano-sized particles, purification is impossible. I will not go into too much detail in this post as I have outlined the purification problems here and here. However, it has been admitted numerous times that it is impossible to separate “viruses” from exosomes and other extracellular vesicles that co-sediment together. There is no one method, whether ultracentrifugation, filtration, precipitation, etc., that can completely purify the “viruses.” Although you can find similar statements in some of the posts I linked, I will provide a recent article which focused on the need for purifying RNA for epigenetic studies. The authors supply various purification methods and then admit that none of them alone are sufficient to purify “viruses” from host-derived impurities. These impurities then impact the creation of the genome and any study relating to it. Even when combined, they can only claim that these methods will increase “virus” yield and quality, not completely purify the particles.
“The relatively low abundance of viral genomic material within the nucleic acid milieu of clinical samples places constraints on the utility of epigenetics-related applications, like m6A RNA methylation ELISAs, to specifically study the virus epigenome. Such assays require highly pure input material, free from host-derived impurities whose epigenetic modifications can also be detected and interfere with results.”
“The methods included above are generally not sufficient, when performed alone, for adequate purification of viruses. Studies focused on the virus epigenome require highly pure input material, without interference from the epigenetic modifications of host DNA, RNA, or protein. Combinations of the aforementioned methods can increase viral recovery, yield, and quality.”
Even when the purification steps are performed on samples, there will always be many known and unknown identical particles with various sources of genetic material within the sample. Contamination is a widespread problem both in cell culturing and genomics. This makes electron microscopy imaging and the creation of a genome utterly meaningless and useless as proof of a “virus.” In order to hammer this point home, here are a few highlights from a 1996 Manuel on “virus” purification:
“Virus purification is the physical separation of virus in a concentrated form from the host cell milieu in which it has grown. Viruses need tobe purified for many studies in which properties or structure of the virus must be distinguished from those of the host cells or culture medium, such as analyses of structure of viral polypeptides, function of membrane glycoproteins, etc.”
Criteria of purity
“The observation of particles in the electron microscope, whilst not a good criterion of purity, does allow the detection of ‘unwanted structures’.
It would be expected that constituents of the medium would form a major part of the contaminants of purified virus preparations. This can be monitored by gel diffusion tests, where antisera raised against e.g. calf serum, or uninfected cells can be reacted with virus preparation.”
As can be seen, “viruses” must be purified in order for the structure and physical properties of the “virus” to be distinguished from host cells and the culture medium. The constituents of the culture medium are said to be the bulk of the contaminants in purified “virus.” This would include the fetal bovine serum which is added to nearly every culture which is a completely separate source of RNA from the host source. They fail to mention the added animal RNA which would come from the Vero cells regularly used for culturing as in the case of “SARS-COV-2.” All of this “non-viral” material would need to be eliminated first along with the host material as well as possible contamination from bacteria, exosomes, MVB’s, other microrganisms, etc. before a genome could be considered valid. Otherwise, there is no realistic way of knowing which RNA belongs to which source within the mixture and whether or not the computer-generated genome is an amalgamation of the RNA stitched together from those numerous sources.
It is clear that purification is an absolutely necessary process, even though the methods themselves are flawed and unable to completely purify these preparations. This is why Steve and Co. claim it is “difficult” (i.e. impossible) to purify “viruses,” that it is no longer necessary, and why they want to skip over this step entirely. They know it is impossible. They know that they can not supply a single study where the particles claimed to be “viruses” were completely purified and isolated directly from a sick host. They can not even show this in papers where “viruses” are cultured. They want you to believe that technology has advanced to a point where it can pick through these unpurified mixtures of RNA in order to piece together a theoretical representation of an unseen “virus” in the form of a genome. Even if this was a logical argument (it’s not), a genome from unpurified samples would be at best INDIRECT evidence, not DIRECT evidence of a “virus.”
Fortunately, even disregarding the sources I’ve shared above which completely dispute Steve and Co., we can rely on logic and critical thinking to understand that their claims are ridiculous. In order for a genome to be considered valid evidence, the entity being sequenced must be shown to actually exist in reality first. One can not just assume an unseen “virus” is within the unpurified sample from the start without ever verifying that it actually exists to begin with. This requires that the particles claimed to be “viruses” be found in a state completely free of contaminants, pollutants, and foreign material as well as separated from everything else. In order for this to occur, the sample must be put through the steps of purification (centrifugation, filtration, precipitation, etc.) so that it can be shown to exist in an isolated state. Only then can proof of pathogeniticity be aquired using the purified particles as a valid independent variable in order to establish cause and effect. Only then can the particles identified in EM images be said to be the “virus.” Only then could a genome be aquired. Only then can the “virus” be fully characterized.
Without purification, Steve and Co. have no “virus.”
And so we get to the crux of the problem with relying on “experts” to do the thinking for you. Steve has relied on his “experts” to tell him that the purification process is unnecessary. He allowed the “experts” to tell him that the definition of isolation means to add many things together rather than what it actually means which is to exist in a state separated from everything else. He did not do a cursory bit of research to understand that his so-called “experts” are wrong. However, their inaccurate claims are now his to defend. Sadly, Steve is adamant that, while he was willing to invest the time to write a blog post about his unwillingness to do a debate, he is not willing to invest his time to actually defend his claims in a debate. So the way I see it, Steve has three options:
Find the time to debate Christine and her experts to defend his ridiculous claims.
Find new “experts” who understand the methods used for the purification and isolation of “viruses” and why they are necessary.
Find the time to do his own research and utilize critical thinking and logic to discern truth for himself rather than relying on “experts” to do the thinking for him.
I’m hoping Steve chooses option # 3. However, I’m not holding my breath.
Event organizers for Freedom Convoy 2022 join us to share details of the planned events for the truckers’ arrival in Ottawa and speeches in Parliament Hill from Saturday to Monday.
With the world watching Canadian truckers lead the charge in removing all Covid and vaccine mandates, Adopt-A-Trucker.ca volunteers Chris, Bethan Nodwell, RN, and Daniel Bulford, ex-RCMP, each discuss their pivotal roles in organizing the next phase at the end of the road for the convoy and how people can support truckers through volunteering and donations for food, accommodations, housing…
Canadians’ emotions and hopes for a restoration of freedoms have never been higher in the last 2 years and the upcoming events will be sure to continue capturing the hearts and attention of freedom-loving citizens around the world.
Saturday, January 29 (Parliament Hill 10 am to 4 pm ET) – truckers arrive in Ottawa in the morning with speeches to follow starting around noon
Sunday, January 30 (Parliament Hill noon to 4 pm ET) – speeches from medical and scientific experts and influencers
Monday, January 31 (Parliament Hill noon to 4 pm ET) – speeches from politician
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: International Criminal Proceeding Resembling a Grand Jury Investigation — as a Procedural Foundation for Future Indictments — to Begin Early February 2022
[Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: February 5, 2022 update — The interview below took place at the end of January 2022. See Day 1 of the Grand Jury proceedings that took place today. You can follow the work of the Corona Investigative Committee, including Grand Jury proceedings at Odysee.]
Truth Comes to Light editor’s note:
The following transcript is a brief excerpt from the video (found below the transcript) wherein Reiner Fuellmich explains the nature and purpose of upcoming international criminal proceedings which are being organized by the Corona Investigative Committee.
“We’re gonna start an international criminal proceeding — which is a model proceeding — very soon, probably at the end of next week.
[…]
There’s going to be three days of discussions with the experts.
[…]
And this proceeding, of course, is not going to be filed in one of the existing courts of law, of the old system.
But we’re using an institution, a procedural institution, which is the American grand jury investigation, as a procedural foundation for what we’re doing.
We have real lawyers, a real judge, real experts and real witnesses with whom we will tell the story. And that is the main objective.
[…]
We want to get indictments against those figureheads who we think we should go after.
That’s Drosten. He invented the PCR test, claiming that his version of the PCR test can tell us something about infections. Full well, knowing that he’s lying.
Two, Mr. Fauci in the United States. He’s the one who pushed the corona issue there.
And three, Tedros, whose WHO recommended these lies to the entire world. Two lies basically — asymptomatic infections, which don’t exist, and the PCR test can tell us about infections.
Then Bill Gates, as one of the figureheads who are making money out of this.
And probably Pfizer and Black Rock.
Pfizer as a representative of the pharmaceutical industry. They’re making a lot of money right now. And Blackrock as the financial institution for which much of the money is being funnelled into our systems to gain control, through the global corporations, over all of us.
But this particular proceeding is only designed to get indictments.
Its second biggest purpose is to give people… through a real legal proceeding, a full picture of what’s really going on — on all three levels.
There’s one level which deals with the question ‘Is are really a pandemic?’. Well, there is a pandemic, but it’s not a corona pandemic, it’s a PCR test pandemic.
And as soon as you reach this conclusion, the question is ‘Well, if it’s not about health, what is it about?”.
Two things that they want to divert our attention from. One is the criminal activities that they, the other side, has been conducting through the financial industry — which is really a misnomer because this is not an industry. They don’t produce anything. They they destroy everything. So a better word is probably financial mafia because they’ve been looting and plundering our public coffers for the last three, four decades, maybe longer.
And it was about to implode, this whole system was about to implode, during the swine flu. And, no, that is not a coincidence. It was then that it was very, very obvious to all of us that the so-called financial industry had been stealing money from us.
The major platform on which they discuss this is, of course, the Davos clique’s World Economic Forum in Davos [Switzerland]. It was very, very obvious at the time that they have really been stealing our money.
[…]
We now understand, of course, that our politicians are not our politicians anymore, but they’re their puppets. Many of them have gone through their own politician production facility which is the Young Global Leaders program.
[…]
The real goal of this pandemic is to be able to shut down, destroy, our economies for the benefit of American platforms — like Uber, as far as the taxi business is concerned, Amazon, for all retail business. And we don’t quite know what to make of the role of the Chinese and this. What we do know is that they are part of a group of people who are dividing the spoils amongst themselves — because they’re trying to take over our car industry, probably the US car industry as well.
So this is quite a complicated picture but not too complicated. And we believe that through this proceeding, we can make this visible to everyone.
And once people understand this — and this is the ultimate goal of this — they will understand that it’s they who have to get up and fight.
They not only have a right to resist but they have a duty to resist. Because this is about life and death.“
The head of the Corona Committee, Dr. Reiner Füllmich, announced that the Grand Jury Trial will take place in early February, during which evidence against the four architects of the pandemic will be presented to a panel, structured like a court of law, based on natural law. The end result of a grand jury proceeding is a decision whether or not to indict. In this case the general public will be the jury. The result of this process will be a better informed public that knows about the big picture and thereby understands why indictments must occur. Dr Füllmich believes the narrative have now shifted, and that he, with the help of the people with good intentions all over the world, now is ready to send the perpetrators of the pandemic ”straight to hell”.
At 2:01:20 in to the following link, you can watch the press conference in Brussels 2022-01-23 featured in the interview with lawyer Dr Reiner Fuellmich, lawyer Vivianne Fischer and WHO whistleblower Dr Astrid Stuckelberger:
Prosecution notification of the SWEDISH DRUG AUTHORITY to the Uppsala Prosecutor by assistant professor, physician and doctor Björn Hammarskjöld. Eighteenth of January 2022 (In Swedish):
Prosecution notification of the SWEDISH DRUG AUTHORITY to the Uppsala Prosecutor by assistant professor, physician and doctor Björn Hammarskjöld ADJUSTMENT. Twentieth of January 2022 (In Swedish):
According to professor Hammarskjöld the Swedish government has spent 2.6 Billon € on testing for rtRT-PCR tests up until week 2 of 2022. Hammarskjöld citizises the decision since there has not been a single life saved by the money spent doing all these tests.
Just during weeks 1 and 2 of 2022, there has been almost one million tests done costing 110 Millon € (In Swedish):
0:50 Summary of the last interview ”Reiner Füllmich and 50 lawyers: The vaccines are designed to kill and depopulate the planet”.
02:15 Press conference in Brussels with Astrid Struckelberger, Reiner Füllmich and Vivianne Fischer who were participating in the large rallies taking place. When Füllmich was about to hold his speech at the rallies, the police dispersed the crowd.
04:30 Indictments will happen against the people accused of causing the world wide problem with the pandemic; Drosten, for promoting his version of the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test kit claiming these tests can say something about infectious diseases. Anthony Fauci, head of the NIAID for pushing the false narrative in the USA, Tedros Adhanom for spreading inaccurate and unscientific recommendations through the WHO such as asymptomatic infections and the PCR-tests for diagnosis. Bill Gates as a figurehead for profit in this agenda. Pfizer as a representative for the pharmaceutical industry and Blackrock as a global financial company.
06:15 Why is the pandemic happening? Füllmich views this as a distraction from criminal activity the same way the mafia works. He takes as an example how the financial crisis in 2008 stole assets from the people without the politicians doing anything about it.
08:35 The real goal number 2, according to Füllmich, is to shut down our economy, in favor of companies such as Über and Amazon, by destroying the retail system. The struggle is about life and death. The public institutions are waking up to the corruption and starting prosecutions against the perpetrators in the USA.
10:35 ”No mercy to those b*stards”. ”The people who are pulling the strings are truly evil”.
12:23 The grand jury investigation will go on for four weeks. How to get people to understand the new system of justice that will be used to handle the case against the suspects? Natural law, which Füllmich means leads directly to human rights, will be used. He believes the world is in a state of war and thus, the natural law which can be used in war are applicable in handling the pandemic crimes. Why following bad orders is not an excuse and may lead to jail.
15:10 A tour in the United States will start in March and will go on until May in order to inform the American people about the truth regarding the pandemic. Famous persons within this field will participate.
16:27 What date will the grand jury begin? Füllmich would say that his assumption made in the interview published on the tenth of January saying ”the narrative will shift within two to three weeks” was accurate. Boris Johnson in the UK was getting massive criticism for ‘partying’ and not following his own restrictions.
19:45 Professor Björn Hammarskjöld has filed a complaint to the Medical Board of Sweden (Läkemedelsverket) due to components in the vials not listed in the medical description. Professor Hammarskjöld has himself witnessed two persons becoming magnetic in the area of injection of the so called corona vaccines.
21:40 Norwegian doctors i Oslo discovered material in the vaccines which is not supposed to be given to humans and is not legal according to citizen journalist Ulf Bittner.
23:04 Pfizer did not include the information on these so called vaccine chemicals in the documents submitted to the EMA – Why not? Almost all the studies on the vaccines are totally false, according to Füllmich. This, he believes was done in order to mislead the people.
25:35 LOT-numbers and lethality
26:39 WHO whistleblower Astrid Struckelberger comments on the African tactics of experimentation. WHO created the cases needed to declare a pandemic. Bill Gates who is funding the WHO, involved Drosten to construct the foundation to declare a global pandemic on false premises by PCR- results.
28:48 How close are you to getting the full picture of what is going on? The experts giving their testimonies to the Corona Committee include; former vice- president of Pfizer Dr Mike Yeadon, Nobel prize winner Professor Luc Montagnier, former investment banker and Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Cathrine Austin Fitts, and developer of mRNA technology Dr Robert Malone. Füllmich believes the full picture of what is happening is almost complete. Legal proceedings are being done so that people will understand and then find the will to to take their freedom back.
31:50 The people participating in the trials are also filing cases in their own courts of law. Füllmich hopes people who believe the narrative of the pandemic is false will follow their example.
33:25 How likely is it that anyone will enforce the punishment to the people prosecuted if they are convicted – when taking in to consideration that the trial is happening outside the normal judicial system? Füllmich explains there will be no sentences and the process is being done as an investigation which will lead to indictments. The judiciaries in Europe are too corrupt to be used for this purpose.
37:15 Professor Hammarskjöld sums up the costs of the performed PCR-tests in Sweden. According to Hammarskjöld, nearly one million PCR-tests have been done during the first two weeks of 2022 in Sweden at a cost of 110 euro per test. The total amount of money spent on the Swedish PCR-tests he reports are now 2,6 billion Euros. This can be compared to the annual costs of the ICU care units, which is only 3 billion Euros. Ten people are dying per day with covid in Sweden.
39:31 There are two camps in the Corona Committee regarding the existence of the virus. One claims there has been a scientific, correctly performed isolation of the virus, while the other claims the opposite. This is however not something that Dr Füllmich views as a question which has importance to the case or has relevance to the trials. He believes the entire system needs to be rebuilt from scratch, and this includes the field of science and research.
Sleezballs is too mild a term for the scum of the Earth who have taken over the field of medicine and public health. Just for starters, Fauci and Gates are running neck and neck for the most disgusting examples of what humans can become, and the CEO of Pfizer seems to take the cake for the number one medical monster of history. This list goes on and down into the rank and file of medical doctors who have thrown their brains away so they can ignore all the suffering and dying that COVID vaccines are bringing to the public.
A complaint with the International Criminal Court (ICC) accused 16 individuals of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression. The 16 defendants include Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Peter Daszak, Bill and Melinda Gates, the CEOs of Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson, U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson along with several other British authorities, as well as the presidents of the Rockefeller Foundation and the World Economic Forum.
Hitler’s medical monsters were hung after the Nuremberg Trials, and it’s anyone’s guess how far this and other legal processes will go against our present crop of medical monsters. However, in terms of the gain of function research that medical devils who invested billions in creating COVID, we could line up the nasty deeds of all the evil men in history and still not balance the scales. So it is now or never for medicine, humanity, truth, justice, and the prevalence of good over evil.
The whole game of detracting the reality of this pandemic resulting from lab-created gain of function research is so the principal people involved would not be shot on sight. Die from taking one of these experimental COVID shots, and the chances are excellent your life insurance company will rule death by suicide and not pay your family the benefits.
Its insane actions now are killing people while seeking to punish those who refuse to walk sheepishly into America’s version of the gas chamber, the Anthony Fauci “vaccines.” ~ James Howard Kunstler
No writer can vomit enough bad words to address the glee of Fauci as he predicts vaccinating babies with COVID shots. No one can cry enough tears for the mothers who trusted their doctors only to lose their babies in the womb. There must be three thousand of them. Is anyone in the world of medicine crying for them? Have we gotten so stone cold?
U.S. health officials claim no one has died due to the COVID jabs proving to the world how deliberately blind influential medical and health leaders can be. They are standing at the edge of a precipice because official vaccine adverse event reporting systems in Europe, England, and America easily together report 50,000 deaths and millions of severe vaccine reactions.
But yes, anyone can remain a complete idiot and pretend COVID vaccines are safe and effective. Did anyone ever guess how many complete idiots there were in modern medicine and public health two years ago?
If anyone thinks I am exaggerating things a bit, read: On January 1, 2022, video announcement Dr. Reiner Fuellmich— a U.S.-German consumer protection trial lawyer and co-founder of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee announced they now have in their possession damaging data, “enough to dismantle the entire vaccine industry.”
How Bad Can the Bad Be?
Fuellmich even has evidence that the vaccine makers were using different lot numbers to carry out an experiment within an experiment, unbeknownst to the public. According to Fuellmich, it looks like an experiment to determine the dosage needed to kill and maim people. In other words, people have not been getting identical products. Different lots or batches contain different dosages and even different ingredients. It looks like five percent of the batches caused 100 % of the deaths.
Intracranial infection cases up 60-fold since vaccines rolled out.
A 10-year-old girl from São Paolo, Brazil, has suffered a cardiac arrest and was in critical condition 12 hours after taking a dose of the Pfizer vaccine. Following the incident, the municipality of Lençóis Paulista suspended the vaccination of children aged between 5 and 11 years old for seven days. However, the Government of São Paulo and the Ministry of Health claimed that the cardiac arrest was not caused by the COVID vaccine but by a mysterious Martian ray gun. After all, Pfizer vaccines are safe, so it is impossible they could be the cause of such problems.
Conclusion
James Howard Kunstler writes, “The American people have been played backward and forwards, inside and out, through and through, and up and down; driven to the very edge of national suicide by a combine of enemies within and without. If China’s CCP wanted to take maximum advantage of a weakened, confused USA, they couldn’t have found more zealous help-mates than the seditious Democratic Party, along with Dr. Anthony Fauci’s treasonous public health empire, the murderous pharmaceutical companies, the recklessly dishonest news media, and a demonic host of federal agencies, especially the three-stooge “Intel Community” — the CIA (Moe), DOJ (Larry), FBI (Curley) — plus the many secret horror chambers in the Pentagon. Throw in the Big Tech tyrants, the Marxist mandarins on campus, and the satanic narcissists of Hollywood. Oh, and let’s not forget the evil principality of grift and swindling that is Wall Street.”
Time to pray to your Fauci candle, the saint of modern medicine, or is he the ultimate sleaze bag?
OTTAWA: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms today filed a lawsuit in Federal Court seeking to strike down the federal government’s mandatory Covid-19 vaccine requirements for air travellers. The court action is on behalf of several Canadians from across Canada whose Charter rights and freedoms have been infringed.
On October 30, 2021, the federal government announced that anyone travelling by air, train, or ship, must be fully vaccinated. The travel vaccination mandate has prevented approximately 6 million unvaccinated Canadians (15% of Canada’s population) from travel within Canada and prevents them from flying out of Canada. Some of the Canadians involved in the lawsuit cannot travel to help sick loved ones, get to work, visit family and friends, take international vacations, and live ordinary lives.
The main applicant in the case is former Newfoundland Premier, The Honourable A. Brian Peckford. Mr. Peckford, pictured, is the only surviving drafter and signatory 40 years after the 1982 Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted.
“It is becoming more obvious that being vaccinated does not stop people from getting Covid and does not stop them from spreading it”, says the former Premier. “The government has not shown that the policy makes flying safer—it simply discriminates”, he notes. “When I heard Prime Minister Trudeau call the unvaccinated ‘racists,’ ‘misogynists, ‘anti-science’ and ‘extremist’ and his musing ‘do we tolerate these people?’ it became clear he is sowing divisions and advancing his vendetta against a specific group of Canadians—this is completely against the democratic and Canadian values I love about this country”, adds Mr. Peckford.
“The federal travel ban has segregated me from other Canadians. It’s discriminatory, violates my Charter rights and that’s why I am fighting the travel ban,” explains Mr. Peckford.
The Justice Centre’s legal challenge cites violations of Charter rights including mobility, life, liberty and security of the person, privacy, and discrimination. The lawsuit also challenges whether the Minister of Transportation has the jurisdiction to use aviation safety powers to enforce public health measures.
In discussing effective border control measures at the start of the Covid-19 outbreak, Canada’s chief medical officer, Dr. Tam, said: “As you move further away from that epicentre, any other border measures are much less effective. Data on public health has shown that many of these are actually not effective at all… WHO advises against any kind of travel and trade restrictions, saying that they are inappropriate and could actually cause more harm than good in terms of our global effort to contain.” (Canada House of Commons, Standing Committee on Health Meeting, February 5, 2020)
The World Health Organization (“WHO”) continues to maintain that position and on January 19, 2022, urged all countries to: “Lift or ease international traffic bans as they do not provide added value and continue to contribute to the economic and social stress experienced by States Parties. The failure of travel restrictions introduced after the detection and reporting of Omicron variant to limit international spread of Omicron demonstrates the ineffectiveness of such measures over time.” The WHO repeated that countries should: “not require proof of vaccination against COVID-19 for international travel.” (World Health Organization, Statement on the tenth meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, January 19, 2022.)
“Despite the confirmed science that the vaccine does not stop people from getting or spreading the virus and the repeated warnings from the WHO, it’s clear the federal government is out of step and arbitrarily restricting Canadians fundamental rights and freedoms,” says Keith Wilson, Q.C., lead counsel for the legal challenge. “It is profoundly disturbing that a marginalized group in Canada—the unvaccinated—are essentially prohibited from leaving the country,” he adds.
“Canadians have been losing hope in the Charter and our courts. We are going to put the best arguments and evidence forward so that the court can clarify where governments overstep,” concludes Mr. Wilson.
The court will be asked to hear the case on an expedited basis given the serious infringement on Canadians’ mobility and other rights. Canada is the only country in the developed world that has banned Covid vaccine-free travellers from air travel.
Pfizer’s Paxlovid is being rolled out around the world. But in some ways it’s even more experimental than the pharma company’s Covid shot. For example, Health Canada — which, like the US FDA, is a decades-long ally of the pharma industry — admits that, “Not many people have taken Paxlovid. Serious and unexpected side effects may happen.”
But there’s little if any ‘pax’ (the Latin word for peace) likely to come from these pills.
Paxlovid has been tested on very few people so far. It’s not being studied at all on vaccinated people or those who’ve had Covid. The pills negatively interact with many very widely used medications. Plus of course the studies are being manipulated to produce seemingly good results.
I’ve heard that behind the scenes some regulatory-agency employees are sick and tired of yielding to intense pressure from politicians, public-health officials and Big Pharma. They don’t want members of the public to take this extremely poorly studied and potentially very dangerous set of pills.
Each dose of Paxlovid consists of one pill of ritonavir — a repurposed old HIV drug — and two pills of a new drug named nirmatrelvir. Both of these drugs are protease inhibitors.
This nirmatrelvir/ritonavir combo was authorized for use in the U.S. by the Food and Drug Administration under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) on Dec. 22, 2021, and for use in Canada by Health Canada on Jan. 17, 2022.
It’s allowed in youth — 12 years of age and older — and adults in the U.S., Israel and South Korea. In other countries including the U.K. and Canada it’s authorized for people 18 years old and above.
(Note that authorization isn’t approval; it’s very rapid evaluation followed by the nod to let tens of millions of people take it, because supposedly we’re in an unprecedented public-health crisis akin to a war.)
Also, a test in a petri dish by Pfizer scientists showed it may have some effect on Omicron — see the first paragraph on page 36 of the Canadian Jan. 22 spec sheet (AKA product monograph) on it. Based on this very thin evidence, mainstream media are widely reporting that “the pills are expected to be effective against Omicron.”
The nirmatrelvir/ritonavir pills are being authorized for use by people who test positive for Covid, have mild or moderate symptoms and are deemed to be ‘at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19.’
But how does Pfizer define high risk?
Being 60 years of age or older. Or overweight. Or having high blood pressure. Or a number of other things – including having “other conditions or factors (i.e., race or ethnicity) that may place patients at high risk for progression.” (See page 8 of the Canadian Jan. 22 spec sheet.)
In total only approximately 1,000 people had been randomized to receive nirmatrelvir/ritonavir at the time U.S. and Canadian authorities gave it the thumbs up.
(It’s very hard to decipher what the specific numbers are – both the Nov. 5, 2021, Pfizer news release describing the interim analysis examined by the FDA and the Jan. 17, 2022, Canadian product monograph — which has an interim analysis from a slightly later date — have a range of numbers, as well as several types of data analyses.)
Furthermore, only 13% of those small number were people 65 years of age or over, and just 3% were 75 and older. (See section 1.2, titled ‘Geriatrics,’ on page 4 of the Jan. 17, 2022, Canadian product monograph for Paxlovid.)
Plus, even those interim results were manipulated to the max in the study write-up (more on this below) – which in the case of the US was simply a Nov. 5, 2021, Pfizer news release.
And Pfizer didn’t even make public the original data it supplied to Health Canada, as far as I can determine. Furthermore, the company’s Jan. 17, 2022, news release announcing the authorization in Canada had very few details.
It was all very predictable.
That’s obvious from the fact that more than a month before the FDA authorization — on Nov. 18, 2021 — the US government signed a $5.3-billion deal for 10 million courses of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (i.e., $530 US per course), pending FDA authorization.
Ditto in Canada: on Dec. 3, 2021, the Canadian government announced its pledge to buy an initial one million courses of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir from Pfizer, pending Health Canada authorization. That is worth about $690 million (Canadian dollars) when you do the math based on $530 US per course. (A ‘course’ means the total number of doses needed to complete a treatment regimen.)
(The same announcement said the Canadian government also had signed an agreement with Merck to buy 500,000 courses of Merck’s Covid pill molnupiravir — with options for buying 500,000 more courses — also pending Health Canada authorization.)(Molnupiravir was authorized by the US FDA a short time later, on Dec. 23, 2021, despite significant concerns. Those include its low effectiveness, high toxicity and potential for women who take it during pregnancy to give birth to children with birth defects. The FDA authorized Merck to sell it for people aged 18 or over with mild to moderate Covid who test positive and are at ‘high risk’ of developing severe Covid. Health Canada has not yet given it the nod. And media report that other countries also are getting cold feet about it.)
There’s more. For example, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir hasn’t been tested at all in people who have been vaccinated and/or have had Covid. [corrected Jan. 28 – in the original I’d inadvertently incorrectly written ‘haven’t been vaccinated and/or haven’t had Covid.’]. Despite this, they are among the people that officials want first in line for it.
It also isn’t being tested at all in pregnant or breastfeeding women.
Pfizer states on page 12 of the product monograph that Paxlovid “should not be used in pregnant women unless the potential benefits outweigh the potential risks to the fetus.”
But there’s no such warning for the use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir by breastfeeding women.
As I noted earlier in this article, each dose of Paxlovid consists of two tablets of nirmaltrelvir and one tablet of ritonavir. Each set of three pills is to be taken twice a day for five days, starting within five days of symptom onset.
Ritonavir has been used since 1996 in people who test positive for HIV. It is widely known to cause serious, life-threatening conditions such as pancreatitis, heart-rhythm problems, liver problems, severe skin rash and allergic reactions.
Yet nirmatrelvir/ritonavir hasn’t been studied in people with liver-function impairment. And neither Pfizer nor government officials are warning that nirmatrelvir/ritonavir should not be taken by, for example, people at risk of developing abnormal liver function (including those who have had hepatitis B, hepatitis C or elevated results on liver-function tests).
Instead, they’re putting on the front lines the frail, the elderly, and/or those who live in poverty or are otherwise disadvantaged.
For example, a Jan. 25 CBC News article reports that Canada’s deputy chief public health officer, Howard Njoo, recommends the first to receive the pills should be “people who are immunocompromised, 80 years of age and over, or [those] who may not have access to health care because of geographical or socioeconomic concerns[,] are first in line — regardless of vaccination status.” [Bolding added by me.]
Quebec is one of the first places poised to start using it in these vulnerable people. By March they’re expecting to receive enough of the pills to treat more than 25,000 people. That includes those with “serious conditions who cannot be vaccinated.” After that, they’ll open up the queue to others.
Therefore, it appears politicians, government officials and Pfizer are stoking demand using the same playbook as they did with vaccines.
They’re only making a relatively small number of pills available initially.
And the mainstream media are helping to hype it. For example one CBC report alone — by Montreal journalist Verity Stevenson on Jan. 18 — called it a “sought-after” drug that has been “lauded for its potential to reduce hospitalizations from the virus” via Pfizer’s reporting “that Paxlovid reduced the risk of hospitalization or death by an impressive 89 per cent compared with a placebo.”
And here’s another example of the overall very positive coverage; it’s in the Toronto Star today.
A Jan. 25, 2022, National Post article is somewhat of an exception: the author, Tom Blackwell, flags the problem of Paxlovid interfering with the effects of other medications (more on this below). However, he doesn’t mention most of the other major drawbacks of the pills.
Yet even the Canadian federal government admits, on its web page for the general public on the pill, that “Not many people have taken Paxlovid. Serious and unexpected side effects may happen. Paxlovid is still being studied, so it is possible that all the side effects are not known at this time.” [Bolding added by me.]
Further down on that same page, it says people should report any suspected side effects directly to Health Canada.
Unfortunately, however, we know from the vast under-reporting of serious effects and deaths from, for example, the Covid jabs, that it’s highly unlikely the feds will faithfully tally and publicly display all such reports.
For its part, the FDA asked Pfizer to report to it the “serious adverse events and all medication errors associated with the use of Paxlovid,” as part of the EUA. It also stipulated that healthcare facilities and healthcare providers receiving Paxlovid will track and report serious adverse events and medication errors. However, this also is very unlikely to result in a full and honest public reporting.
(The FDA also asked the company to provide the FDA with further trial results relating to safety and effectiveness until the study concludes in April.)
So they’re not even trying to pretend that it’s been shown to be safe and effective.
After all, this is the pharmacocene epoch of our planet’s history.
Here are three more red flags among the many surrounding Paxlovid:
The US FDA omitted the important step of getting input from an advisory panel before giving an Emergency Use Authorization to Paxlovid.
That panel is called the Antimicrobial Drugs Advisory Committee. Members of the panel scrutinize pharma companies’ data on drugs the firms are seeking approval of. The panel’s meetings are public and are attended by media and others.
(In contrast, in the case of molnupiravir it was convened, at the end of November, 2021 [the members voted for it, 13 to 10; then on Dec. 23, 2021, the FDA authorized it].)
I found this out when I stumbled on a Jan. 6, 2022, SonsOfLibertyMedia.com article on Paxlovid. The article describes, among many other insightful information, a Dec. 22, 2021, Bloomberg Law article on the controversy caused by the FDA skipping this important step.
The panel meeting usually is just a rubber stamp, but nonetheless skipping it is very unusual.
In addition to being a protease inhibitor, ritonavir reduces the activity of a highly important enzyme called CYP3A4. CYP3A4 is produced in the liver. There, it’s central to metabolizing (i.e., breaking down) a large number of drugs and toxins; this is a necessary before the drugs and toxins can be cleared from the body.
Since ritonavir (and by extension Paxlovid) reduces CYP3A4’s activity, that means those large number of drugs and toxins will stay in the body longer.
The Canadian federal-government website on Paxlovid admits that “many medicines interact with Paxlovid. Taking Paxlovid with these medicines may cause serious or life-threatening side effects.” [Bolding added by me.]
In total, there are more than 100 medications that Pfizer says shouldn’t be taken with Paxlovid. They include very widely used ones like lidocaine, warfarin, phenobarbital, erythromycin, St. John’s wort, fentanyl, methadone, midazolam and prednisone.
The study results in the Pfizer US Nov. 5, 2021, press release relied on ‘intent-to-treat’ statistical analyses. These are not at all rigorous.
If you look up what ‘intent-to-treat’ means, you’ll see it’s based on assuming that study subjects received the treatment, whether they in fact did or not. Many articles on this approach profess it to be solid. But objectively it is not at all. (I started to notice intent-to-treat analyses in medical research studies at least 20 years ago. It was — and still is, to my knowledge — a popular way to avoid honest reporting of the effects and efficacy of drugs being tested.)
And just to be clear, the Pfizer news-release study didn’t stop there – its intent-to-treat analyses use a ‘modified’ approach. Specifically they include, for example, people “who at baseline did not receive nor were expected to received COVID-19 therapeutic mAb [monoclonal antibody] treatment.”’
You can’t make this stuff up.
I sincerely hope that the employees who, behind the scenes, are pushing back against the pressure to let Paxlovid be given to many people will win the day.
You can buy bottles of Liquid Fear (LF) at your local pharmacy. Over the counter.
No refrigeration necessary.
I suggest sipping through a straw to start. Don’t gulp it all at once. You want it to seep in.
One day you won’t take a walk in the park. You’ll say you have other things to do. But you’ll be afraid of strangers breathing on you. Breathing is dangerous. Who knew?
Now you do.
Fear was first isolated by Louis Pasteur in 1884. He wrote in his diary: “I was sitting in my kitchen drinking a glass of pasteurized milk, and suddenly I realized I could extract blood from a patient and separate out anxiety from the sample. Later that day, I took a vial of blood to the local prison, where they kept killers in a special section. The guards brought these dangerous men into a room, where I had placed a bit of blood on a slide, under a lamp, on a table. The men stared at it, and soon a colorless liquid migrated from the blood on to the table. I sucked it up into a dropper and squeezed it on to the arm of a guard. He promptly fled from the room…”
For near a century and a half since that day, governments and corporations have been trying to produce very large amounts of the fear liquid.
Finally, in February, 2020, in an NIAID lab, under the direction of Anthony Fauci, Doctors Rachel Maddow and Anderson Cooper were able to synthesize the fear particle using blood obtained from several hosts of The View.
“From that point on,” Cooper told reporters, speaking yesterday from CNN-CIA headquarters, “we activated a special machine that transmits voice vibrations from leading news anchors, we focused the vibrations on the synthesized fear particle, and within an hour we had 567 gallons of pure liquid.”
Untersturmführer Klaus Schwab, executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, stated, “After all, this pandemic is your basic terror operation. How else are you going to hold society together and mobilize it?”
The drink, it turns out, has been bottled and sold, by corporations, under a variety of names for the past year and a half. For example, XXX [censored] and XXX [censored].
Schwab continued: “Since the dawn of time, people have been falling ill and dying for a variety of reasons. Down through the ages, some of those people who recovered said, ‘When I was sick THIS time, it was really DIFFERENT. I had never experienced anything like it.’ Anyway, now we take all that sickness and dying and we re-label a large part of it ‘COVID’. Add the fear particle and we have our window of opportunity to transform the world.”
The COVID vaccines are not an antidote. They’re not designed to affect emotions. They scramble internal systems of the body.
The President has announced the formation of a new cabinet post, the Department of Trepidation. Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer and Whoopi Goldberg have been put on a short list of candidates to serve as its first director.
Social media trolls have already begun calling this innovation The Department of Pussification.
The CDC has announced adult guidelines for imbibing the fear drink. Basically, the agency recommends a first dose of two tablespoons, twice a day, for the first week. Thereafter, a pint a day in the morning for a month; and then a quart each day, on an ongoing basis. Researchers are conducting studies to determine the dose schedules for children.
Groups of “anti-fearers” in Tennessee, Kentucky, and Florida have sprung up. US Attorney General Garland has issued a memorandum to all Dept. of Justice employees: “These groups share common anti-government sentiments. They tend to cling to religion and guns. We have to be on the alert for acts of domestic terrorism…”
Public health departments across the country are, according to the Washington Post, “investigating charges of disproportionate distribution of LF [Liquid Fear] to underserved communities of color.”
This morning, California Governor Gavin Newsom appeared at a press briefing, standing in front of a huge poster carrying the simple message, SUPPORT FEAR. Newsom said, “This is not the time to back down from what we feel. Embrace it. It’s healthy, it’s real, and it’s our passport out of this pandemic. I’m especially addressing our young children. Don’t worry. Drink from your bottle. It tastes great. And to the adults: there’s nothing to tremble at but the absence of trembling.”
Senator Chuck Schumer has introduced a bill allocating emergency funding for federal bottling plants in sixteen states. The word on Capitol Hill is, the new government version of LF will be called Quake, or Anthony.
Last week, in Northern Florida, at the Hanging Chad Park, local organizers staged an impromptu concert featuring Eric Clapton and Van Morrison. For nearly a half-hour, 75,000 adoring fans shouted in unison:
FUCK FEAR.
Several hundred FBI agents, dispatched to the scene, stationed themselves around the periphery of the park.
A mass movement against the Covid mandate is unfolding coast to coast across Canada in solidarity with cross-border truck drivers. Tens of thousands of people will be joining the truck drivers in Ottawa.
According to Justin Trudeau, unvaccinated truck drivers “may pose a risk of transmitting COVID-19 to the general public”. What nonsense. Truck drivers for the most part stay in their truck, perform administrative duties and supervise loading and unloading. They deliver the commodities and have limited contact with people.
All cross-border truckers will “need to be vaccinated in order to avoid a 14-day quarantine”, says Justin Trudeau.
Has Trudeau been Vaccinated?
Is it relevant to the solidarity movement with the truck drivers? The Prime Minster demands that the truck drivers be vaccinated. Has he been vaccinated?
Check it out and decide for yourself: There are indications, yet to be fully confirmed, that Prime Minister Trudeau has not been vaccinated.
US-Canada Trade Is the Lifeline of Our National Economy
Canadian governments are fully aware of the importance of the North-American trade bloc. And now Justin Trudeau has sucked us up into the biggest economic mess in our country’s history, while violating the fundamental rights of Canadians.
What we need here in Canada is an indefinite “political quarantine” of our not so illustrious Prime Minister.
I can say as an economist that this irresponsible decision by the Trudeau government (if enforced) will have devastating consequences on producers, transport companies as well as on the entire fabric of wholesale and retail trade. It will affect all of us.
If applied, it will create shortages of essential goods including food, fuel and pharmaceuticals. It will also affect the delivery of essential commodities shipped via the US from China, the European Union and Latin America.
We must prevent this from occurring. We must initiate dialogue involving the truck drivers, the owners of transport companies, law enforcement officials, customs officials on both sides of the border, producers, wholesalers, retailers.
The government will say we are committed to saving lives, to protect people against V the virus. What utter nonsense.
The Trudeau government is corrupt. This far-reaching decision was taken on behalf of powerful financial interests. Its unspoken intent is to trigger a renewed wave of bankruptcies.
It is important that government Covid-19 mandates and restrictions be lifted and that cross-border trade is protected and sustained.
#Yes, It’s A Killer Vaccine
The various Covid mandates have been used to spearhead the fear campaign and encourage Canadians to take their booster vaccine dose.
While the media repeats ad nauseam that the virus is more dangerous than the vaccine, the devastating impacts of the mRNA vaccine are now confirmed beyond doubt.
Official figures of reported vaccine-related deaths are routinely published by the US, UK and EU. They are not published by Health Canada. See the statement by Doctors for Covid Ethics.
“There have been more deaths, more permanent disabilities, and more hospitalizations following the experimental COVID-19 vaccines [in the US], than there have been following all FDA-approved vaccines for the previous 31 years combined.”
What is contained in Pfizer’s “confidential” report is detailed evidence on the impacts of the “vaccine” on mortality and morbidity. This data which emanates from the “Horse’s Mouth” can now be used to confront as well formulate legal procedures against Big Pharma, the governments, the WHO and the media.
This is a de facto Mea Culpa on the part of Pfizer. #Yes it is a Killer Vaccine.
The Freedom Convoy Initiative focusses on the broader policy context, with a view to confronting the Trudeau government and repealing the Covid-19 narrative and its various policy mandates including the mRNA vaccine.
This movement must not be sidetracked. It must focus on the immediate repeal of the mRNA vaccine, which has resulted in an upward trend in mortality and morbidity. It is essential to dispel the lies.
The Covid-19 Test is Invalid. The Data Used to Justify the Policy Mandates are Meaningless
All the data pertaining to so-called “Covid Confirmed Cases” resulting from the PCR test are totally meaningless.
The Rapid Covid-19 Home Test Kits
In November 2021, 94 million rapid home test kits (self testing and antigen testing kits) were delivered and distributed to the provinces, and another 140 million were ordered by the federal government in early January at a cost of 1.7 billion dollars.
Test Test Test:
Canada has a population of 38.5 million and we now have 234 million rapid test kits which have indelibly contributed in the course of the last two months to pushing up so-called Covid-19 positive cases.
This has created havoc in families across Canada. The fear campaign has gone into high gear.
Ironically, the antigen and self testing kits recommended by Health Canada are categorized as less reliable than the PCR test which is now upheld as “the gold standard”. The PCR test is totally dysfunctional. It does not detect or identify SARS-CoV-2.
All those figures of Covid-19 are meaningless.
The official figures (UK, US, EU) on reported vaccine related deaths and adverse events are REAL.
Canada’s Freedom Convoy: First Step towards the Development of a Broad Based Grassroots Movement
This movement is now supported by people from more 65 countries. Truck drivers in Australia will be sending a convoy to Canberra on the 31st of January.
More than 60,000 truck drivers from the United States including 15,000 from California will be crossing the border and meeting up in Ottawa for this important event.
in a CTV online poll, 77% of Canadians have voted in support of the Freedom Convoy in support of the truck drivers. (out of 17,698 votes cast).
Attorney Thomas Renz on Monday told a panel of experts that data provided to him by three whistleblowers show COVID-19 vaccines are causing catastrophic harm to members of the U.S. military.
Attorney Thomas Renz on Monday told a panel of experts that data provided to him by three whistleblowers show COVID-19 vaccines are causing catastrophic harm to members of the U.S. military while not preventing them from getting the virus.
Following Monday’s panel discussion on COVID vaccines and treatment protocols, led by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Renz summarized data obtained from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), the military’s longstanding epidemiological database of service members.
The data show:
Miscarriages increased 300% in 2021 over the previous five-year average.
Cancer increased 300% in 2021 over the previous five-year average.
Neurological disorders increased 1000% in 2021 over the past five-year average, increasing from 82,000 to 863,000 in one year.
The whistleblowers provided the data knowing they would face perjury charges if they submitted false statements to the court in legal cases pending against the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD).
Renz told the panel a “trifecta of data” from the DMED, the DOD’s military-civilian integrated health database, Project SALUS, along with human intelligence in the form of doctor-whistleblowers suggest the DOD and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Prevention have withheld COVID vaccine surveillance data since September 2021.
“Our soldiers are being experimented on, injured and sometimes possibly killed,” Renz said.
Following Renz’s presentation, attorney Leigh Dundas reported evidence of the DOD doctoring data in DMED to conceal cases of myocarditis in service members vaccinated for COVID.
The military whistleblowers reported a DMED search of “acute myocarditis” resulted in 1,239 cases in August 2021, but the same search in January 2022 resulted in only 307 cases.
Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCollough, commenting on Renz’s presentation, told the panel myocarditis is being falsely described as mild and transient when in reality it causes permanent heart damage and is life-limiting in most cases.
The military did not take any safeguards for the most at-risk age group for vaccine-induced myocarditis — 18- to 24-year-olds.
Renz also highlighted a broader data set from Project SALUS, run by the DOD in cooperation with the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC), which sends weekly reports to the CDC.
Project SALUS analyzed data on 5.6 million Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 or older. Data were aggregated from Humetrix, a real-time data and analytics platform that tracks healthcare outcomes.
According to Renz, the Project SALUS data as of late last year show:
“71% of new cases are in the fully vaccinated, and 60% of hospitalizations are in the fully vaccinated. This is corruption at the highest level. We need investigations. The Secretary of Defense needs investigated. The CDC needs investigated.”
The Project SALUS report also included data on natural immunity, stating the vaccines have waning protection. The data also showed an upward trend of breakthrough cases suggesting booster shots could contribute to prolonging the pandemic.
“Breakthrough infection rates 5 to 6 months post-vaccination are twice as high as 3-4 months post-vaccination,” the report said.
According to the Humetrix overview of the Project SALUS data, Congress must investigate vaccine failure, along with increased risk reported for breakthrough cases (or vaccine failure) in North American Natives, Hispanics, Blacks, and males.
People with kidney disease, liver disease, heart disease and cancer treatment, along with people over age 75 are the most likely to experience breakthrough cases, while medical authorities advocate vaccines to these same populations to allegedly “protect the vulnerable.”
Project Salus reported the vaccines were only 41% effective. This low level of infection prevention needs to be analyzed against the counterweight of a threefold to tenfold increase in chronic disease signaled in DMED.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires only two adequate and controlled studies to approve a biologic, even if those studies are industry-sponsored.
The FDA now has data from the entirety of 3 million people employed by the DOD and 5 million people in Medicare. This data serves as independent substantiation that scientific fraud has occurred.
Based on this data, the FDA must revoke the Emergency Use Authorization for the Moderna, Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccines, and the Biologics License Application for Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine.
It would be wrong for the FDA to extrapolate the industry’s clinical trial data to pediatrics without halting the use of the vaccines and conducting an investigation based on this real-world data.
Watch Renz’s testimony here:
Pam Long is graduate of USMA at West Point and is an Army Veteran of the Medical Service Corps.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.
“In the last 80 years since Nazism, fundamental human rights have never been so severely violated…”
– MEP Mislav Kolakušić
Massive controversy erupted worldwide after French President Emmanuel Macron told Le Parisien newspaper that he wanted to make life miserable for unvaccinated Frenchmen. He also claimed that an unvaccinated person is “an irresponsible person” who “is no longer a citizen.” This is the kind of life-threatening rhetoric of dictators.
The embattled leader stated he wanted to “piss off” the “unvaccinated” as much as possible. Macron also promised to restrict the daily life of the unvaccinated by denying them access to restaurants, theaters, and cinemas.
Macron, a graduate of the Great Reset globalist Klaus Schwab’s school for “Young Global Leaders, “has been against the unvaccinated from the very beginning of the Globalists’ “vaccine campaigns.”
Many French politicians expressed their displeasure with Macron’s comments and the country’s new vaccination certificate law,
Croatian MEP Mislav Kolakušić Slams Macron
Not only in France but many leaders in the European Parliament launched an unambiguous attack on Macron. The Croatian MEP Mislav Kolakušić, among others, sharply attacked the French President.
France will hold the Presidency of the Council of the EU from January 1 to June 30, 2022. MEP Kolakušić urged Macron to do the exact opposite of what he has been doing during his presidency, citing the drastic curtailment of rights and freedoms.
“You said today that you are proud that there is no death penalty in Europe,” said Kolakusic. “Tens of thousands of citizens have died from the side effects of vaccines. Mandatory vaccinations represent the death penalty and will result in the execution of many citizens.”
The MP stressed that vaccination should remain a voluntary choice for every citizen. “Murder is murder,” emphasized Kolakusic and recommended that all listeners take a look at the official data from the European Medicines Agency (EMA).
Croatian MEP Mislav Kolakušić Takes On EU President
The former Croatian judge MEP Kolakušić infamously called out the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s human rights abuses during an address to her at a Parliamentary session in September 2021. The MEP blamed the leader’s Covid policies for dividing citizens, violating their rights, and scientific advice.
MEP Kolakušić took the floor after Von der Leyen detailed her left-wing policies and the state of fundamental freedoms and “social rights” of EU citizens.
The statements you make about fundamental freedoms and citizens’ rights in the European Union are in stark contrast to reality, expresses Kolakusic. Fundamental human rights have never been more seriously violated in the past 80 years since Nazism: freedom to travel, the right to work, health care, and the right to ban medical experiments performed on more than 500 million people. Furthermore, every citizen has the right to self-determination, emphasized the MEP.
‘End The Division Immediately’
Kolakušić went on to say that we have trampled down science and the medical profession for several centuries and that we are now announcing measures that seem to have no end. “Corona certificates that only allow the vaccinated to travel freely – while spreading the virus just as easily as the unvaccinated – are insane.”
He called on von der Leyen to “immediately end the division of citizens.” Kolakušić warned the leader that “nobody knows what will happen if we don’t put an end to it.”
by Stand Up Canada sourced from Stand Up Canada newsletter
January 26, 2022
January 22, 2022 marks this date in our Canadian history with the start of the biggest trucker convoy to descend upon Ottawa to protest vaccine mandates. Their ETA is Saturday January 29, 2022. What a glorious time to be Canadian!
Truckers Hit With Illegal Vaccine Mandates
We need to be clear. Vaccination in Canada in voluntary. To have a mandatory vaccination policy is illegal and unconstitutional.
The first sector hit with these unlawful measures was the airline industry followed by all of the first responders: Police, Firefighters, Health care workers, Paramedics etc. Simultaneous mandates rolled out to provincial and federal employees including Educators and Teachers and federally regulated telecommunication industries such as Bell Canada.
And now our Truckers. The buck stops here.
If you would like to learn more about your rights on this important subject, please visit our website Rights to Refuse Vaxx.
Trucker Convoy: Their Mission
Simply put. Unite and say NO to these illegal and unconstitutional mandates in the biggest demonstration our country has ever seen in this regard!
If you’ve eaten fresh fruits and vegetables today or put on warm socks, thank a truck driver who made that happen. Sometimes we honestly give no consideration to how these items of necessity wind up on our shelves in the grocery and retail stores.
If thousands of truck drivers are fired because they stood up and said NO to the illegal vaccine mandates, this will have a major impact on the food and supply chain coming into Canada. Not to mention a devastating personal impact to their personal lives for the loss of their jobs, but also the inability to feed and clothe their own families.
• their goal is to have 5,000 vehicles in Ottawa – this would gridlock the city
• truckers will be at interprovincial boarders; it will be a coordinated shut down in Canada and the US
• American Truckers are starting around the same time; truckers in Buffalo, Detroit, New York will be participating
• trucks are also coming from the North West Territories
• clan mothers are coming to support the event
People across the world are watching Canada! Here is a fantastic January 19, 2022 interview with Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson and Patrick King as they talk about this subject.
Follow Convoy Schedule & Route Information by Province & ETA Countdown
To follow the convoy’s current departure and arrival addresses, dates and times are depending upon Mother Nature:
• you can support them locally by finding out where they’ll be making their next pit stop close to your town; you can bring food and well wishes to their stops along the way to Ottawa
To follow the countdown of when they are expected to arrive in Ottawa:
• please visit Canada-Unity.com for this outstanding and historic Canadian initiative called Operation Bear Hug.
These courageous and brave souls will need food, housing and natural immune-boosting human connection when they arrive and while they are in Ottawa.
Volunteers are needed in any capacity to help with this historic event.
If you would like to “adopt a trucker” in any capacity and make your mark in history, please add your name to an “Adopt a Trucker Program” database that will help organize all of the volunteers and categorize efforts easier.
Show your support to this courageous and historical movement. Find their route as they pass by your town. Gather your freedom loving friends and families on overpasses, or the side of the roads.
Encourage these courageous souls with your waves, honks and beautiful home-made signs of support as they drive by you, on their way to Ottawa to defend all of our rights to medical privacy and choice! This feeds their souls and keeps their spirits high.
Please pray and/or send good thoughts for their safe journeys and arrivals.
Financial Support for Convoy
In an overwhelming response to the Convoy’s Mission, freedom loving human beings have generously donated over 5$ million dollars to date! These donations help with trucker costs of fuel and vehicle repairs, food and shelter, and to remain in Ottawa as long as it takes for illegal, unconstitutional mandates to be lifted. What a tremendous expression of love and UNITY!
Inspiring Videos of Their Convoy Journey So Far…
Here is a small collection of videos of their history-making convoy. These should inspire you and lift up your spirits.
ONE: Let’s not get distracted by the virus question. We have to focus on knocking down the vaccine mandate.
My Reply: Can you walk down the street, carry a bag of potatoes, and look at messages on your cell phone? Newsflash: people have been known to do several things at the same time.
TWO: If we bring up the virus question, people will call us crazy and have a reason to ignore our criticism of the vaccine.
My Reply: “People” already say we’re crazy. They have 345 “reasons” on file.
THREE: If we say the virus doesn’t exist, “our base” will desert us.
My Reply: “Our base” is so outraged about the ineffective and hugely destructive vaccine, and about the mandates, NOTHING will deter them from attacking the vaccine.
FOUR: It’s well established that the virus exists.
My Reply: Yes, established by the same scientists who say the vaccine is remarkably safe and effective.
FIVE: Doctor A says the virus exists. As evidence, he cites Doctor B’s statements. Doctor B says the virus exists. He cites Doctor C’s statements. Doctor C says the virus exists. He cites Doctor A.
My Reply: Go back to school. I suggest starting at the 4th grade.
SIX: It doesn’t really matter whether the virus exists.
My Reply: If the virus doesn’t exist, the pandemic is a hoax. If the pandemic is a hoax…trace all the implications. If you can’t, go back to school. I suggest starting at the second grade. If the school won’t let you in, tell them you identify as a six-year old.
SEVEN: If I say the virus doesn’t exist, my family will disown me.
My Reply: I see. Other than the virus question—you’re on very good terms with your family, right? Who are you trying to kid?
Speaking of kid, here’s another dialogue for your edification—
ME: Hey kid, aren’t you fed up with all this COVID crap?
KID: Listen, Grandpa, I’m been fed up with crap since I was born.
KID: I wore one once, at the DMV, when I applied for my driver’s license. The witch behind the counter told me I had to put that germicide goo on my hands. So I did. I wiped my hands on the counter. She called security. I don’t drive. I take the bus.
ME: What about the vaccine?
KID: Let me put it this way. My cell phone says I took the shot.
ME: Did you get depressed during the lockdowns?
KID: No. I made money fixing old people’s computers. When I went to their houses, I wore a military uniform. Nobody bothered me.
ME: Are you woke?
KID: You mean do I think every move I make is motivated by systemic racism? That crap is for my friends whose parents give them money. They all moved away. Their parents took them to Florida.
ME: What about the virus?
KID: What about it?
ME: Do you think it exists?
KID: The people who say it does—I don’t listen to anything they say.
ME: Why not?
KID: If you can’t figure that out, Grandpa, you’re older than you look.
ME: Are there a lot of kids like you?
KID: Millions.
ME: Do they listen to the government?
KID: You mean the mafia. We don’t pay protection money to anybody.
ME: Do these millions of kids take the vaccine?
KID: It’s always a tip-off when somebody says, “Hey, it’s free.” We’re not that stupid.
ME: Have you ever voted in an election?
KID: Once, when I ran for student body treasurer in high school. I ran because the treasurer handles student funds. I voted for myself 27 times.
ME: Did you win?
KID: I came in third. The kid who won was the son of the assistant principal. Very quietly, that old codger was trying to get us to join his secret transgender club. We told him we already had the sex change, he just couldn’t spot it. We also told him the local pedophile priest, Father Joseph, was opposed to transgenderism on moral grounds. We suggested he should turn Father Joseph into the authorities for the hate crime of opposing transgenders.
I now return you to your regular scheduled programming, sponsored by Moderna, the company that cares about you. The company that had never brought a single product of any kind to market, before the RNA genetic shot. The company that spawned several billionaires overnight. The company championed by little Anthony Fauci, serving his last term as de facto president of the United States.
With the Truckers Freedom Convoy having arrived in Calgary, Alberta the night before, the second day embedded with the group started around 9 a.m. at a Flying J gas station surrounded by 2000–3000 freedom-loving Canadians showing their support for this movement.
Pastor Artur Pawlowski, who Rebel News viewers should be very familiar with, delivered a powerful speech (as per usual), fanning the flames of freedom before the convoy departed, which left the crowd in a frenzy of energy.
After that, we joined the convoy, and hit the road.
Continuing onwards, it suddenly became very clear that potentially everyone had underestimated the amount of traction and momentum the truckers rebellion carried with them.
The driving force behind this convoy, no pun intended, is not only a sight to be hold, but a pleasure to bare witness too.
The commitment and determination of those aligned with the Truckers Freedom Convoy was truly something to behold.
See more of our coverage at ConvoyReports.com, as we travel across the country bringing you the other side of this truly inspiring story.
When the media reports that illegal mandates are ending, it is necessary to read between the lines. Because there is always more to the story.
On January 19, 2022, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson was reported to say that so-called Plan B measures would lapse on Jan. 26, as face masks would not be legally enforced anywhere and COVID passes would not be mandatory.
Our scientists believe it is likely that the Omicron wave has now peaked nationally… because of the extraordinary booster campaign, together with the way the public have responded to the Plan B measures, we can return to Plan A.
While this may sound positive on its surface, the idea of legally enforcing illegal mandates is an oxymoron. By reading between the lines, we see that OMICRON is an anagram for moronic and oncomir (i.e., tumor forming). And the wave represents 5G mm wave frequencies.
If mandates are on the outs, then they have served a purpose, by design. What’s next? In the world of sports metaphors, it is the jab followed by the right-hook punch, which translates to a strategy of injections plus added wave frequencies.
The new, faster level of 5G connectivity will significantly augment Verizon’s “5G Ultra Wideband” network, which, until now, has relied solely on extremely-fast-but-very-hard-to-find millimeter wave spectrum.
Did the Federal Aviation Administration fail to plan for this oversight?
The Jab-5G Right Hook Punch
The new mRNA injections are known to contain graphene oxide (nanometals) which is part of a self assembly process of nanobots (i.e., nanotechnology). Graphene oxide acquires magnetic properties and is extremely toxic. It’s toxicity is dependent on the electromagnetic radiation it absorbs. Once injected, it has an affinity for the central nervous system and electrical organs, such as the heart. Consequences include fainting, arrhythmias, or syncope, and sudden death. To understand why boosters will be recommended every 3 months to keep the graphene oxide in the body, watch this explanation. This is the jab.
The Jab-5G Strategy could be a very effective knock-out punch for a global government to exert more control over large populations, including the depletion of the human species. This is a crime against humanity, a strategy first tested in China and South Korea in 2019.
On June 29, 2019, China’s new law, The Vaccines Administration Law was promulgated. Soon after, 2 billion doses of COVID vaccine were deployed in China, enough for 1 billion people, or 76 percent of China’s 1.4 billion population.
By now, it is widely known that 5G towers utilize frequencies that affect all life at the level of DNA. These are microwave, radio wave frequencies that range from 3 kilohertz (kHz) up to 300 gigahertz (GHz). Within this range is the range is the absorption spectrum of oxygen molecules, at 60 GHz.
Since 2008, 5G research scientists have shown that the coiled portion of the sweat duct in the upper skin layer is regarded as a helical antenna in the sub-THz band. In their December 2019 article in Bio Heat Transfer, they warn:
One must consider the implications of human immersion in the electromagnetic noise, caused by devices working at the very same frequencies as those, to which the sweat duct (as a helical antenna) is most attuned. We are raising a warning flag against the unrestricted use of sub-THz technologies for communication, before the possible consequences for public health are explored.
DNA, Water & Your Health
Helical is also a word used to describe DNA, in skin cells or any cell. DNA is more than a series of four base pairs (CGAT). DNA is a transmitter, a receiver, and a translator of information. There is a deep relationship between DNA, water, and your health. Water molecules surround the structure of your DNA, through hydrogen bonds, making it highly responsive to stimuli, such as light frequencies. [Read more in The Nature of Healing].
Now, add cell towers that emit 5G frequencies strategically placed atop water towers all over the U.S. What happens when the structure of water is altered by incoherent frequencies before entering your body? What happens to your DNA? Do you need to consider a safer water source? Do you wonder why your government has not vetted 5G technology for safety and health as it relates to water or air travel?
The symptoms of sub-THz band frequencies appears similar to “COVID” symptoms and includes: lack of oxygen, seizures, and a phlegm-less cough. While the 5G frequency network has been launched in every continent without verifying safety, millions of people have consented to experimental mRNA vaccines that utilize “gene therapy” technology.
Knock-Out Punch
An Editorial published in the July 2020 J Biol Regul Homeost Agents, suggests that 5G waves are a critical factor to sudden deaths attributed to an influenza-like condition dubbed COVID. Read that article in full (that has been retracted), here: 5G Technology and Induction of Coronavirus in Skin Cells:
In this research, we show that 5G millimeter waves could be absorbed by dermatologic cells acting like antennas, transferred to other cells and play the main role in producing Coronaviruses in biological cells. DNA is built from charged electrons and atoms and has an inductor-like structure. This structure could be divided into linear, toroid and round inductors. Inductors interact with external electromagnetic waves, move and produce some extra waves within the cells.
The shapes of these waves are similar to shapes of hexagonal and pentagonal bases of their DNA source. These waves produce some holes in liquids within the nucleus. To fill these holes, some extra hexagonal and pentagonal bases are produced. These bases could join to each other and form virus-like structures such as Coronavirus. To produce these viruses within a cell, it is necessary that the wavelength of external waves be shorter than the size of the cell. Thus 5G millimeter waves could be good candidates for applying in constructing virus-like structures such as Coronaviruses (COVID-19) within cells.
The authors write:
When an electromagnetic wave passes the cell membrane and the nuclear membrane, it induces an extra magnetic field within the DNA inductor and interacts with its fields.
A DNA is built from charged particles and according to laws of physics, by any motion of these particles, some electromagnetic waves emerge. Also, the structure of a DNA is similar to the structure of an inductor in a receiver and can produce some waves. Thus, a DNA could emit some waves and interact with external waves. However, most waves have a length more than the size of cells and pass them without any effect. Only limited waves with lengths smaller than millimeter could penetrate into cell membrane and interact with DNA inductors. These wavelengths could be observed in 5 G technology.
After the jab was rolled out in the U.S. in December 2021, doctors presented strong evidence of the destructive effects of the immune system, at the Doctors for COVID Ethics Symposium. Introducing a synthetic spike protein into the body, via injection, directs the DNA to express proteins it was never meant to express. The Doctors for COVID Ethics (DCE) write:
A natural infection with coronavirus will, in most individuals, remain localized to the respiratory tract. In contrast, the vaccines cause cells deep inside our body to express the viral spike protein, which they were never meant to do by nature. Any cell which expresses this foreign antigen will come under attack by the immune system, which will involve both IgG antibodies and cytotoxic T-lymphocytes.
Note: Millimeter waves are currently used by the U.S. Army as a crowd control dispersal weaponry called Active Denial Systems.
Solutions
With contradictory media messages that serve to confuse, know who you are. Under your skin suit, you are first and foremost a part of Nature, a being of light frequency. Every thought, emotion, and action, is a frequency you emit through your DNA, your biological internet. Understand that artificial frequencies introduced into the environment are scrambling and altering your natural frequency. How do you negotiate life in a boxing ring
Return to Nature. Eliminate all WI-fi devices, or hard wire them. If you have a Smart meter on your house or apartment, you can block those waves using a Smart Meter Guard or Block. Eat clean, organic foods to keep your immune system at peak performance. Drink clean, filtered water. Use herbs that promote a strong immune system. Research the use of the mineraloid, Shungite, as protection carried on your body. Make sure you cleanse Shungite regularly. All of these tools work to help to maintain a strong natural frequency.
Stop watching and listening to media talking heads. Shut off the Tel-A-Vision, which emits a low frequency for TV programming. Scrutinize leaders who offer no real solutions, but only fear based sound bites. Raise your own frequency by spending time in Nature, and by meditating to keep you from beLIEving the propaganda.
Understand that you are your own healer and this life is the self-healing journey. Part of the journey is to see through fear-based illusions. Once you find your center, you can ground yourself, like a martial artist or kick boxer. Then you can duck the jabs and right hooks. You can avoid the knock-out punches altogether.
A deep dive expose’ into radioactive lithium hydrogel nasal test swabs, injectible quantum dots, nanorouters, UPC bluetooth and the UN Agenda 21 Great Reset Nano-man.
Plus a look at why the Government might hate Ivermectin.
The story of the 4th Industrial Modified Reset Man.
What’s been put up your nose in nano dust “test swabs” and in your mRNA, 4th Industrial Revolution, Great Reset, how the nano dust tech works, it’s all in there.
My readers know that, for the past two years, I’ve been making the case that the virus is a scientific fiction, a con, and a cover story for tyranny that would make Hitler, Stalin, and Mao blush with envy.
Recently, the question has been attracting wider coverage: Does SARS-CoV-2 exist?
Entrepreneur, inventor, and philanthropist, Steve Kirsch, says yes. He offers to set up a 5-hour live video debate. He’ll send his experts and other side will send theirs. They’ll go at it.
What about the usual form of scientific debate, called the written word?
Buckle up.
Kirsch: “I don’t think the folks I’d ask to do this would want to spend time writing papers…They don’t even have the time to prepare their own papers. Doing written documents is much more time consuming than talking because people spend the time to make it bulletproof.”
Heaven forbid.
Kirsch: “None of the people on our team require that all discussions be in writing only.”
Of course not. Why would his team of scientists insist on the method by which science is accomplished?
Kirsch: “One of the commenters [to an article by Kirsch] wrote this: ‘But when someone really knows their shit they would much rather handle it in a live conversation; it’s much more efficient (you don’t spend hours writing) and it reaches a wider audience, and that audience has the benefit of tone and body language to affirm (or negate) the veracity and substance of what is being said.’”
Kirsch: “I agree with that.”
Truly awesome.
Tone and body language. Yes, of course. You know, that was Galileo’s problem when he was tried by the Inquisition for insisting the Earth rotated, and journeyed around the sun. If only he’d stood up straighter and spoken with unwavering clarity (in the manner of, say, a Walter Cronkite). He might have won his case. Because tone and inflection equal science. We all realize that. Obviously, Galileo didn’t know his shit.
Spending hours writing arguments about the existence of the virus—who would have the audacity to insist on that? As Kirsch points out, his experts are busy. It’s rude to interrupt them and ask them to make their case bulletproof. Science on Video tends to be based on “we KNOW we’re sure” and “the truth is OBVIOUS” and “WE’RE the pros.” That’s good enough, and you can sell it. If you, again, display convincing tone and body language.
In medical school, they teach this. “One day you students will be called on to defend your actions and opinions with pure bullshit. I tell you that now, to prepare you for the moment. How do you shape and transmit the bullshit? Do you do it through tiresome written reports, which run the risk of exposing the truth, engraved on the page, or do you stand up before a panel and look those people in the eye and tell a story that wows them? Do you fumble to clarify a point, or do you gloss it over with a quick-hitting generality that covers a crack in your armor? Careers are won and lost on that basis.”
Kirsch believes an exchange of papers between debaters is futile. Who can, or is willing to, pore through them and analyze them? And do those written exchanges actually cover all essential points? But with video, we NEVER EVER see opponents talking past each other or quickly changing the subject to avoid unpleasant revelations. Certainly not. We never see opponents smirking like entitled monkeys and making ad hominem accusations. We never witness slippery logic sliding by before it can be isolated and corrected. We never witness grandstanding for the audience’s benefit. It’s never show biz on parade. No mainstream expert would dare intone, “Ahem, in my many years as professor of so-and-so at such-and-such, having engaged in intense research on this question, and having authored over 60 papers on this very subject…”
And then there is the suggestion, as the commenter states, that the audience can decide…on the winner in the debate. Yes. What else is a debate FOR? Science is a democracy, and the audience is the proof of the pudding. Once they vote up or down, the deed is done. This is why, in medical journals, at the bottom of every paper and study, you see the poll question: “DO YOU THINK THIS ANALYSIS IS ACCURATE? CAST YOUR BALLOT. Depending on the outcome, we will maintain the study in our archive or retract it with an apology. Everyone can vote. You do not need to be a subscriber. We work for our audience every day. If the majority of you believes one of our authors has convinced you that the moon is a slice of soft brie on a plate or an elephant’s ass, we concur. This is called consensus, and what else could science be?”
Not long ago, I crashed my Gulfstream in the Himalayas, and after a harrowing journey to the GeFunkte Hospital in Berlin, as I was lying on the operating table, two surgeons debated whether I needed one or two transplanted hearts. Later, I was told a live stream of this discussion had been piped into the hospital waiting room, and the patients expressed an overwhelming preference for two hearts, based on the charismatic presentation of Surgeon Number One, who had studied Voice and Drama at the Julliard School in New York. So…two hearts it was. You can read about the groundbreaking operation in the Medical Journal of Audience Participation.
Published blow-by-blow descriptions of “isolating viruses” are quite dense to begin with. Perhaps one person in two hundred thousand can plow through them and understand them. Therefore, the debate about the existence of a virus starts with something in writing that, for most people, is impenetrable.
It’s no surprise that these descriptions are viewed with suspicion.
“We’re the expert virologists. Only we understand what we’re doing.”
“I see. So understanding virus isolation is like understanding RNA development and insertion into lipid nanoparticles which are injected into a few billion people.”
“Yes, exactly. Only we understand that whole process.”
“Got it. I have grave doubts about everything you’re claiming about the vaccine, but I completely accept everything you’re saying about the existence of the virus.”
In this particular debate about the existence of the virus, the devil really is in the details.
The details concerning exactly how virologists believe they are isolating viruses and sequencing them. As I say, reading the studies, one sees immediately that the accounts of these procedures are laden with technical terms and technical steps.
Those elements have to be analyzed and taken apart, to see whether they make scientific sense. In fact, a debate in writing is the sane way to proceed.
Settling the question of virus-isolation via video would be quite a challenge. An exceptional amount of good will and patience, from the mainstream virologists, would be required. I’ve never seen medical “experts” show those qualities, when the basic assumptions of their professions are on the line. I’ve seen them get up on their high horse, growl, bloviate, dismiss, generalize, tap dance, boil over, accuse, pretend to be oh so reasonable, with their pants on fire.
Someone will say, “But…but, let’s wrap all this up in one sitting. Video will accomplish that. I have things to do, places to go. We live in a fast-food world, face it.”
Yes, you have to go to the store with your mask on and maintain distancing; you have to look for a restaurant that won’t make you flash your vaccine passport; you have to show up at the school board meeting to tell the members what they can do with their mandate forcing your kid to take the shot; when they refuse to listen to you, you have to sell your house, pack up your belongings, and move with the kids from New York to Florida; and all the while, you have to keep deleting voice messages from your brother who’s telling you only the injection will save you and the family wants you institutionalized.
All these and so many more to-do’s begin with the assumption that a virus exists.
So a debate on this point ought to be complete and rigorous.
If the only possibility is a video, have a go. But the written word is far superior.
“Counsel, you have a video where the defendant discusses how he can steal a billion dollars from the pension fund?”
“Yes, Your Honor. But we also have a letter of agreement between the defendant and the head of the Montebello crime family. The letter reveals the defendant has already stolen the money, and will give it to the mob in exchange for certain favors.”
“A letter, you say? Words? Sentences? In writing, on a page? Signed? And it can be read?”
“Yes, sir. Writing is an older form of expression. It’s now being phased out. But it stands up quite well. It’s bulletproof.”
Big rigs and other trucks are heading to Canada’s capital, gathering momentum as they go!
These are the people who deliver the food and other essentials to our shops. Many of them aren’t okay with being forced to take ineffective and dangerous injections for a mild, endemic, common cold virus!
I captured great footage of this historic moment, as the Freedom Convoy rolled through BC’s Interior, headed toward Alberta and then across the continent!
In the second half of an interview this month on Del Bigtree’s “The Highwire” — “COVID-19: Following the Money” — policy analyst A.J. DePriest reported on the impact of billions in COVID stimulus funds, which, according to some doctors and lawyers, turned hospitals and medical staff into “bounty hunters,” and COVID patients into “virtual prisoners.”
As reported last week by The Defender, federal monies from the 2020 and 2021 COVID stimulus bills dramatically reshaped K-12 educational priorities, turning American school officials into lackeys for federal agencies more intent on masking and vaccinating every last child than on supporting meaningful education.
So, too, with the stimulus-induced reshaping of hospital priorities.
In the second half of a January interview on Del Bigtree’s “The Highwire” — “COVID-19: Following the Money” — policy analyst A.J. DePriest reported on the untoward consequences set into motion as a result of COVID funds provided to hospitals.
Managed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the federal government allocated a total of $186.5 billion to the Provider Relief Fund (PRF), with two-thirds ($121.3 billion) disbursed as of January 2022.
The first tranche of $50 billion for hospitals and other Medicare providers — “for healthcare-related expenses or lost revenues … attributable to COVID-19” — began flying out the door in April 2020.
Almost immediately, alert doctors and astute journalists warned the Medicare add-on payments built into the relief package created perverse incentives unfriendly to patients’ interests.
As summarized by Dr. Scott Jensen — former Minnesota state senator and current gubernatorial candidate — “anytime healthcare intersects with dollars it gets awkward.”
Nearly two years down the road, the “awkwardness” is increasingly difficult to hide.
In the view of DePriest and many others, HHS’s stimulus slush fund has been every bit as dangerous for hospital patients as the U.S. Department of Education’s handouts have been for the nation’s schoolchildren.
Making out like bandits
Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet and Ali Shultz, J.D., who wrote a widely distributed op-ed in late 2021 for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), summed up the disturbing situation prevailing in hospitals. The AAPS’s professional calling card is its “dedication to the highest ethical standards of the Oath of Hippocrates.”
Not mincing their words, the two argued that Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) payment directives turned hospitals and medical staff into “bounty hunters,” and COVID patients into “virtual prisoners.”
Highlighting the slew of CMS add-ons and other incentives established with the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act — and also the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act (PPPHCEA) — they emphasized the payments hinge on hospitals’ willingness to slavishly follow the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH’s) guidelines “for all things related to COVID-19.”
As itemized by Vliet and Shultz, compliant hospitals garner CMS payments for:
Each completed diagnostic test (required in the emergency room or upon admission).
Each COVID-19 diagnosis.
Each COVID admission.
Use of the intravenously administered Gilead drug remdesivir (brand name Veklury), which yields a 20% bonus payment on the entire hospital bill.
Mechanical ventilation.
COVID-19 listed as cause of death.
Citing a Becker’s Hospital Review breakdown, published in April 2020, of CARES Act payments to different states, DePriest told Bigtree payments ranged from $166,000 per COVID patient in Tennessee hospitals, for example, to far higher payments in states such as North Dakota ($339,000), Nebraska ($379,000) and West Virginia ($471,000).
In addition, for hospitals ascertained to be in COVID “hotspots,” HHS distributed special “high-impact” funds — $77,000 per admission initially, later downsized to $50,000 per admission.
HHS explained it used COVID admissions “as a proxy for the extent to which each facility experienced lost revenue and increased expenses associated with directly treating a substantial number of COVID-19 inpatient admission [sic].
The remdesivir ruse
The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) spent $79 million developing remdesivir for Gilead, which itself dished out $2.45 million during the first quarter of 2020, to lobby for the drug’s use with COVID patients.
On May 1, 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized remdesivir for emergency use in individuals hospitalized with severe COVID illness, and members of an NIH expert panel (many with financial ties to Gilead) added the drug to the agency’s treatment guidelines.
A scant five months later, FDA granted full approval to remdesivir for hospitalized COVID patients over age 12.
The World Health Organization (WHO), in contrast, advised against remdesivir, stating the drug has “no meaningful effect on mortality or on other important outcomes for patients.”
Remdesivir sailed through regulatory hoops in the U.S. despite an abysmal track record of “adverse effects serious enough to kill” any individual hapless enough to take it.
Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. discusses remdesivir’s toxicity in his best-selling book, The Real Anthony Fauci, outlining the lethal problems — multiple organ failure, acute kidney failure, septic shock, hypotension and death — experienced by participants in NIAID’s clinical trial of remdesivir as an Ebola therapy.
When the trial, which compared remdesivir against three other drugs, killed more than half (54%) of the remdesivir recipients within 28 days — the highest mortality rate among the four groups — an oversight board forced the NIAID to end the prong of the study focused on remdesivir.
As if remdesivir alone weren’t bad enough, Vliet and Shultz estimate mechanical ventilation kills anywhere from 45% to 85% of COVID patients. Moreover, NIH’s skimpy treatment guidelines prescribe dexamethasone concurrently with ventilators.
Dexamethasone, often described as a “double-edged sword,” is a highly potent corticosteroid that suppresses the innate immune system.
Like remdesivir, dexamethasone’s potentially significant adverse impacts include kidney damage. Additional side effects include interference with the normal function of other organ systems such as the cardiovascular, digestive, endocrine, musculoskeletal and nervous systems.
Ironically, dexamethasone can also increase the need for mechanical ventilation as well as for blood pressure intervention.
Therapies like these are a large part of why, as Vliet and Shultz note, the U.S. COVID mortality rate is so “shockingly high” compared to the rest of the world.
Remdesivir’s trail of destruction could get worse — on Jan. 21, FDA expanded use of remdesivir to “high-risk” adult and pediatric outpatients (age 12 and older) “for the treatment of mid-to-moderate COVID-19 disease,” permitting administration of the intravenous drug in various outpatient facilities.
FDA’s side effects warnings include possible liver injury and allergic reactions such as “changes in blood pressure and heart rate, low blood oxygen level, fever, shortness of breath, wheezing, swelling …, rash, nausea, sweating or shivering.”
Getting involved and bringing transparency
Referring to the 20% add-on payment that hospitals receive for administering remdesivir to COVID patients, DePriest commented that a “bonus” is a “weird thing to call something when you’re murdering people.”
Journalist Jon Rappoport agreed, preferring to characterize hospitals’ behavior toward COVID patients as “a federally incentivized protocol for murder” — or “cash for death.”
All of the above parties concur that the best-case scenario is to treat COVID early at home and avoid hospitals — “because we know from experience what happens there.”
In cases where hospitalization is unavoidable, DePriest encourages communities to get more involved:
“[W]hen you know these hospitals are doing that, the people of that community need to show up at that hospital en masse and start telling them that you, as a community, are going to be advocating for every single COVID patient that walks through those doors, and you are going to hold that hospital accountable — to their patient bill of rights, to their stated visitation policies — and if your state is not in a state of emergency anymore, there shouldn’t be any reason why patients are medically kidnapped and separated from their families and isolated.
“There’s absolutely no reason for it, but the communities have to get involved and they have to confront these hospitals and tell them, ‘We’re done, you’re not killing any more of us.’”
More than 30,000 people attended the “Defeat the Mandates” rally Sunday in Washington, DC, calling for an end to vaccine mandates and government overreach.
Americans of every race, creed, political affiliation, sexual orientation and vaccination status attended the event, including groups of police officers, firefighters and teachers.
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Children’s Health Defense chairman and chief legal counsel, gave a powerful speech encouraging everyone to stand up for democracy and freedom.
Other speakers included: Del Bigtree, Lara Logan, Dr. Paul Marik, Dr. Pierre Kory, Chris Martenson, Steve Kirsch, Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Christina Parks, Dr. Paul Alexander, Attorney Tricia Lindsay, Kevin Jenkins, Rev. Aaron Lewis, Rabbi Epstein, Tramell Johnson, Jo Rose (Jo Speaks Truth), Angela Stanton King, Kwame Brown, Trahern Crews and others.
In its most recent program, La Quinta Columna discussed a 2010 article on a nano-transistor capable of entering cells as if it were a virus.
This is one of the many articles that has attracted the attention of Spanish researchers since perfectly fits with what was found in vaccination vials analyzed by Dr. Campra.
All this would be part of the whole nano- and micro-technological system that’s formed in the human body, creating nano-networks.
More details about this are on the fragment selected by Orwell City.
Note: Remember that you can find all the information related to the research of La Quinta Columna and other independent researchers in the archive.
Let’s take a look at the following article published by El País in 2010.
“A transistor that enters cells like viruses. The Harvard-made nanosensor can record biological activity without disrupting it. Coming out of Harvard University’s laboratories and shaped like a V, a new nano-transistor smaller than many viruses can be inserted inside a cell and record its activity without disrupting it. The new device is 100 times smaller in diameter than those used until now, which were also flat, while this one is flexible and three-dimensional.”
This flexible property is somehow familiar to us. Sorry.
“…known as nanoFETs, represent the first measurement of the inside of a cell with a semiconductor device, says Charles M. Lieber, director of the project, whose results are published in Science.”
This Lieber guy was the one we saw yesterday, I think, right?
“Scientists claim…”
Dr. Sevillano:
Yes. If I’m not mistaken.
Ricardo Delgado:
Yes.
“Scientists claim that these transistors can be used to measure the flow of ions or electrical signals in cells, especially neurons.” Aimed at the neurons, huh. “They can also be associated with receptors or other biological elements” “to detect the presence of biochemical compounds inside a cell. The diameter of human cells ranges from 10 microns (such as neurons) to 50 microns (such as cardiac cells). The new sensors are in the nanometer range (which is three orders of magnitude less)…” That’s 1,000 times less. “…and scientists have found that they’re accepted by the cell membrane in a similar way to what happens with viruses and bacteria when they coat them with a phospholipid double layer, similar to the structure of the membrane. We have found that the nanosensors can be inserted and removed from the cell many times without detectable damage to the cell, Lieber explains.”
“The transistor is integrated into a V-shaped nanowire that connects to electrical wires to function.” “This work can be a breakthrough in the understanding of intracellular structures, said Zhong Lin Wang,” a nanotechnology expert.”
Of course, he’s Chinese. And it’s this. We’ve seen quite a bit of these “tweezers” in vaccines too, you know?
Let’s see. Well. Here they put the scale representation of a nanosensor inserted in a cell to record the internal activity. Like neurons, as well. Well, this was already published, as I said, by El País in 2010.
Dr. Sevillano:
Yes, right. Since then, the time has passed, and things have been done. They have done everything we have seen there. Everything. You know, nanotubes, self-assembling structures… Everything.
But they haven’t asked anybody’s permission. Nor said, “We’re just going to…” They haven’t asked anybody’s permission. Have they asked anybody’s permission? Have they said, “We’re going to do this and…?” And have they told anybody anything? “No, no…” “That’s a lie, that’s a lie.”
Is the thief going to tell you that he’s robbing you or the murderer that he’s killing you?
“…I think there has been, you know, a total wave right of criticism of the the truth that viruses don’t exist and cause disease. And we see that, seemingly at the same time, that the pandemic seems to be drawing near an end. Right?
We see suddenly lifting restrictions all over the world.
And even Bill Gates predicted in 2022 that would be the end of the pandemic.
The Wall Street journal printed an editorial saying that…essentially last three weeks a major drop in cases, and it signifies, you know, what do they call it — the herd immunity. Right? Which is another thing we can debunk.
So, as they’re kind of ending out of this — and, you know, I’m sure that there’s more planned in the future. And I don’t know if it’s going to be a health crisis or not. But if this does peter out, they want to make sure that as we, you know, get this relief and come out of it — and probably they want us to look at them in a favorable light.
But they want to make sure that we still believe in deadly and dangerous viruses.
And they want to make sure that we still believe that there are safe vaccines, even if we question the safety of these particular genetic injections.
That we retain those important beliefs, so that they can still continue to profit and manipulate and, you know, run operations in the future.”
~ Dr. Andrew Kaufman
Video available at Dr. Tom Cowan BitChute channel.
See Dr. Mercola’s article “Yes, SARS-CoV-2 Is a Real Virus” here.
VAERS data released Friday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention included a total of 1,053,830 reports of adverse events from all age groups following COVID vaccines, including 22,193 deaths and 174,864 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 14, 2022.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released new data showing a total of 1,053,830 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 14, 2022, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.
Foreign reports are reports foreign subsidiaries send to U.S. vaccine manufacturers. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.
Of the 10,162 U.S. deaths reported as of Jan. 14, 19% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 24% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 61% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.
In the U.S., 525.2 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of Jan. 14, including 307 million doses of Pfizer, 200 million doses of Moderna and 18 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).
Every Friday, VAERS publishes vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 14, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:
The most recent death involves a 7-year-old girl (VAERS I.D. 1975356) from Minnesota who died 11 days after receiving her first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine when she was found unresponsive by her mother. An autopsy is pending.
14 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart inflammation).
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 14, 2022, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:
27,205 adverse events, including 1,559 rated as serious and 35 reported deaths.The most recent death involves a 15-year-old girl from Minnesota (VAERS I.D. 1974744), who died 177 days after receiving her second dose of Pfizer from a pulmonary embolus. An autopsy is pending.
65 reports of anaphylaxis among 12- to 17-year-olds where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death — with 96% of casesattributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
594 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis with 583 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
152 reports of blood clotting disorders, with all cases attributed to Pfizer.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 14, 2022, for all age groups combined, show:
19% of deaths were related to cardiac disorders.
54% of those who died were male, 41% were female and the remaining death reports did not include the gender of the deceased.
40% rise nationwide in excess deaths among 18- to 49-year-olds, CDC Data Show
Death certificate data from the CDC show excess deaths increased by more than 40% among Americans 18 to 49 years old during a 12-month period ending in October 2021, compared to the same time period in 2018-2019 before the pandemic. COVID caused only about 42% of those deaths.
Death certificate data from CDC show excess deaths increased by more than 40% among Americans 18 to 49 years old during a 12-month period ending in October of 2021, and that COVID caused only about 42% of those deaths.https://t.co/0tX147U6Qs
Excess deaths are defined as the difference between the observed number of deaths during a specific time frame and the expected number of deaths during that same period.
State-level data for the same 12-month period also show increases. For example, in Nevada, excess deaths were as high as 65%, with COVID accounting for only 36%. The District of Columbia saw an increase of 72% — with COVID not being a factor in any of the deaths.
Increases in excess deaths were most noticeable in the Midwest and western and southern states, while states seeing the lowest increases were primarily from the Northeast.
Swiss Olympic sprinter gets pericarditis after Pfizer’s COVID booster
On Dec. 22, Atcho received a booster because she “didn’t want to struggle with this when the season started” and was told it was safer to get Pfizer — even though she had Moderna the first time — to avoid cardiac side effects.
On Dec. 27, Atcho said she started experiencing tightness in her chest and felt dizzy while walking. A cardiologist diagnosed Atcho with pericarditis — inflammation of the thin membrane that surrounds the heart.
Atcho is not allowed to get her heart rate up for several weeks to allow her heart to rest and heal from the inflammation. Said she is upset nobody talks about the “heavy side-effects” young and healthy people are experiencing after receiving COVID vaccines.
Experts call on UK regulators to reassess COVID vaccines for 12- to 15-year-olds
In a letter to the UK’s Joint Committee on Vaccines and Immunisation, more than 30 politicians, doctors and medical experts in immunology asked UK regulators to overhaul the country’s COVID vaccine rollout for 12- to 15-year-olds based on new data showing a high risk of myocarditis in that age group.
The experts said data proved “for males under 40, risk of myocarditis was up to 14 times higher after vaccination than after infection” and the risk of myocarditis in young men and boys increased “significantly after a second dose of the vaccine.
They also argued vaccines are less effective “at stemming the transmission of Omicron compared to Delta” and therefore there may be few advantages to exposing young people to the potential increased risks and long-term harm.
Prior COVID infection more protective than vaccination during Delta wave
People with a history of previous COVID infection were better protected against infection and related hospitalization during periods of predominantly Alpha and Delta variant transmission, suggesting natural immunity was more protective against the variants than vaccines, according to the CDC.
New data released Wednesday by the CDC showed people who survived a previous infection had lower rates of COVID than people who were vaccinated alone.
Hospitalization rates were also lower among people who had recovered from COVID than among those who had been vaccinated.
For the study, health officials in California and New York gathered data from May through November 2021, which included the period when the Delta variant was dominant. The agency said there were limitations to the study and results were not applicable to the new Omicron variant.
However, the agency concluded vaccination “remains the safest and primary strategy to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections, associated complications and onward transmission,” due to the risks associated with COVID infection.
The agency did not compare the risks of infection in those with and without underlying medical conditions and did not analyze the risks associated with vaccinating those with a history of previous COVID infection.
Major businesses, attorneys general, respond to Supreme Court ruling
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last week striking down the Biden administration’s vaccine-or-test mandate for private businesses has left many companies scrambling to decide whether they should abandon the mandate or force their employees to be vaccinated anyway while the case plays out in the lower courts.
As The Defender reported today, Starbucks was the first major business to announce it would not enforce its COVID vaccine mandate against employees in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling, while Carhartt CEO Mark Valade announced in an email to staff the company’s vaccine mandate for its 3,000 U.S. employees would remain in place.
Both decisions sparked backlash on social media with calls to boycott both companies.
Meanwhile, a coalition of attorneys general from 27 states is calling on the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to rescind its Emergency Temporary Standard for private businesses with more than 100 employees because it lacks the authority to issue a broad vaccine mandate.
In an interview that La Quinta Columna gave for the Paraguayan channel La Bitácora, biostatistician Ricardo Delgado gave a brief but accurate explanation of the relationship between the self-assembling structures that he and his team have found in vaccination vials with graphene oxide and the generation of MAC addresses.
This explanation is especially good for those who have not yet caught up with the most recent discoveries the Spanish team has made to date.
“The development of science and technology of advanced materials…” Such as graphene. “…using nano- and micro-scale units can be conducted by a novel concept involving the combination of nanotechnology methodology with various research disciplines, especially supramolecular chemistry.
The novel concept is called ‘nano-architectonics’ where self-assembly processes are crucial in many cases involving a wide range of component materials.”
That is… Let’s say, that the materials that go into the vaccine have some kind of “orders” of some chemical prevalence so that they have to self-assemble in a certain way. And then form these other more complex structures. But also, throughout the evolution of the days.
Do you understand now why they kept the samples in an apparently extremely cold environment and so on? It was precisely so that the hydrogel wouldn’t evaporate prematurely, and these certain formations would appear. It wasn’t to preserve the vaccine at -5 to -10 ºC. Everybody said “What a strange thing, isn’t it?” Now we understand everything.
Okay. Everything we’ve been advancing before. And the most worrisome thing. We have said that graphene is there precisely so that all that can work.
But of course, is that the side effect of introducing graphene inside the body is to multiply signals, as we already know. And when we study the toxicity that graphene has from the chemical point of view, we realize that it’s a blood clotting factor. It generates thrombi, thrombocytopenia…
Graphene is a superconductor, so it’ll go to places with the highest electrical conductivity in the body. The spinal cord is, practically, the central nervous system. It consists of the spinal cord and neurons in the brain. But also the heart, when its electrical activity increases. That’s to say, athletes make a special effort because they work with their tool, which is the heart. When there’s a greater amount of electricity or conductivity, graphene reaches the heart due to greater cardiac activity. Graphene will go there as a conductor to impregnate it. As it’s toxic it generates inflammations all over the parts where it occurs. Systemic or multi-organ inflammations, as those seen in COVID-19.
Then, precisely once it impregnates the heart, it generates, in the case of the myocardium, myocarditis. If it’s the pericardium, pericarditis. But in addition, graphene absorbs radiation and multiplies it, so it generates discharges. And a discharge in the heart generates an arrhythmia. And arrhythmias will have consequences such as fainting, syncope, collapses… Usually with cardiac arrest or sudden death, especially in athletes.
That’s what we’re seeing more and more. They’re arrhythmias camouflaged as infarction. Because infarction has a prodrome. There’s a forewarning. It doesn’t happen to an athlete. It hardly ever happens to an athlete. And yet we’re seeing, well, what we’re seeing absolutely all over the world. Weekends when a soccer player, a cyclist, etc., doesn’t die or collapse are rare.
But, as we have said, as far as the toxicity of graphene is concerned, it generates neurodegeneration. It’s a carcinogen. It triggers mutagenesis, chromosomal alteration… In other words, causes the cancer to skyrocket. This is something that we’re also seeing especially in vaccinated people. Keep in mind that we are talking about a toxic. And not declared in vaccines.
This is an aberration. It’s the side effect of introducing that technology, for which graphene had to be introduced as well. Graphene inside the body is attacked by the immune system as if it were a pathogen. Graphene oxide is the simile of the famous SARS-CoV-2 of the official version. Or non-existent SARS-CoV-2.
This means that when eliminated by the lung, graphene will irradiate them and trigger bilateral inflammations. These are the famous bilateral types of pneumonia.
And now, one very important thing, which is the last article I want to share before opening the Q&A. This one we have here. Precisely what it tells us is that graphene oxide —which is what we have found in the samples— is radiomodulable. Okay? Radiomodulable. Let’s take it out.
What does it mean that it’s radiomodulable? It means that the toxicity of the material depends on the amount of radiation dose it absorbs. Therefore, there may be a person who has been vaccinated and has no bad symptoms, or nothing has apparently happened to them. Except for the damage the chemical does. Even if the body can degrade it. However, another person in the same conditions, but who absorbs the radiation dose because he lives, for example, near a telephone antenna, absorbs that radiation, and begins to shoot the number of free radicals inside the body.
The British Medical Journal (BMJ), one of the world’s oldest and most prestigious medical journals, has now called for the full and immediate release of all data relating to the COVID-19 experimental vaccines and treatments. According to the BMJ, ‘Data should be fully and immediately available for public scrutiny.’
Will the pharmaceutical cartel members Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna and others, along with their allies in government regulatory bodies like the FDA comply with this crucial request?
In the pages of The BMJ a decade ago, in the middle of a different pandemic, it came to light that governments around the world had spent billions stockpiling antivirals for influenza that had not been shown to reduce the risk of complications, hospital admissions, or death. The majority of trials that underpinned regulatory approval and government stockpiling of oseltamivir (Tamiflu) were sponsored by the manufacturer; most were unpublished, those that were published were ghostwritten by writers paid by the manufacturer, the people listed as principal authors lacked access to the raw data, and academics who requested access to the data for independent analysis were denied.1234
The Tamiflu saga heralded a decade of unprecedented attention to the importance of sharing clinical trial data.56 Public battles for drug company data,78 transparency campaigns with thousands of signatures,910 strengthened journal data sharing requirements,1112 explicit commitments from companies to share data,13 new data access website portals,8 and landmark transparency policies from medicines regulators1415 all promised a new era in data transparency.
Progress was made, but clearly not enough. The errors of the last pandemic are being repeated. Memories are short. Today, despite the global rollout of covid-19 vaccines and treatments, the anonymised participant level data underlying the trials for these new products remain inaccessible to doctors, researchers, and the public—and are likely to remain that way for years to come.16 This is morally indefensible for all trials, but especially for those involving major public health interventions.
Unacceptable delay
Pfizer’s pivotal covid vaccine trial was funded by the company and designed, run, analysed, and authored by Pfizer employees. The company and the contract research organisations that carried out the trial hold all the data.17 And Pfizer has indicated that it will not begin entertaining requests for trial data until May 2025, 24 months after the primary study completion date, which is listed on ClinicalTrials.gov as 15 May 2023 (NCT04368728).
The lack of access to data is consistent across vaccine manufacturers.16 Moderna says data “may be available … with publication of the final study results in 2022.”18 Datasets will be available “upon request and subject to review once the trial is complete,” which has an estimated primary completion date of 27 October 2022 (NCT04470427).
As of 31 December 2021, AstraZeneca may be ready to entertain requests for data from several of its large phase III trials.19 But actually obtaining data could be slow going. As its website explains, “timelines vary per request and can take up to a year upon full submission of the request.”20
Underlying data for covid-19 therapeutics are similarly hard to find. Published reports of Regeneron’s phase III trial of its monoclonal antibody therapy REGEN-COV flatly state that participant level data will not be made available to others.21 Should the drug be approved (and not just emergency authorised), sharing “will be considered.” For remdesivir, the US National Institutes of Health, which funded the trial, created a new portal to share data (https://accessclinicaldata.niaid.nih.gov/), but the dataset on offer is limited. An accompanying document explains: “The longitudinal data set only contains a small subset of the protocol and statistical analysis plan objectives.”
We are left with publications but no access to the underlying data on reasonable request. This is worrying for trial participants, researchers, clinicians, journal editors, policy makers, and the public. The journals that have published these primary studies may argue that they faced an awkward dilemma, caught between making the summary findings available quickly and upholding the best ethical values that support timely access to underlying data. In our view, there is no dilemma; the anonymised individual participant data from clinical trials must be made available for independent scrutiny.
Journal editors, systematic reviewers, and the writers of clinical practice guideline generally obtain little beyond a journal publication, but regulatory agencies receive far more granular data as part of the regulatory review process. In the words of the European Medicine Agency’s former executive director and senior medical officer, “relying solely on the publications of clinical trials in scientific journals as the basis of healthcare decisions is not a good idea … Drug regulators have been aware of this limitation for a long time and routinely obtain and assess the full documentation (rather than just publications).”22
Among regulators, the US Food and Drug Administration is believed to receive the most raw data but does not proactively release them. After a freedom of information request to the agency for Pfizer’s vaccine data, the FDA offered to release 500 pages a month, a process that would take decades to complete, arguing in court that publicly releasing data was slow owing to the need to first redact sensitive information.23 This month, however, a judge rejected the FDA’s offer and ordered the data be released at a rate of 55 000 pages a month. The data are to be made available on the requesting organisation’s website (phmpt.org).
In releasing thousands of pages of clinical trial documents, Health Canada and the EMA have also provided a degree of transparency that deserves acknowledgment.2425 Until recently, however, the data remained of limited utility, with copious redactions aimed at protecting trial blinding. But study reports with fewer redactions have been available since September 2021,2425 and missing appendices may be accessible through freedom of information requests.
Even so, anyone looking for participant level datasets may be disappointed because Health Canada and the EMA do not receive or analyse these data, and it remains to be seen how the FDA responds to the court order. Moreover, the FDA is producing data only for Pfizer’s vaccine; other manufacturers’ data cannot be requested until the vaccines are approved, which the Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines are not. Industry, which holds the raw data, is not legally required to honour requests for access from independent researchers.
Like the FDA, and unlike its Canadian and European counterparts, the UK’s regulator—the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency—does not proactively release clinical trial documents, and it has also stopped posting information released in response to freedom of information requests on its website.26
Transparency and trust
As well as access to the underlying data, transparent decision making is essential. Regulators and public health bodies could release details 27 such as why vaccine trials were not designed to test efficacy against infection and spread of SARS-CoV-2.28 Had regulators insisted on this outcome, countries would have learnt sooner about the effect of vaccines on transmission and been able to plan accordingly.29
Big pharma is the least trusted industry.30 At least three of the many companies making covid-19 vaccines have past criminal and civil settlements costing them billions of dollars.31 One pleaded guilty to fraud.31 Other companies have no pre-covid track record. Now the covid pandemic has minted many new pharma billionaires 32, and vaccine manufacturers have reported tens of billions in revenue…
