Perhaps the most impactful revelation in perception that I have ever had was when I finally understood the scientific way of thinking. Because “scientific” often comes, understandably, with negative connotations, we could also substitute the words “rational” or “logical.” This revelation came fairly recently, even though I can see that I have been circling around it for decades.
This understanding is simple and actually obvious, but in practice, it is often difficult to follow. To be succinct, the message is: We do not have to understand what is true to know something isn’t true. A corollary principle is that when a claim is made, the validity of that claim has to be investigated. Science, logic and rationality are based on the premise that clearing away what is not true does not depend on knowing what is true. You don’t have to know why rain exists to know, through careful investigation, that it doesn’t come from elephants peeing in the sky. This approach of discerning what isn’t true is the path to truth, knowledge and, as I am going to argue, unlocking the power of wonder. In today’s world, this path is also excruciatingly difficult.
We are surrounded by, almost swimming in, a mountain of claims. Viruses are real things and cause disease, the atom is made up of a nucleus and orbiting electrons, nuclear weapons pose a threat to humanity and life on earth, we are the most advanced civilization technologically ever to exist on earth, we are formed through evolution based on mutations in our code known as DNA, ribosomes are the sites of protein synthesis in our cells, and on and on and on.
During the past few years, I have spent the better part of my waking hours, when I’m not gardening, cooking, or taking care of animals, investigating the validity and accuracy of these and many more. In each case, the clear findings are that the claims are not proven by the known evidence and facts. Often, it is easy to demonstrate the evidence. But then comes the key element, the questions that sabotage the power of wonder, often unspoken by the listener: “Well, what does cause Covid then? Why do I look like my father? Why didn’t I learn about the pyramid builders in college?” and on and on. Then comes the disagreement, the accusations, the war-like mentality, and connection and understanding fall apart.
Why does this happen over and over again, particularly with loved ones, as well as members of one’s “tribes” or groups? Although many possible answers to this important question exist, a simple answer is, we men and women haven’t learned how to be in the unknowingness of life. Once we see that many taken-for-granted claims are, by and large, distorted fantasies, particularly regarding what passes for “science,” we are left in the place of not knowing, and for many, for a variety of reasons, we feel profoundly uneasy. We wonder what the consequences of adopting this new understanding will be for us, both inwardly and outwardly. Will we be ostracized from society, kicked out of the clan or tribe, lose all connection with all our loved ones? Will we lose our job or livelihood, will we die — both literally and psychically? These are real questions, and we get scared. We lose our nerve and succumb to fear; we lose the ability to unlock the power of wonder.
To unlock the power of wonder is to see and investigate each claim, to search for the foundational principles or observations that will affirm or refute them. If the claim is that three dots on a page are in a straight line, you don’t need to consult experts, you need a ruler. Once you have verified the falsity of the claim, you allow yourself to stand in the unknowing stage, in the “I wonder, then, what is true?” Here is where the magic and power lie. It is as if the angelic or spiritual world sees your efforts, your courage, and then sends an insight that lights your way. Sometimes, a new understanding presents itself, or a new friend, living situation or job appears.
This path is a true practice in every sense of the word. We are not used to being rigorous in how we see the world, in examining core beliefs. It is painful, and it’s supposed to be. But it also brings a sense of freedom and sovereignty. Once you start on this path, my guess is you will begin to experience the joy and gratitude that is our birthright. We are free men and women. All we need to do is free our minds from delusions, and what opens up for us is profound. Try it, it’s fun.
Last weekend in the “honourable mentions” I included a fascinating article about Bunny, the talking dog. Bunny is a dog that uses a special apparatus that consists of buttons on the floor that she can press with her paws. Pressing a particular button will produce a particular word. The disconcerting thing is that Bunny has a tendency to push buttons that make coherent sentences or questions that she’s never heard before, and that she has done so so many times in contexts that make eminent sense, that it is clear she is trying to communicate. It would appear even that she is asking some pretty “metaphysical” questions, not only about herself, but why she’s “here.” We’ll get back to this whole subject, because it’s the center of today’s high octane speculation.
I suppose that talking about a dog pressing buttons might seem a bit “indulgent”, but in a world where the leadership class of the West appears to have lost all self-awareness and to have become incapable of coherent speech (q.v. Bai Den Dzhao, any recent public statement), a dog apparently forming sentences and asking “Platonic” questions I think is pretty newsworthy, and worth some high octane speculation time. And besides, most regular readers of this website are well aware of my fascination with animals and the apparent intelligence and emotional life in higher beasts: dogs, cats, horses, dolphins, birds (corvids, parrots, &c), and of course, one of my favorites, octopuses. I’ve recounted, for example, the incident with my friend Dr. Scott D. DeHart’s African Gray parrot, Murray. During a period when we were sharing an apartment, I would drive his youngest son to school (Scott left early as he was teaching school). Murray’s cage was right next to the front door, and on the way out, I used to always say, “Ok Murray, I’ll be right back; you be a good bird,” or something similar.
One day, as we were leaving, I turned to Murray as Scott’s son was looking on, but before either of us could say anything, Murray said (I kid you not), “I’ll be a good bird.”
Our jaws were on the floor, and for very good reason. This was a sentence Murray had never heard before. He simply composed it on the spot for the occasion, and used it in the proper context. I tried to put the whole unnerving incident out of my mind, until another incident with Murray brought me up short. Being a smoker, I would also step outside to smoke a cigarette. Shortly after this incident, something began to happen: I’d get outside, light my cigarette, and take that first wonderful drag, and… the phone would ring. Angrily, I’d snuff out the cigarette, run back into the apartment as fast as my overweight frame could waddle, and answer the phone, only to have the line go dead. This went on for a couple of days, and then something else: As soon as I’d enter the bathroom to relieve myself, again, as regular as clockwork, the phone would ring. And it would continue to ring until I came tearing out of the bathroom trying not to severely injure myself as I zipped myself up and waddled to the phone… only to find the line dead once again.
I would probably have gone on like this, until the telltale laughter from Murray after one such incident gave his whole sinister game away:
Parrot: 2 Supposedly Intelligent Human Being: 0
Since then I’ve really had my eyes peeled for similar stories of animal intelligence and, in this case, of an animal playing a game. There are endless videos on YouTube of such things, of crows solving intricate puzzles (using tools no less); of gorillas speaking sign langauge, of octopuses learning by simply watching other octopuses solving problems, and, yes, of African Gray Parrots forming their own sentences and talking.
And now along comes Bunny the dog, who is asking the sorts of metaphysical questions one does not normally associate with canines (or even, as we’ve come to learn to our chagrin in the past couple of centuries, some humans… this article courtesy of MANY of you who read last week’s honourable mentions):
Here is the “problem”, and see if you can spot what caught my eye:
Bunny the Dog is famous on social media because of her ability to talk by using buttons, as reported by Insider. But recently, the talking dog blurted out a surprising question about her existence. Salon reports that Bunny looked into the mirror and asked who herself is.
People were astonished as the Sheepadoodle breed asked about the meaning of life through her augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) device.
Through the development of her communication, Bunny seemed to be interested in her sense of self. Since then, the AAC helped her and other dogs exchange words with humans, but this time, she asked a different one from her usual conversation.
Pressing the AAC button consecutively, Bunny constructed a sentence: “Dog what dog is?” Amazed, Bunny’s human parent Alexis Devine said that the question pushed her to add more buttons for the words “same”, “different”, and “animal.”
…
A combination of over 3,000 dogs and cats are enrolled in this project, including Bunny. Most of the results from the observation suggest that cats and dogs, in fragments, can talk.
OK, I suppose that in itself is not really big news to anyone who has owned a cat or a dog, and seen first hand their ability to understand words. Why should we be surprised that – given appropriate tools – they would use them to communicate to us? But there’s more:
According to Rossano, self-awareness is not the initial target of the study. But considering the development from various subjects, language and self-awareness have added curiosity to research. With that said, Rossano shared that the new concern of the study is whether dogs can recognize a sense of time, such as the past, present, and future.
…
For example, even though dogs have difficulty identifying themselves in the popular mirror test, a recent study published on Scientific Reports entitled “Dogs (Canis familiaris) recognize their own body as a physical obstacle” suggests that dogs have the capability to identify self-awareness through considering their own bodies as an obstacle.
As one might have guessed, it is this which caught my attention, plus the fact that Bunny at least appears to be asking “the Platonic questions”: what am I, why am I here, who am I?” and perhaps the most important question, “What is an ‘I’?” In some past blogs and in some vidchats I’ve remarked often on the need to break out of this post-Cartesian binary world of the equations we’ve all absorbed from the wider (and mostly western) culture of “human=intelligent & self-aware, everything else=not intelligent nor self-aware”. I’ve remarked that St. John of Damascus once used the term “hypostasis” not only to denote individual human persons, but also particular animals (this horse and that horse), and so on. The story of Noah’s ark is not simply the story about the survival of humanity, but of animals.
All this brings me to my two off-the-end-of-the-twig high octane speculations of the day: firstly, what if our tests of “self-awareness” in dogs, cats…whatever… are simply the wrong test? What if our obsession with mirrors and so on is more of a comment on the human predisposition toward narcissism rather than self-recognition and awareness? What if it is a pathology as much as it is an indicator of self-awareness? What if animals do not respond to the “mirror test” because they think it’s rather silly and uninteresting?
Don’t laugh, because in my Shiloh’s case, I noticed exactly this behaviour. The big mirror in my master bathroom is visible from my bed. The first few nights I had her, she would bark at her reflection in the mirror. On one occasion, as she sat on the bed barking at her reflection, something amazing happened: she cocked her head in that wonderful way that dogs do, and then, cocked it in the opposite direction. And immediately the barking at her reflection stopped, and has not resumed. It’s as if, in that moment, she understood that the dog in the mirror was her. At that moment, she lost interest, and has not barked at herself since.
This leads my to my second high octane speculation of the day, one with much more profound implications, one sparked by Bunny’s metaphysical questions, and by all those videos of octopuses watching each other solve problems, of crows solving intricate multple-step puzzles (and using tools to do it), of African Gray Parrots forming sentences and asking questions, of gorillas using sign language, and add to this all those stories of saints with their bears, or befriending lions, or surrounded by wild birds who seem to flock to them: or of those videos of pigeons attacking 5G towers and removing the wires: something is going on in the animal world, but what? And my speculative answer is, what if something is causing them to “wake up” for whatever reason, to take the next big “cosmic leap” in intelligence? What if, in response to humanity’s insanity in trying to develop artificial intelligence, this is nature’s way of balancing things out? What if, indeed, armies are being raised right under our noses, and we’re too stupid to see it?
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappeared on March 8th 2014. On May 19, about nine weeks later, a leaked video was published to YouTube by a third party who claimed to have received it on March 12th. The video shows what appears to be a jet airliner on fire being trailed by three spiraling orbs. Eventually, the three orbs change to a vertical pattern and disappear in a flash with the airliner, leaving a dead-end trail of smoke in the sky. A month later on June 12th, a second video was published to the same channel that showed the exact same event taken from a different viewpoint. These videos have been deleted from YouTube but can still be found on archive-dot-org.
Ashton Forbes and his team have been researching these videos extensively, and have provided exhaustive evidence that these videos are legitimate. Including digital forensics verified by CGI professionals, eyewitnesses, and government data, Forbes and his team have successfully addressed all de-bunker claims and have listed them for all to see on X-dot-com @JustXAshton. So far, nobody has been able to de-bunk this research.
Their research shows that the first leaked video was taken from a pair of American signals intelligence satellites known as USA-229. Twin satellites capable of creating 3D stereoscopic images by capturing two slightly different views. The twin USA-229 satellites are logged at the exact location, time, and apparent angle required to of captured this video. This event occurred at around two-thirty in the morning, it was completely dark, the wavelengths captured by these cameras are for detail, and the stereoscopic effect allows for added depth perception.
The source of the second video has been identified as an MQ-1C Gray Eagle unmanned combat drone with Infrared and thermal technology. This video focuses on the heat signature.
And the man responsible for leaking these videos seems to be Lt. Cmdr. Edward Lin. He was accused of being a spy, but court transcripts prove that this was just spin. The details of his crimes, including the time they happened, are redacted, but it came out in the trial that the classified information in question was published on the internet. And Lt. Cmdr. Edward Lin had full security clearance to the same technology used to capture these videos.
Using Inmarsat satellite ping data and military radar to track its path, and eyewitness testimony to verify it, Forbes put together the final flight path of Malaysian Airlines Flight 370:
On March 7th at 16:42 UTC Flight 370 takes off from Kuala Lumpur International Airport. At 17:21 the plane abruptly turns back towards the nearest airport in Penang. A witness on an oil rig reported that the plane was on fire. Several witnesses along the East Coast reported hearing a loud bang and seeing a glow coming from the plane as it passed overhead. At 17:52 the co-pilot’s mobile phone pings the local tower. At 18:40 an eyewitness on a boat reported that the plane was glowing orange and appeared on fire. The Inmarsat ping data shows the same sharp left turn that we see in the videos, and then abruptly goes to zero as the plane disappears.
The CCP released Chinese satellite images that appear to be three orbs. They first claimed it was debris, and later said that releasing the image was a mistake. According to Chinese media, nineteen families have signed a statement claiming they made calls that connected to missing passengers after the disappearance but without an answer.
Some people are saying this was alien UFOs saving a plane from crashing. But this doesn’t explain the fact that three different advanced US military surveillance cameras captured this one event. Twenty-three of the passengers on board were related to Freescale Semi-Conductors, a field leading the development of super-conductor technology, which is what this appears to be. Some type of superconductor targeting system for teleportation. Which is reminiscent of what the NAZIs were doing with their highly classified Die Glocke project.
Luminous objects like this were first reported in May of 1940 as Germany invaded Belgium. And by 1942 several people reported seeing them in the skies over Germany. American pilots during World War Two called them, Foo Fighters.
And let’s not forget Gary Mckinnon, who in 2002 was accused of perpetrating the “biggest military computer hack of all time”, and who claimed to have seen evidence of an advanced off-world military fleet.
Psychiatrists used to not put much effort into diagnosing. Instead, they focused on getting to and working on the issues in their clients’ lives that were upsetting them. But all that changed when the 1980 DSM came out. Since then, diagnosing mental disorders has been one of their main focuses (prescribing medicine being the other). People pay huge sums of money for psychiatrists’ expert opinions, and their diagnostic evaluations carry great weight in court, school, the workplace, and disability determinations. But is this truly warranted? Is a doctor really needed to make a psychiatric diagnosis, or can anyone do it?
Here are three points which support the idea that anyone can make a psychiatric diagnosis:
1. All the diagnostic criteria that psychiatrists learn in their training can be easily found on various websites. Therefore anyone can look up the criteria for diagnosing any mental illness and then conduct a do-it-yourself diagnostic evaluation.
2. It’s true that only trained doctors can perform physical exams and order lab tests, x-rays/scans, biopsies, etc.. And it’s true that only doctors are qualified to interpret their results. But these medical workups are only ever done to verify physical illness diagnoses, like cancer or diabetes. They are never done to diagnose mental illnesses. If a medical workup is ever done during a mental illness evaluation, it’s only to rule out a real (physical) illness.
3. If one examines the criteria for all the mental illness diagnoses, it becomes clear that identifying them doesn’t require any medical background or skill. For example, here are some criteria for diagnosing depression: diminished interest/pleasure in activities, indecisiveness, and feelings of worthlessness. First of all, these are not terms/concepts that only doctors are privy to. Secondly, they’re vague, subjective perceptions rather than objective, scientific facts. They’re in the eye of the beholder. Thus, any human could offer an opinion as to whether or not someone is experiencing them. Who’s to say which is the “right” opinion?
These are all excellent points.
But if a regular human such as you dares to take it upon yourself to perform a psychiatric diagnostic evaluation, you’ll be laughed at for your brazenness. You need a doctor’s official stamp of approval to make the diagnosis appear legitimate and valid. Doctors are greatly revered and trusted. Only if you tell others that a learned doctor diagnosed you with your mental illness, will it be viewed as a proven fact rather than a mere opinion. So even though psychiatrists don’t use any medical knowledge when making diagnoses, they do have MD degrees, and that’s enough.
Furthermore, for centuries psychiatrists have been designated by society to be the supreme authorities over several key areas: They decide who is insane and should be involuntarily committed and forcibly sedated. They also determine who is mentally unfit and should lose their right to manage their own lives. Perhaps these longstanding power roles have culturally imbued psychiatrists with an aura of superhuman capabilities which makes all their opinions far more important than a regular person’s. The common belief that psychiatrists have the intimidating ability to read and manipulate people’s minds may enhance this aura. Without necessarily being consciously aware of the aura, people may sense it, fear it, and be awed by it. They may thus be particularly likely to unquestioningly, submissively accept whatever their omniscient psychiatrist diagnoses and commands.
Psychiatry’s aura of superiority may be what enabled it to convince people that mental illnesses are real physical illnesses, even though they’re opposites: First psychiatry constructed a fantasy about emotional distress being a medically-treatable disease caused by a chemical imbalance or brain anomaly.Then it turned it into a reality just by proclaiming it to be true. It didn’t matter that 50 years of intensive research never found any chemical imbalances or brain anomalies. Nor did it matter that antidepressants were proven to be mere placebos(1). When psychiatry says something is true, that makes it true, no matter how illogical. And this isn’t the first time this was done: The diagnosis of hysteria was taken seriously for many centuries. It was another example of emotional distress being unfoundedly declared to be a medical condition. This time it was said to be caused by a wandering uterus, and the treatment was to coax it back into place(2).
Psychiatry would lose its power over people if its aura was removed, because nothing would be left but smoke and mirrors. People would lose faith in it (just as happened to the Wizard of Oz when his curtain was removed, revealing that he wasn’t a higher being but just a regular human). Psychiatry’s customers would then realize that they’re not defective and helpless as their doctor oppressively insists. They’d see that they’re actually capable of thinking for themselves in order to devise adaptive ways to solve their own problems. (The tin man, scarecrow, and lion made the same realization after their wizard was shown to be a fraud.) If this ever happens, then people will no longer feel compelled to follow the yellow brick road to a doctor’s office to have their painful feelings medicalized.
1. Kirsch, I. “The Emperor’s New Drugs: Exploding The Antidepressant Myth”, Basic Books, New York, 2010.
2. Wellesley, M “A Load Of Ballokis” London Review of Books, 23 April 2018.
Lawrence Kelmenson has practiced psychiatry for 32 years, working with children, adults, and families. He graduated medical school from State University of New York, and completed psychiatric residency training at Cornell. He then became staff psychiatrist, and later medical director, of Craig House Hospital in Beacon, New York until 2000, and has since conducted a psychotherapy-based private practice in Cold Spring, New York.
Songwriter: Bradley James Skistimas
Publisher: Seven Places Music (ASCAP)
Label: Baste Records
Lyrics:
Well there ain’t no rock and roll Ever since they sold out Rolling Stone All the words that were sung in the past Will never feel the same when we’re looking back All the old men sitting in their make up chair With their gold record walls really couldn’t care All the fame feels the same when you’ve had enough So they don’t bother standing up
And there ain’t no peace and love Ever since the sixties kids grew up All the drugs and the girls and the cash After all the songs it was gone in a flash All those bad boy rebels and the attitude What a show, we didn’t know that none of it was true Only self serve anti-establishment We were all so innocent
Because there ain’t no rock and roll
And the blues has lost it’s soul
All the punks gave the man control And every pop star’s bought and sold No, there ain’t no Ain’t no rock and roll
And there ain’t no Joni, no Bob No one stuck around for their protest job All the stars and the big pharma whores Shilling for a check from their corporate chores All the actors say what they’re paid to say While the fans take the blame All the once cool fools that were me and you Well they pushed us all away
Because there ain’t no rock and roll
And the blues has lost it’s soul
All the punks gave the man control And every pop star’s bought and sold No, there ain’t no Ain’t no rock and roll
And there ain’t no Boss, no Queen Never was a rage against the damn machine No there ain’t no fighter in the foo No more rockin’ in those free world shoes All the high strung Neil Young wannabes Yea their silence has been deafening All the suits lick the boots of the government What they sang they never meant
Because there ain’t no rock and roll
And the blues has lost it’s soul
All the punks gave the man control And every pop star’s bought and sold No, there ain’t no Ain’t no rock and roll
The narrative of an Anthrax bioweapons attack is again in the “news cycle” and remains prominent on the CDC website.
A November 15, 2023 CDC news brief updated advice for healthcare providers in preventing and treating anthrax should a “wide-area aerosol release of B. anthracis” occur.
CDC has classified B. anthracis as a “category A” organism of concern because an attack with B. anthracis would happen via aerosolized exposure. How does the CDC know that any attack would be in an aerosolized form? Does the CDC have a crystal ball? The CDC did seem to know the problems of the COVID19 vaccines before they were distributed:
Americans need to be prepared for the possibility that they may feel a little unwell after they get a coronavirus vaccine, if one is authorized. – CDC Prevention Advisory Committee, November 23, 2020.
Appearance of small welts or sores that are itchy.
Confusion or dizziness
Cough
The sore developing into a blister that turns into a skin ulcer.
Nausea and loss of appetite ( if the infection is through ingestion).
Swelling in the neck area.
Headache & fatigue
Sweats
Shortness of breath
Diarrhea accompanied by severe abdominal pain.
If exposed to the CDC anthrax antigen, the CDC recommends Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP), suggesting immediate vaccination and antimicrobial therapy (Ciprofloxacin and Doxycycline are first-line options). The CDC says a new and improved anthrax vaccine became available in 2019. However, on July 20, 2023, the U.S. FDA approved a neweranthrax adjuvanted vaccine, Cyfendus for use in adults 18-65 exposed to anthrax as a countermeasure. Where there is one countermeasure there are always more.
A 2000 report published in Experimental and Molecular Pathology titled, “Antibodies to Squalene in Gulf War Syndrome,” described symptoms including severe headaches, nausea, muscular pain, joint swelling, short term memory loss, night sweats, depression. Autoimmune conditions ranged from fibromyalgia, lymphadenopathy, Lupus, Multiple Sclerosis, autoimmune thyroid disease, chronic fatigue syndrome to malar rashes, chronic headaches, non-healing skin lesions, musculoskeletal disorders (ALS), among others.
US District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled that it was illegal for the federal government to mandate anthrax vaccinations. Judge Sullivan banned the Pentagon from forcing military personnel serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea, and part of Asia and Africa to get the anthrax shots without their prior consent. The military could not require the vaccine until the FDA approved it for the specific use of inhaled anthrax. – Hill & Ponton Disability Attorneys, Dec. 2020, updated
In general, adjuvants, such as squalene are added to vaccines (flu shots) to hyper-stimulate the immune system. They are designed to stimulate antibody creation and remain in the body for a prolonged reaction. The new class of adjuvants are comprised of phospholipids (surfactants), which also happen to make up the membrane of every human cell. Using recombinant DNA technology, phospholipids are combined with recombinant proteins and engineered in a way to be structurally and functionally identical to their natural counterparts. As such, the body can create antibodies to its own tissues in an attack of the Self.
A Little Anthrax History
B. anthracis (anthrax) was discovered in 1875 by the German physician and one of the founders of microbiology, Robert Koch (1843-1910) who developed Koch’s Postulates. He also discovered the deadly toxins cholera and tuberculosis, then was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1905.
Anthrax had also been produced in a Russian lab since before the 1920s. In May 1926, the first report of a new anthrax strain with enhanced virulence was filed, resulting in a 100% increase in mortality. By 1930, Germany had a bioweapons facility. By 1935, the Russians had developed a human anthrax vaccine.
Today, many countries have developed weaponized anthrax through genetic manipulation using bacteria and insects. According to the NIH, Russia created anthrax by introducing an “alien gene” into the highly toxic Baccillus Anthracis bacteria. The new NIH version of anthrax is resistant to antibiotics.
They used an alien gene and genetically altered bacterial immunological properties to produce a deadly pathogen to Humans. Where did they get an alien gene from? A UFO crash perhaps? Negotiations with other beings? Your guess is as good as mine….I found a patent with a method for removing plasma (DNA) from Bacillus anthracis bacteria using CRISPR/Cas9 system and it’s owned by China. This is how they get Mycoplasmas.
— Ariana Love, ND Nov. 23, 2021
The process that began before 1950 is called Cross-Species-Genomics. Its purpose? “To generate disease models.” In other words, to produce the deadly biowarfare agent for use in vaccines. The science reveals that deadly agents do not cross the species barrier unless genetic modification is used in a lab setting. A 2002 study in the Journal Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology states:
The assessment of species barriers has relied on the development of a clinical disease in inoculated animals. On this basis there is a highly efficient barrier limiting transmission…
After 1979, the Soviet’s preferred a bioweapon of inhaled anthraxdue to undifferentiated symptoms that resemble a cold or flu. This version was genetically attenuated sometime before 2006 by the NIH.
British SIS intelligence reports from 1924 confirmed the use of anthrax shells (with a capacity of 2 liters/shell), bombs, and mortars.
In the April 2021 Journal Nature, the study, “Adjuvantng a subunit COVID-19 vaccine to induce protective immunity,” the reference to Alhydrogel is listed under Adjuvant Formulations and immunization:
Alum (Alhydrogel 2%) was purchased from Croda Healthcare (batch 0001610348)
According to a 2021 study in Molecular Cell, Anthrax is developed to “regulate gene expression by binding to DNA sequences and modulating transcriptional activity through their effector domains.” So Anthrax has more than one function.
The reason to be aware of any possible aerosolized anthrax bacterium spore release is to know the natural remedies that exist so you have a choice between consenting to an experimental vaccines and prescribed pharmaceuticals or natural options.
As a disclaimer, nothing suggested in this article is intended to replace consulting with a medical expert if you have a medical problem. Everyone should take responsibility for his or her own health and do your own research. That said, the following herbs and foods are commonly known remedies to help enhance the immune system, your built-in defense system, and can be incorporated in or with meals.
Garlic displays potent anti- anthracis activity, according to the 2021 Journal of Ethnopharmacology. So start thinking of your favorite garlic dishes to create in the kitchen. Alternatively, you can make a tea. Peel and crush into a fine paste with water. Mix paste in two glasses of warm water. Drink in two doses: morning, before bedtime. Continue for 10 days.
Oil of Oregano
Homeopathic anthracinum – super-diluted and potentized extracts of the anthrax bacteria itself to boost immunity on a nanoscale.
Herbs:
Wintergreen essential oil – for discomfort in bones, muscles and joints. Add a few drops to olive oil and apply to the soles of the feet. You can also add 3-5 drops to a bath.
White Fir – oxygenates with antiseptic properties known for us in disease caused by bacteria. Mix essential oil with olive oil or use essential oil as aromatherapy.
Thyme and Melissa (lemon balm) – Fill a capsule with 12 drops of Thyme and 1 drop of Melissa.
Spruce – essential oil has oxygenating properties with support to the nervous and respiratory systems.
Idaho Tansy – stimulates the immune system. Can be applied topically against infection or on wounds.
Savory and Oregano oil – both herbs are potent anti-microbials.
Astragalus root powder Chaparral power Tea – Mix 2 teaspoons of each herb in 2 glasses of warm water. Strain and add organic honey. Drink twice during the day.
Echinacea – boil 2 tsp. root powder in two glasses of water. Strain. Drink twice daily for a week or more.
Hey, Larken Rose here, and whether you completely despised Donald Trump or totally adored Donald Trump, you’ll probably be offended by this video either way. Because the two sides, the sides that are going, ‘Rah, rah, rah’, put him on the throne. And the side that’s going, ‘anybody but him on the throne’ are falling for the exact same game. And it’s worth explaining the phenomenon and how, oddly enough, both sides are examples of — they’re driven by good intentions but they’re driven into playing an inherently, immoral and destructive game known as politics.
Now the thing that the leftist media just has complete tantrums about is the same thing that makes a lot of people like Donald Trump. It isn’t principle because he doesn’t have any. It isn’t being pro-freedom because he isn’t.
It’s the fact that he doesn’t appear as a normal politician. He speaks with disdain and disrespect towards a bunch of power-happy psychos. And lots of people like that and go ‘Rah, rah, rah’ about that, as well they should.
I think, accidentally, the best thing Trump is doing is tearing down the apparent respectability of the entire system. I don’t at all mind that he talks down to them and constantly insults them. What’s kind of hysterical is that anybody imagines that he’s any different. He isn’t. He’s one more clown in the clown show.
But I wanted to at least give a little sympathy to the people falling for the Trump pitch because most of them are doing a common thing that a lot of people did. I remember doing it myself with Ross Perot. It shows how old I am. Basically imagining into his words things that I wanted him to believe in. Things, agendas that I wanted him to push, whether it matched or not.
So lots of people love Trump because they picture him as an outsider, which he’s not. They picture him as anti-establishment, which he’s not. And they hallucinate that he’s in favor of freedom, which he isn’t.
But the fact that he talks down to them and is insulting, and is sort of funny in the process, and you so rarely see that among politicians, that excites a bunch of people. Like, ‘Yeah, you tell ’em!’. And they’re not — they’re just emotionally riled up because they’re so sick of the lukewarm tomato soup BS crew — that both parties have cranked out as politicians for decades and decades and decades and decades — that by comparison, they think, here’s Trump, he says it like it
Well, no, he doesn’t, but he says it bluntly and insultingly. And that’s refreshing to a lot of people, which is kind of weird and kind of understandable. Because the fake respectability that politics has received for so long, including in the mainstream or formerly mainstream media, is sickening. Like we’re supposed to treat these people like, oh, there are lords and masters and they’re above reproach. And no, there are a bunch of corrupt, lying psychos. And the fact that Trump points that out and says so, gets a lot of people excited. And then they want to believe that he is fundamentally different, even though he’s not and he’s never given any reason to think he’s fundamentally different. Because he isn’t.
He openly adores literal dictators. He single-handedly pushed the worst federal gun control in my lifetime by telling the lawyers, not even going through Congress, something that conservatives would have flipped out if a Democrat president did this. Which is ‘I’m just going to tell the lawyers rewrite the definition of machine gun and make it include bump stocks. So now I’m just making several hundred thousand Americans into felons overnight by changing the wording of a regulation. Because I said so.’ That’s what Trump did. And if Biden had done that, all of the conservatives would have flipped out. But their own favorite clown did it. So they’re like, ‘Well, he was bullied into it or he had to or it’s not that serious. It’s just bump stocks.’ They make excuses for it, which is exactly what the other side does.
So if you’re going ‘Rah, rah, rah’ for Trump, because you think he’s anti-establishment, I commend you for being anti-establishment. I can’t commend you for being very observant because he’s not anti-establishment. He appointed all the same warmongers. He appointed all the same bankers, all the same parasitic control freaks. And he talks a little bit different.
Donald Trump IS professional wrestling. And he’s literally been involved in professional wrestling. He was the thing that they brought in to get attention back on politics because nobody cared. You have a bunch of lukewarm, boring politicians on both sides. Nobody was paying attention. Nobody cared. Voter rolls were going way down. They needed to shake it up by fabricating a fake drama.
So in comes Donald Trump with all his bluster and bravado and arrogance — and just all the qualities — including the ones that were sort of good? — which is that he dared to bash the system. I mean, he did it sort of incoherently and inconsistently. But at least he showed them, he showed them libtards by calling out how horrible they really are. Yeah, good for him.
Here’s the problem. Literally, every single historical tyrant you can think of, rose to power by bashing an injustice that was there before them. And in almost every case, it was a real injustice. You know, Hitler was right to condemn the — like the Treaty of Versailles and the way Germany had been treated after World War I and stuff like that. That was a just complaint. And that’s why people said, ‘Rah, rah, rah, we want him’. They didn’t say ‘Rah, rah, rah, we want him to kill a bunch of people or, like, bring in fascism and violently dominate everyone’. They went ‘Rah, rah, rah’ because they were so sick of what was happening, that if somebody came along who pretended to be something different, they didn’t bother looking closely at what he was actually proposing. Well, as long as he’s against that thing that we all don’t like.
And the same thing with the czars in Russia and the Soviet Union, and Mao and the feudal lords or whatever you want to call them in China, and the injustice there. We’re going to bring in communism to save the day. Every single time tyrants come to power, it’s because they’re bashing, usually rightfully bashing, some past injustice, or present injustice when they’re in the process of bashing it. That’s all Trump did.
And people were so sick of the liberal collectivist establishment that they decided, well, the enemy of my enemy must be my friend. And they didn’t bother. It was so much wishful thinking. They didn’t bother looking closely and realize Trump is literally a New York liberal. And he’s been pretty open about that. He’s literally buddies with the Clintons and that whole crowd. And he knows how to put on a show, à la professional wrestling, literally being involved in professional wrestling.
He knows how to put on a show to get people’s attention by bashing his enemies — the ones he pretends are his enemies and totally aren’t. ‘Lock her up. Lock her up.” Then the moment he’s elected. ‘Well, she’s been through enough.’ He never meant a word of it. He didn’t care. He’s buddies with them. He puts on a show and you fall for it because you’re eager to have somebody in power who’s against the establishment. So eager that you’ll ignore everything he actually says and actually does.
And what he proposed and did was slight tinkerings with the authoritarian game, adding some here, pretending to oppose authoritarianism over here — to the point where people are going, ‘Rah, rah, rah’, he’s putting tariffs on a bunch of things. ‘Yeah, he’s really sticking it to China.’
The US government can’t tax China. Do you understand that? The US government cannot tax China.
If there is trade between people in China and the US, they can tax the transaction going to the American or coming from the American. Tariffs are taxes on Americans. Always. You can’t tax foreign countries. Wnd you can say, ‘Well, it’s an import tax’. Yeah, who’s importing it? The people here! You import something from China when you’re already here. To stick a tax on that or to stick attacks on exports, you’re taxing Americans.
So you had a bunch of people going, ‘Rah, rah, rah, hooray for Trump because he’s taxing us more’. And they didn’t recognize that, because they were so into the mentality of ‘at least he’s anti-establishment and he’s against China and he’s against Russia and he’s against the libtards’. And no, he’s just one more person playing the game. And that’s why Trump is Trump. It’s because he is a very good bullshitter. Well, I can’t even say he’s very good at that. He’s just convincing enough to have gotten his way in a lot of different ways throughout his life, and to dupe a bunch of people into thinking he’s pro-freedom.
What has he said that’s pro-freedom? ‘I believe in taking guns first and going through due process second.’ What would your reaction have been if Biden said, ‘Yeah, we’re going to disarm you first and then maybe we’ll do due process second’? All conservatives would have flipped out. Donald Trump said that, live and in front of a bunch of cameras. What was your excuse? And that was talking about the red flag laws where, ‘Oh, some anonymous somebody said this person might be a danger. Let’s send in armed thugs of the state to violently disarm that person and then later we’ll go through due process and see if it was at all necessary or justified.’ That was the context. That is 100% anti-constitution, anti-second amendment and pro-dictatorship. Where you start by forcibly disarming people. Later we’ll decide whether we should have.
And so many conservatives go, ‘Well, yeah, but the other side is worse’. And that’s the problem. If you’re not thinking in terms of principles, then all they have to do to get you to cheer for a warmongering power-happy psycho is run him against the slightly worse warmongering power-happy psycho. Or what appears to you as slightly worse. And that’s why people fell for it.
And so the good news is that the enthusiasm behind Trump demonstrated sort of an inherent rebelliousness in Americans. They didn’t want the established –the establishment. They didn’t want the status quo. And here was a guy coming out and pretending to bash it. They were, ‘Rah, rah, rah. Yeah, you tell him.’ And there was so much wishful thinking. They didn’t bother to look closely at what he was actually doing, which was just more of the same. It’s more of what the puppets have always done. Authoritarian garbage.
Yeah, he kept the bombing going. He kept the war going. ‘Well, he didn’t start any new wars.’ Like how far are you going to stretch to pretend he’s a good person who believes in good things.
It’s like, oh, well, yeah, that carjacker, he’s still stealing cars, but he’s only stealing cars from the same people he stole from before. So it’s good. He’s awesome. He’s a great improvement. We support that carjacker. That’s the equivalent of what Trump supporters did.
So for Trump supporters, I would say, don’t give up your rebelliousness. Don’t give up your resentment and hatred for the establishment and the status quo because they totally deserve it. Don’t give up your resentment for the socialist BS that they’re trying to impose on you. But instead of just letting your emotions carry you away, look who you’re actually supporting. And ultimately, what that comes down to is, don’t support anybody being on the throne.
If you believe in freedom, bickering over which jackboot’s going to be on your throat or which clown is going to sit on the throne, that’s not freedom. That’s not in the direction of freedom at all. Your brain isn’t even in the direction of freedom. If the entire discussion you can comprehend is which crook should we put on the throne? The only pro-freedom answer is ‘none’. Don’t have there be a throne.
And I know that’s passed what most people want to think about right now. But in the case of Trump, he doesn’t even do a… like Reagan did a really good job in his rhetoric of bashing authoritarianism, and coming right out and saying government is not the solution, government is the problem. And saying all sorts of cool things like that. And then whether he knew it ahead of time or he was sort of cajoled or tricked into it, he supported the insane evil completely unconstitutional war on drugs.
So gee whiz, one of the best spokespeople for limited government ever, to ever make it to the White House, increased authoritarian domination. And so did Trump. And so will everybody who ever gets there. Because you’re not going to get anywhere near there if you actually, in principle, oppose authoritarianism.
And so it’s sad to watch so many people’s hopes and enthusiasm be thrown into the Trump camp as if that is the path to freedom. No, it’s not. Look more carefully. Don’t support what you blindly wish he was. See what he actually is. See what he’s actually done. See what he’s actually said. Watch what he did in his first for years in there. And then recognize that you’re not pro-freedom.
And the fact that you’re zealously against Biden, because he’s a senile old socialist psychopath — good, keep being against that. And be against that in principle, which also means being against Trump, who also push the free handouts that caused the inflation. Yes. And he did it first. And he was smart enough to do it when he knew the inflation would hit after he wasn’t there anymore. Trump did it, then Biden did it, then the inflation hit. Trump was pushing for bigger socialist handouts after that ridiculous debacle. He was also with his, with his lispy… he was pushing the same crap.
It was under his administration that that slimy little troll Fauci was pushing the propaganda. What did he do? Well, you half the time, sort of pretended, to almost be against it. That cannot be. You can’t make it that easy to trick you into cheering for your own subjugation and victimization and then be baffled by why we aren’t free.
We’re not free because you fall for crap like that. You think Trump is pro-freedom when he hasn’t even pretended to be. And Vivek Ramaswamy, however the hell you say his name, he’s the next salesman of pro-freedom authoritarianism. He’s actually way better at it than Trump as far as trying to express actual principles, but he doesn’t have any. He’s absolutely a statist authoritarian. And he’s doing the same thing of ‘I’m going to bash certain forms of authoritarianism that I think you’re against and you’re opposed to’. So you go, ‘Rah, rah, rah. Put him on the throne.’ And then you’re sort of going to downplay or ignore it when he mentions all the authoritarian domination that he’s in favor of. You’re bickering over what style of fascism you want imposed on you, instead of thinking from principle.
So as for your rah, rah, rah, anti-establishment — good, keep doing that. Only actually do it. Actually do it consistently. Not by supporting Trump, another puppet in the clown show, but by actually supporting principles that don’t match what any politician is ever going to tell you.
If you’re still looking for a political solution, you’re doomed.
So having bashed the Trump supporters, let me focus on the political left and Trump derangement syndrome. And that totally is a thing where they completely flip out. And the irony is they’re flipping out at somebody pretending to be anti-establishment who isn’t. So both sides are pretending that, ‘Ah, this is this radical, extreme change.’ No, it isn’t. Not in any way, shape or form was Trump radical on anything ever. He was this lukewarm, you know, finger to the wind, constantly seeing what would get him approval and him praise and him money. That’s all he has ever cared about.
And anyone paying any attention should be able to see that Trump cares about Trump. Nope, that’s the whole list. Just Trump. That’s all he gives a shit about is himself, his glory, his power, his money. He makes that as obvious as anybody could possibly make it. Like, could the narcissism and ego be any more obvious and blatant than the way he openly talks in front of the cameras. And if you’re trying to imagine him to be an advocate for principles instead of just an advocate for Trump, that’s just your imagination. That’s just your wishful thinking.
But let’s get back to the opponents of Trump who completely flip out at things that aren’t even significantly different. And they have to do that. They have to have tantrums at Trump because what are they even going to pretend to be for? Biden? This senile old corrupt racist? By the way, there’s way more of a basis to call Biden a racist than Trump. Like by a lot. If you look at the legislative history of what Biden has actually voted for and pushed, yeah, there’s a whole lot more basis to actually call him racist than, ‘oh, Trump has lots of white supporters. So he must be a white supremacist’ or some stupid logic like that. I have plenty of complaints against Trump, but him being a racist is like the dumbest.
That’s just the accusation they throw at everybody they don’t like. ‘You’re racist and a fascist.’ He is kind of a fascist and he openly adores dictators. So there’s that. But the racist part, you just made up.
Biden, there’s even less of an attempt to pretend he has any principles. He doesn’t believe in anything except the political machine. It’s all he’s ever been. He’s a cog in the wheel, in that giant machine of evil domination and parasitism known as the federal government. That is what Biden is. And they’ve gotten away with it so long that they take corruption… They’re not even trying anymore. Like Hunter and the stuff he’s been doing. Just so blatantly obvious. Like they didn’t even try to hide it because they thought they’d get away with it. And they knew, probabl, that the media was going to cover for them, which they did. The media lied their asses off to try to cover corruption.
And that’s the dead giveaway. Whether you’re talking about the media or just leftists in general supporting Biden, if they can do things that obviously corrupt and evil. and you’re going to look the other way because ‘well that other guy is even worse’, not only are you just as bad as the people who fell for Trump’s BS, you’re the same thing. You’re the exact same thing.
Trump supporters and Biden supporters are mirror images of each other. They’re both supporting old crooked, slimy, corrupt, power-happy, half senile, slime balls. And their excuse is, ‘Well, the other one is even worse’. Well gee, how did we get to a point where, like, two of the worst people in the world are the choices for president of the United States? And before that, it was Hillary versus Trump.
How do you think we get to the point where 300 and some million people are told to choose between the wicked witch of the west in Hillary and this egomaniac, arrogant lying piece of boop, Trump? Why is that what ended up? Because you keep falling for it. You keep voting for corrupt crooks and doing the comparison game and saying, well he’s not as bad as the other guy, so I’m going to vote for him.
Now, what I’m actually scared of is someone coming along who doesn’t suck at propaganda. And Trump is good at propaganda for an unthinking, emotion driven, angry audience that’s just so mad at the left, which I can understand. You should be left. They’re evil in doing evil things. But they’re so emotionally angry that they’re like, ‘Anybody who’s on our side say how bad they are. Good, you have our support’. Okay. Well, who is he? What does he believe? Well, he’s a self-absorbed narcissist who doesn’t believe in anything except himself. Yeah, that’s going to turn out great.
But the liberals who are just constantly having tantrums, and like obsessed with January 6th. It’s one of the funniest and saddest things I’ve ever seen. ‘January 6th, oh we have to have hearings about it.’ It was a tantrum. It was a frat party tantrum. And they’re talking of this, ‘Oh, this was an attempt to overthrow the government’. No, when there’s an attempt to overthrow the government, you’ll know it because they’ll show up with guns. And they won’t stay between the velvet ropes. But they have to blow it ridiculously out of proportion. Because what else do they have? It’s like, well, our guy is, we don’t know what he thinks. You can’t form a complete sentence. So there’s a problem with that. And even before that, there was never a principle. It was just he, he changed his positions on everything. You can go back and see the videos of Biden floundering on literally every single thing — because he’s going to say whatever he thinks will get him votes and get him public support because that’s what politicians do, including Trump.
So the political left, all they have is hatred of Trump. That’s all they have to hang on to. And it’s not like they know that on a conscious level. But, subconsciously, none of them are like Biden, he’s so brave and principled and he really cares. Nobody believes that. Nobody believes that. Biden is never… And same thing with Kamala, that babbling, cackling imbecile. Nobody believes she gives a crap about anybody but herself. Like, they’re not even putting up good actors in this puppet show anymore. And some people are still falling for it. Thankfully a lot of people aren’t.
Now let me try to give a little bit more credit to the political left, which, man, that takes a serious effort sometimes. But they look at Trump and say, ‘Oh, he’s going to start World War III’. It’s like, well, we’re on the way to World War III and who’s is in the White House now? When people are that scared — like when people are told over and over again, he’s a racist and a fascist and all these horrible things and they don’t bother to check — you can see the outcome. There’s tons of conservative pundits who do interviews with angry liberals and go like, ‘Okay, can you give me example of his racism?’. Dead silence. No example. They have no idea. They just heard other people say it about them. And that’s been true of the political left forever. And now they throw the label, racist and fascist at everybody. I mean, look at Trudeau up in Canada, which is just laughably stupid. ‘So, you don’t like us destroying your lives? Well then you’re misogynist and a racist and fascist’ to the truckers. What are you talking about? We just didn’t want you ruining our livelihoods. How did that get — and how did like homophobe get in there? Like, yeah, you must hate gay people because you want to earn a living. Okay. Not sure how many flying leaps of logic it takes to get that from there to there.
But they’ve become so desperate it’s ridiculous. All they have is throwing the labels. The thing is their followers believe it. When they get terrified. And so you get ridiculous spectacles like the Antifa, which is short for anti-fascist, which is kind of ironic because they’re the most fascist movement there is in this country. Literally, ‘we’re going to violently’ — they use the exact tactics of Hitler’s brown shirts. ‘We’re going to violently attack people, try to silence anybody who disagrees with us and label them as horrible evil people’. It’s just ridiculous because they don’t think in principles either.
What I would really ask people to do, and I know it’s a big ask because it requires people turning down their fricking emotions long enough to think, be clear in your own head about what it is that you actually want. What do you actually want? If policy were up to you. You’re the king on the throne now and they decided, yeah, these candidates are all horrible. They’re taking you and you’re putting on the throne. You can do whatever you want. What are you going to do? Is it freedom? Is it using the violence of the state to control people and limit what they can say and do? Is it using the violence of the state to rob everybody to fund a welfare state or to fund a huge military and a police force?
Whatever you want to do to the people, if you had the power, that’s what they’re going to do to you. Because you’re not going to be the one on the throne. It’s going to be somebody else. If you supported having a throne, and the amount of power that you would have used on people, and then it gets used on you and you complain about it, you’re a giant freaking hypocrite. If you’re a Republican, you’re a giant freaking hypocrite. If you’re a Democrat, you’re a giant freaking hypocrite. Because what every single statist does is say, ‘I want government force used to impose my values and my preferences and serve my interests by way of government power’. Then the next day they’re saying, ‘Hey, no fair, they’re using government power to force their interests and their priorities and their values and their preferences on to me’. Well, gee frickin’ whiz, that’s what the game is, the game that you agreed to, the game that you supported.
And this is a point I’ve made before. I’ll end on this. There is no such thing as political corruption, or I should say it’s redundant. Political corruption is redundant. There isn’t any other kind of politics.
The people who use the violence of government and call it politics to get what they want at the expense of other people’s freedom and prosperity, they call it “a representative republic doing the will of the people”. And the people on the losing end who say, ‘Hey, that’s not what I wanted’ and ‘You’re using their violence against my interests and my values. That’s corruption!’. They’re the ones who are right.
The fact that you might be the recipient, the beneficiary, from corruption doesn’t make it not corruption. Corruption is all politics and government will ever be. It’s all it can ever be.
Fricking George Washington said it. Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. It is force.
When you try to vote a person in, it’s because you want them to use force to force your agenda and your preferences onto the rest of the world. And then you act all shocked and offended when they do the same thing to you. And if you win, you go, ‘Yeah, we’ll show them. We’ll forcibly control them’. A few years later, they win and you’re going, ‘Hey, they’re forcibly controlling us’. Shut up. Until you advocate freedom for everybody, just shut the hell up.
If you’re supporting Trump, you’re supporting authoritarian mass extortion and domination. If you’re supporting Biden, you’re supporting mass authoritarian extortion and domination.
If you’re on the losing end of the game, tough crap, you deserve it because you legitimized that game. You said it was okay. You said you wanted that. You just wanted the violence used in a different direction so that you’d win and they would lose, instead of them winning and you losing.
The thing is, there’s only one way for humanity to win, which is stop advocating violent authoritarian domination. And that means do not support Trump. Do not support Biden. Do not support Vivek or DeSantis or any other clown that says, ‘If you give me power, I will do the right thing with it’. No, they won’t ever. Have they ever? No. And you can point to a thing. ‘Well, he did slightly less abuse’. Oh, goody. We got a slave master who only whips us half as much as the slave master before. Is that any closer to freedom? No. On a practical level. Okay, we’re suffering a little bit less. Rah, rah, rah. That doesn’t make you free. Just means your master is a little bit nicer to you.
And this is something that a lot of people, Trump supporters, Biden supporters, everybody else, they need to recognize that their own goodness is being used to trick them into supporting evil with them as the victim of it. You are supporting your own extortion and subjugation every time you vote, every time you rah, rah, rah, for any political candidate. I don’t care what party. And it’s really frustrating to watch.
Once you’re outside of the game and you recognize how it works, it’s frustrating to watch a bunch of well-intentioned people on both sides, screaming at the top of their lungs how much their guy needs to wield basically unlimited power to boss people around and take their stuff. And they don’t get that the politicians are just sitting back, they’re laughing their asses off, probably hanging out and having parties together like Trump and the Clintons used to. They don’t care. They’re both getting your money. They’re both controlling you while you bicker and hate each other.
And if you actually want something different, Trump isn’t it. Biden certainly isn’t it. If you actually want something different, you have to be able to comprehend something different than bickering over which clown is going to be on the throne for the next how many years.
So yeah, if you want freedom, you have to change what’s inside your own head. Because if you’re playing politics, you don’t even want freedom. You’re not even advocating freedom yourself. And if you expect government to advocate freedom when none of the people voting for it, including you, believe in freedom, you’re going to be waiting a while — like forever.
So I guess that’s about it. By the way, if you want sort of a rude slap in the face, fun allegory, fun and disturbing and traumatic allegory of how the political system actually works and what people are falling for, I highly recommend you watch The Jones Plantation at jonesplantationfilm.com.
I’m not saying either of you are bad people. I mean, yeah, there’s some bad people out there. Most Republicans, most Democrats, they mean well. They think they’re doing the right thing and they’re empowering evil in the process without even knowing it.
So my question to you is, do you care enough to pause long enough to reexamine your own assumptions and your own words and your own beliefs and your own actions to see if you might be accidentally empowering evil? Because you are.
The virus never yet’s been found
Yet theories based on naught abound
Handy tool, device of ghouls
Another fearful trick to fool
Big bang too, a deft device
Explaining cause with bad advice
“God” works well too, to ‘splain away
With Myst’ry kept at deft abay
To understand is just control
The ego knot, the little troll
Thrives on knowing this and that
That nuisance gnat, the little brat
Show me where this self resides
Lest this contraction be but pride
Illusion traps are woven spells
Made real by other ‘magined selves
Hard to believe? Of course it is
That selfsame self within you lives
Programmed, reinforced at will
Behold our whirled, and hence the ill
Nature not, it’s doing fine
A mirror of the deft design
But humans? Man, what happened here
We bit the apple – now the fear
We can’t let go and trust what Is
Everything is now our biz
The hyperactive fearful self
Will not let go, and that’s called hell
Zen Gardner is an impactful and controversial author and speaker, whose personal story has caused no small stir amongst the entrenched alternative pundits. His book You Are the Awakening met rave reviews and is available on amazon.com. You Are the Awakening examines the dynamics of the awakening to a more conscious awareness of who we are and why we are here – dynamics which are much different from the programmed approach of this world we were born into. Zen Gardner does not currently offer public contact details.
When I discovered this study several years ago and wrote the following extensive piece on it, the study was a bolt from the blue, a complete devastating shocker.
It still is.
It is more than enough to topple the whole vaccine empire.
Honoring the work of the study co-author, Dr. Antonietta Gatti, Catherine Austin Fitts wrote, “Not long after the publication of this revolutionary study, tax authorities raided and investigated Dr. Gatti’s and [her husband] Dr. Montanari’s laboratory and private home—an all too usual method of intimidation.”
THAT was the “scientific follow-up.”
In a nutshell, Dr. Gatti’s 2017 study showed an incredible amount of contamination, in a whole host of traditional vaccines. The contamination was in the form of tiny nanoparticles, mostly metallic, and obviously highly harmful and dangerous.
Before reading my summary and analysis of that study—here is an updated communication from Dr. Gatti I received a few days ago. It describes, in a stark and disturbing fashion, what has been happening to her, her work, and her laboratory. This is chilling:
“At the end of last year, our laboratory no longer had the financial capacity to continue its research. The proceeds from the few analyzes requested by private individuals yielded enormously less than what the research cost us. Then, there were two possibilities: close everything or set up a foundation by giving away everything that belonged to us, hoping to find some sponsors. After all, all initiatives, even the most bizarre, find someone willing to contribute financially. Why not a foundation that does fundamental research on health? So, we opted for the latter choice, and the Nanodiagnostics Foundation was born.”
“But, after almost a year, not a cent has arrived. In short, no company, no private citizen, no institution is willing to contribute.”
“Many people continue to demand results and ask questions to which they have no answers from the institutions or their doctors, but, if it is a question of parting from some money, the silence is absolute.”
“It is clear that our work is a threat to billion-dollar businesses that are not exactly clear, at least for most people. For this reason, the most absurd and incredible slanders are invented to our detriment.
Not being able to dispute our scientific results, there are those who publish, usually anonymously, that we earn enormous sums of money, even giving the impression that the Foundation belongs to us, when it should be known that foundations do not belong to anyone, and no one can profit from them. And this is when we have donated everything that belonged to us, and we work for free.”
“Another tactic is trying to isolate and discredit us with lies. What the University of Bologna did a few days ago, the university where I graduated, then specialized and taught, is a small example.”
“A few months ago, that university asked us if we were willing to accept [a] student… who would prepare her graduation thesis with us. We agreed and agreed with the student on how to proceed. A few months passed, then, a couple of weeks ago, when the University authorities realized that the student would work with us, they sent us a message of a few lines in which they informed us that what we do (and which I had taught at that university) was of no interest to them (which, in a way, is true, although very far from the mission of the University). Needless to say, my letter to the Rector asking for explanations remained unanswered.”
“And it is also useless to say how difficult it is to publish the results that we continue to obtain, and which are not liked by those who financially maintain the medical journals, on whose scientific nature I prefer not to comment. For twice the Editor after the publication of an article (on vaccines and on SIDS) asked to retreat [sic] them. Only the work of the Robert Kennedy Jr lawyers stopped the request.”
“[Paper:] Novel chemical-physical autopsy investigation in sudden infant death and sudden intrauterine unexplained death syndromes” (click here)
“Just for your information, in spite of all difficulties, we are now dealing with very critical topics: spontaneously aborted babies, analysis of the brains of infants who died in cots (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, aka SIDS), analysis of what falls from the sky (e.g., recently hail never seen before), food, etc. All this can only be fought with personal discredit.”
“We haven’t had any visits from the regime for a long time. For them it is enough to monitor our computers and phones. The rest is done by ‘volunteers’. As for other scientists, no one deals with our topics in full. It must be realized that doing so represents a risk that is obviously preferable not to take.”
“As long as we can manage, we will continue to work. If, however, no sponsor materializes (idle chatter and empty promises are not only useless: they are a waste of time,) we will have no other option than to declare defeat, a defeat that belongs to the whole world and, above all, to the children who do not deserve the fate they are suffering.”
“…I give some details of our Foundation Nanodiagnostics (click here)…”
IF YOU CAN, PLEASE DONATE TO Dr. Gatti’s vital work at the above website.
Here is my original article on Dr. Gatti’s vaccine-contamination study:
Dangerous nano-particles contaminating many vaccines: groundbreaking study
“The Lung,” Second Edition: “Nanoparticles [are] comparable in size to subcellular structures…enabling their ready incorporation into biological systems.”
A 2017 study of 44 types of 15 traditional vaccines, manufactured by leading global companies, has uncovered a very troubling and previously unreported fact:
The vaccines are heavily contaminated with a variety of nanoparticles.
Many of the particles are metals.
We’re talking about traditional vaccines, such as HPV, flu, Swine Flu, Hepatitis B, MMR, DPT, tetanus, etc.
To begin to understand some of the destructive effects of contaminating nanoparticles in vaccines, here is the groundbreaking 2017 study:
International Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination
Volume 4 Issue 1
January 23 2017
New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro- and Nanocontamination
Antonietta M Gatti and Stefano Montanari
(Paper archived here and here)
“The analyses carried out show that in all samples checked vaccines contain non biocompatible and bio-persistent foreign bodies which are not declared by the Producers, against which the body reacts in any case. This new investigation represents a new quality control that can be adopted to assess the safety of a vaccine. Our hypothesis is that this contamination is unintentional, since it is probably due to polluted components or procedures of industrial processes (e.g. filtrations) used to produce vaccines…”
Are the study authors leaving the door open to the possibility that the contamination is intentional?
“The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us. The inorganic particles identified are neither biocompatible nor biodegradable, that means that they are biopersistent and can induce effects that can become evident either immediately close to injection time or after a certain time from administration. It is important to remember that particles (crystals and not molecules) are bodies foreign to the organism and they behave as such. More in particular, their toxicity is in some respects different from that of the chemical elements composing them, adding to that toxicity…they induce an inflammatory reaction.”
“After being injected, those microparticles, nanoparticles and aggregates can stay around the injection site forming swellings and granulomas…But they can also be carried by the blood circulation, escaping any attempt to guess what will be their final destination…As happens with all foreign bodies, particularly that small, they induce an inflammatory reaction that is chronic because most of those particles cannot be degraded. Furthermore, the protein-corona effect…due to a nano-bio-interaction…can produce organic/inorganic composite particles capable of stimulating the immune system in an undesirable way…It is impossible not to add that particles the size often observed in vaccines can enter cell nuclei and interact with the DNA…”
“In some cases, e.g. as occurs with Iron and some Iron alloys, they can corrode and the corrosion products exert a toxicity affecting the tissues…”
“Given the contaminations we observed in all samples of human-use vaccines, adverse effects after the injection of those vaccines are possible and credible and have the character of randomness, since they depend on where the contaminants are carried by the blood circulation. It is only obvious that similar quantities of these foreign bodies can have a more serious impact on very small organisms like those of children. Their presence in the muscles…could heavily impair the muscle functionality…”
“We come across particles with chemical compositions, similar to those found in the vaccines we analyzed, when we study cases of environmental contamination caused by different pollution sources. In most circumstances, the combinations detected are very odd as they have no technical use, cannot be found in any material handbook and look like the result of the random formation occurring, for example, when waste is burnt. In any case, whatever their origin, they should not be present in any injectable medicament, let alone in vaccines, more in particular those meant for infants.”
This 2017 study opens up a whole new field: the investigation of nanoparticles in vaccines where none were expected.
Such particles are not medicine in any sense of the word.
Many legal and scientific “experts” assert the State has a right to mandate vaccines and force them on the population. But these contaminating nanoparticles are not vaccines or medicines. Only a lunatic would defend the right of the State to inject them.
Here is another section from the 2017 study. Trade names of vaccines, and compositions of the nanoparticle contaminants are indicated. Take a deep breath and buckle up:
“…further presence of micro-, sub-micro- and nanosized, inorganic, foreign bodies (ranging from 100nm to about ten microns) was identified in all cases [all 44 vaccines], whose presence was not declared in the leaflets delivered in the package of the product…”
“…single particles, cluster of micro- and nanoparticles (less than 100nm) and aggregates…debris of Aluminum, Silicon, Magnesium and Titanium; of Iron, Chromium, Silicon and Calcium particles…arranged in a cluster, and Aluminum-Copper debris…in an aggregate.”
“…the particles are surrounded and embedded in a biological substrate. In all the samples analyzed, we identified particles containing: Lead (Typhym, Cervarix, Agrippal S1, Meningitec, Gardasil) or stainless steel (Mencevax, Infarix Hexa, Cervarix. Anatetall, Focetria, Agrippal S1, Menveo, Prevenar 13, Meningitec, Vaxigrip, Stamaril Pasteur, Repevax and MMRvaxPro).”
“…particles of Tungsten identified in drops of Prevenar and Infarix (Aluminum, Tungsten, Calcium chloride).”
“…singular debris found in Repevax (Silicon, Gold, Silver) and Gardasil (Zirconium).”
“Some metallic particles made of Tungsten or stainless steel were also identified. Other particles containing Zirconium, Hafnium, Strontium and Aluminum (Vivotif, Meningetec); Tungsten, Nickel, Iron (Priorix, Meningetec); Antimony (Menjugate kit); Chromium (Meningetec); Gold or Gold, Zinc (Infarix Hexa, Repevax), or Platinum, Silver, Bismuth, Iron, Chromium (MMRvaxPro) or Lead,Bismuth (Gardasil) or Cerium (Agrippal S1) were also found. The only Tungsten appears in 8/44 vaccines, while Chromium (alone or in alloy with Iron and Nickel) in 25/44. The investigations revealed that some particles are embedded in a biological substrate, probably proteins, endo-toxins and residues of bacteria. As soon as a particle comes in contact with proteic fluids, a nano-bio-interaction…occurs and a ‘protein corona’ is formed…The nano-bio-interaction generates a bigger-sized compound that is not biodegradable and can induce adverse effects, since it is not recognized as self by the body.”
“…examples of these nano-bio-interactions. Aggregates can be seen (stable composite entities) containing particles of Lead in Meningitec… of stainless steel (Iron, Chromium and Nickel…) and of Copper, Zinc and Lead in Cervarix…Similar aggregates, though in different situations (patients suffering from leukemia or cryoglobulinemia), have already been described in literature.”
I’m sure you’ve read official assurances that vaccine-manufacturing problems are “rare.” You can file those pronouncements along with other medical lies.
“I’d like the heavy metal sandwich on rye, please. And instead of serving it on a plate, can you inject it?”
Several vital questions demanding answers spring from the findings of this 2017 study:
Are some of these nanoparticles intentionally placed in vaccines?
Does the standard manufacturing process for traditional vaccines INEVITABLY lead to dangerous and destructive nano-contamination?
New nano-technology is already being employed to create several vaccines—supposedly “improving effectiveness.” In fact, the RNA COVID-19 vaccine are a nano-type. Does this manufacturing process carry with it the unavoidable effect of unleashing a hurricane of nanoparticle contaminants?
How many cases of childhood brain damage and autism can be laid at the door of nanoparticle contamination?
And finally, where are these contaminated vaccines manufactured? The above study did not attempt to discover this. It was outside the scope of the research. It’s common knowledge that, for example, in the case of the US, vaccines or their components, are, in many instances, not produced domestically. Where does this put control of safety? In, say, China, where there have been numerous pharmaceutical scandals connected to contamination of products?
The vaccine establishment does not show the slightest interest in answering any of these questions. They are busy pretending the questions don’t exist.
“Why is it so difficult for virologists to simply explain basic questions about a ‘virus’ such as whether the ‘virus’ is living or dead? Why must the concept of what a ‘virus’ is change depending upon the researchers and technology of the time? What physical organism changes in concept after over a century of supposed study? The answer to all of these questions is actually fairly easy to grasp. As the researchers have never actually had any physical entities on hand in order to study, the concept of what the assumed invisible entities are was allowed to constantly change in order to suit the needs and evidence of the researchers of the time. There was no solid foundation for virology to stand upon from the very beginning in order to definitively state what the nature of a ‘virus’ truly is.”
For the greater part of the first 50 years of the 20th century, there was no agreed upon definition for what the invisible entities labelled as a “virus” actually were nor how these agents looked, formed and functioned. Some researchers believed that these entities were endogenous processes produced within the host while others envisioned them as exogenous invaders that came from outside and attacked from within. There were arguments over whether “viruses” were corpuscular in nature or whether they were a soluble liquid. Debates centered around whether these agents were alive or if they were simply inanimate and non-living. While there were researchers who believed “viruses” were a ferment or a chemical molecule of some kind, the majority believed that these invisible entities were just smaller unseen bacterium. According to biochemist and historian of science Ton van Helvoort’s 1996 paper When Did Virology Start?, the “virus” concept lacked clarity and certainty over the first half of the 20th century. However, the link between bacteriology and “viruses” was so strong at this time that these unseen entities were not considered conceptually distinct from bacteria:
“I have come to believe that, despite its widespread appearance in textbooks and journals of that era, the early concept of the “filterable virus” lacked clarity and certainty. More importantly, I also believe that during the 1930s and 194Os, the links between the study of filterable viruses and bacteriology were so strong that viruses were still considered merely another form of bacteria-not conceptually distinct, as they now are.”
The reason for these many contradictory ideas about the nature of the “virus” was a direct result of the fact that the researchers never had a physical entity on hand in order to study. The “virus” was nothing more than a fluid concept that was open to the interpretation of those who claimed to be working with them. Most of these researchers came from a bacteriological or chemistry background, and thus, they viewed the “virus” concept through their own lens and paradigms. Regardless, there was no way to actually determine the true nature of something that could not be seen or studied in reality and that only existed within the realm of the imagination.
Thus, it shouldn’t be hard to understand why virologists often have a difficult time answering simple questions such as “What is a virus?” or “Is it alive or dead?” This is exactly the argument made in the appropriately titled 2014 article Inventing Virusesby William Summers, a retired Professor of Therapeutic Radiology, Molecular Biophysics & Biochemistry, and History of Medicine. While being able to define what a “virus” is should be an easy task for any virologist, simple questions about the nature of a “virus” are not ones that are simple for them to answer. In the opening of his paper, Summers asked a more subtle question about the invention of the “virus” category:
“…how generations of microbiologists arrived at the idea that some of the entities they dealt with fell into a category that differed in fundamental ways from others. In other words, how did they invent the category of “virus” as we now know it?”
Summers looked to investigate how the idea that “viruses” are a separate entity that requires its own category away from bacteriology came to be. In doing so, he admitted that our beliefs, understandings, and conceptions of what a “virus” is changes over time. This is because “viruses” are whatever a virologist tells us that they are. The concept and the nature of the “virus” was invented, and continually reinvented, by virologists as part of the normal progress of their (pseudo) science. In other words, the idea of the “virus” is able to change at any time based upon whatever a virologist wants a “virus” to be at any given moment:
“Even so, how did the category “virus” come to be recognized, and what are its essential, defining qualities? Viruses are natural objects, but our beliefs, understanding, and conceptions of them change over time on the basis of new information, new points of view, and new scientific values and standards. In a very real way, a virus is what virologists say it is. It is a product of the way virologists talk about viruses—that is, the way facts about viruses are organized in their discourse. It can be said that virologists invent (and continually reinvent) the concept of a virus as part of the normal progress of their science.”
The deliberate ever-changing concept of the “virus” shifted away from its original invention as an agent of disease transmission to its modern day concept as a genetic assembly that sometimes causes disease when it integrates into its host in order to survive. This reinvention of the concept happened in 1957 when French microbiologist Andre Lwoff took many competing and contradictory ideas and mashed them together into the modern definition of a “virus” based upon work done with bacteriophages. Prior to his reinvention of the concept, in 1953, Lwoff actually questioned whether a bacteriophage was a “virus” and wanted to know exactly what a “virus” was. He even noted that “viruses” are defined to be exogenous (coming from outside of the body) while bacteriophages are “always formed inside its host” and “could therefore be described as endogenous,” i.e. originating from within the host. In fact, Lwoff stated that “if prophage is phylogenetically endogenous, the temperate phage produced by a lysogenic bacterium must be described as endogenous,” meaning that the phage is from within the host, thus negating it as an exogenous entity in line with the definition of a “virus.” Ironically, after redefining the “virus” as a genetic code in 1957, Lwoff would ultimately warn in 1991 that virology was “in danger of losing its soul, since viruses now show a strong tendency to become sequences.” He also argued that the abundance of discoveries was causing “the very concept of virus” to waver “on its foundations,” noting that the “problem today and in future is to keep abreast of its whereabouts.”
Regardless, Summers stated that his paper was not about the “triumphant accumulation of knowledge by the heroic scientists” of the past. Rather, it was an examination of the “continual struggle to understand and organize observations.” This struggle was showcased by Lwoff’s own attempts to rationalize and combine contradictory evidence in order to create the modern genetic concept of the “virus” from an entity that did not meet the necessary requirements:
“Nobelist Andre Lwoff, perhaps in a Gertrude Stein frame of mind, famously answered “viruses are viruses” (9), but the question “What is virus?” has been notoriously fraught since the role of virus in late nineteenth-century germ theories became central to medicine, and later, in the midtwentieth-century, to biology in general. The evolution, or perhaps deliberate and continuous reformulation, of the meaning of “virus” from an agent of disease transmission in the nineteenth century to a molecular assembly with remarkable properties by the end of the twentieth century is the subject of this article. This is not a story of the triumphant accumulation of knowledge by the heroic scientists of the past so much as it is an examination of the continual struggle to understand and organize observations that challenged and made obsolete the comfortable certainties of the often recent past. This examination requires consideration of past science on its own terms, without judgment in light of present-day understanding, and it requires consideration of the context and extent of background knowledge of the particular period considered.”
This struggle to answer the question “What is a virus?” was ongoing, even in the so-called “modern age” of virology. There was no consensus as to the true nature of a “virus.” Summers shared a quote by Joseph Beard that stated that the “virus” was a fabric of concepts that had been “woven of a plethora of woof and a paucity of warp.” In weaving terms, this makes for an unstable foundation upon which to weave. Another example was of plant virologist N.W. Pirie who was considered “agnostic” (impossible to know one way or the other) on whether a “virus” was a molecule or a microbe. However, he seemed to argue that the variability in the chemical composition of the same “virus” went against the modern molecular hypothesis. Thus, we can see that there was no agreement on the nature of the “virus:”
“The construction of the virus as a living molecule in the middle decades of the twentieth century generated wide debate as to the correct answer to the question, “What is a virus?” Having rejected filterability, negative growth properties, and size as defining characteristics, microbiologists searched for new ways to think about viruses. Even at the beginning of what might be called the modern era, there was remarkably little consensus on this subject. Joseph Beard, in 1945, famously remarked, “Viruses are said to be living molecules and autocatalytic enzymes and are likened to genes and mitochondria—in short, a fabric of concepts has been woven of a plethora of woof with a paucity of warp” (quoted in 47, p. 332). N.W. Pirie, one of the pioneers in the study of plant viruses, even in 1949 was agnostic as to whether viruses were microbes or molecules. In a long review of the problem in the British Medical Bulletin (47), he argued that the variation in chemical composition reported for the same virus suggested a level of heterogeneity not compatible with the molecular hypothesis. He noted that “all the viruses purified so far have contained nucleoprotein, but this generalization may lack significance because the viruses that have been studied are a group selected to some extent on a chemical basis.”
Summers ultimately concluded that each generation of virologists will look at “viruses” in their own way and will alter the concept of the “virus” based upon the “science” of the time. Thus, the “virus” is left to be a concept that is allowed to be continually reinvented at the whims of the researchers:
“Although “viruses are viruses,” each generation of scientists looks anew at these fascinating entities in its own way, endowing them with properties, relationships, and capacities that reflect the science of the time. Truly, they are microbes being continually reinvented by their most ardent admirers.”
In his summary, Summers laid out 5 very revealing points to end his paper on. Sharing similar sentiments as van Helvoort, he stated that the “virus” concept is an unstable one that “evolved,” not due to an accumulation of facts, but rather due to an ongoing reformulation of the “virus” concept on the basis of “scientific” focus at a given time. This reinvention was determined by technological advances rather than scientific understanding. Thus, the answer as to what a “virus” is will depend upon the discourse at the time more so than the “known” characteristics of “viruses:”
The concept of a virus has not been stable and has evolved since its introduction in the latter half of the nineteenth century.
This evolution has been not a linear accumulation of facts but rather an ongoing reformulation of the virus concept on the basis of scientific focus at a given time, e.g., growth, metabolism, chemical composition, genetics, or physical structure.
The concept of a virus has particularly been determined by technological advances ratherthan scientific understanding.
The answer to the question “What is a virus?” is one that depends on the particular scientific discourse at a given time.
The discourse with respect to the physical object “virus” is based on the particular concerns and problems of interest at a given time more than on any one set of intrinsic characteristics known about viruses.
Why is it so difficult for virologists to simply explain basic questions about a “virus” such as whether the “virus” is living or dead? Why must the concept of what a “virus” is change depending upon the researchers and technology of the time? What physical organism changes in concept after over a century of supposed study? The answer to all of these questions is actually fairly easy to grasp. As the researchers have never actually had any physical entities on hand in order to study, the concept of what the assumed invisible entities are was allowed to constantly change in order to suit the needs and evidence of the researchers of the time. There was no solid foundation for virology to stand upon from the very beginning in order to definitively state what the nature of a “virus” truly is.
While Summers paper on the invention of the “virus” offers some great modern insight into the problems related to defining the nature of the invisible beast, there is a much earlier paper by prominent virologist Thomas Rivers from 1932 that details the many issues with trying to give life to the imaginary shortly after its conception. You may know Rivers due to his 1937 proclamation that “It is obvious that Koch’s postulates have not been satisfied in viral diseases.” This shockingly honest admittance that the essential logical criteria considered necessary in order to prove a microbe causes disease remains unfulfilled for “viruses” and continues to haunt virology to this day. As it is a rather long 18 pages that I have reproduced here, I will try to keep my commentary throughout brief. However, what Rivers highlighted as key problems in 1932 during the formative years of virology compliments Summers 2014 paper on why virologists needed to invent, and then continually reinvent, the concept of the “virus” that was dreamt up in the late 1800s.
Thomas Rivers immediately began his 1932 paper on the nature of “viruses” by admitting that, up to 1932, “viruses” were defined solely based upon their absence as well as for what they were not. “Viruses” were defined in negative terms as they were:
Invisible to ordinary microscopic methods.
Unable to be obtained via filtration.
Unable to propagate in the absence of susceptible cells.
Interestingly, things did not progress away from defining “viruses” in negative terms even with Andre Lwoff’s 1957 modern reinvention of the concept as noted by Professor Milton W. Taylor, teacher of virology and world-renowned historian from Indiana University. In a 2014 paper examining what a “virus” is, Taylor explained that Lwoff’s reinvention of the “virus” concept was also a “negative definition” that “stresses the non-cellular nature of viruses.” By Lwoff’s own words from his 1971 paper From Protozoa to Bacteria and Viruses. Fifty Years with Microbes, he defined “viruses” by the “inability to grow and to divide, absence of metabolism, absence of the information for the enzymes of energy metabolism…the absence of transfer RNA and of ribosomes and also of the corresponding information.” In other words, even by the modern definition, “viruses” were still defined by what they were not.
While Rivers attempted to define “viruses” in what he felt were positive terms of what was “definitely known” about these invisible agents, he admitted that the biological nature was still a moot question, i.e. one open to debate and challenges with no foreseeable solution or answer. Perhaps this was due to his feelings that, while there was plenty of data concerning the nature of “viruses,” the accumulated data was “distinctly lacking in quality,” and that “enough reliable data have not been acquired to establish the nature of the viruses.”
The Nature of Viruses
Thomas M. Rivers
The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York
Viruses are usually characterized by three negative properties, namely, invisibility by ordinary microscopic methods, failure to be retained by filters impervious to well-known bacteria, and inability to propagate themselves in the absence of susceptible cells. I prefer a positive characterization of the viruses, one emphasizing the intimate relation that exists between them and their host cells. The multiplication of viruses only in the presence of susceptible cells, their regeneration and production of disease in many instances in only one species of host, the marked stimulation and destruction of cells induced by their activity which on the one hand gives rise to tumors, such as Rous’ sarcoma, and on the other to vesicular lesions, as fever blisters, the intracellular pathology frequently evidenced in virus diseases by inclusion bodies, and, finally, the lasting immunity that follows the majority of virus maladies, are essential phenomena that serve to stress the intimate type of parasitism encountered in working with these active agents. Such a characterization of viruses implies much, not only as concerns their biological nature which is still a moot question, but as regards their activities about which something is definitely known.
Data concerning the nature of viruses are sufficiently adequate in quantity but distinctly lacking in quality. According to reports, some of which have come from eminent investigators, most of these active agents have been seen and have been cultivated on lifeless media. If such statements are correct, viruses are autonomous living agents, and further discussion of their biological nature should deal with their place in the scale of living entities and their relation to other forms of life. Reports of work in this field are confusing, however, particularly to the uninitiated, and critical investigators are of the opinion that enough reliable data have not been acquired to establish the nature of the viruses. Inasmuch as this is a subject of fundamental biological importance, I shall review some of the recently accumulated data regarding the size, electrical charge, purification, spontaneous generation, adaptations, elementary bodies, metabolism, immunological phenomena and cultivation of viruses that might be of assistance in the elucidation of the origin and constitution of these peculiar incitants of disease.
One of the only indirect means which early virologists could use to conclude that a “virus” was “present” in a sample was by claiming that the invisible entities passed through filters of a certain size that retained all known bacteria, thus allowing them to guess as to the size of the unseen particles. Rivers noted that a “virus” was generally accepted as “an object less than 0.2 p or 200 ppl in diameter” and that it was not capable of being seen under light microscopy. In other words, “viruses” were too small to be seen and were defined by their absence. He noted that figures regarding the size of “viruses” derived from stained preparations were apt to be inaccurate and misleading. This lines up with his 1927 statement on filtration in his paper Filterable Viruses: A Critical Review, claiming that the methods were “crude and inaccurate.”
Rivers then presented evidence for the size of eight “viruses,” which were contradictory depending upon the researchers cited. He utilized hemoglobin as a comparison and stated that if the figure for hemoglobin is incorrect (which had contradictory estimates as to its size as well), many statements concerning the size of “viruses” were also inaccurate. Rivers was dismayed that certain researchers did not account for the possibility that they might have been estimating the size of particles of degraded cells to which the “viruses” were attached. He noted that other researchers took this into consideration and that they were unable to be assured that they had been successful in obtaining the correct figures for the size of the different “viruses.” Rivers concluded that none of the figures could be accepted without reservations and that the exact size of any “virus” was unknown. The numerous contradictory results stemmed from “inadequate experimentation, careless thinking, prejudice, imperfect experimental methods, and the difficult nature of the problems.”
SIZE. The size of minute particles may be determined in several ways, namely, by direct mensuration provided the objects are capable of resolution under the microscope; by filtration and ultrafiltration if the factors that influence the passage of the particles through pores of graded diameters are known and controlled; by diffusion, and, finally, by centrifugation. All of these methods have been employed in the study of the magnitude of viruses and the results obtained will be discussed.
It is generally accepted that an object less than 0.2 p or 200 ppl in diameter is not capable of resolution under the microscope when ordinary light is used. Furthermore, it is understood that mordants and stains usually increase the magnitude of small particles. Some of the “larger” viruses, e.g., those of fowl-pox (log), smallpox, vaccinia (122, 123), and rabies, are said to be just visible after treatment with certain mordants and dyes. Consequently, one is justified in concluding that most of the viruses have a diameter of less than 200 pp and in an unstained state are not mensurable by means of ordinary light. Moreover, figures regarding their size derived from stained preparations are apt to be inaccurate and misleading. The use of light of short wave lengths makes possible the mensuration of particles smaller than 0.2 p in diameter. So far, however, this method of investigation has yielded no convincing evidence concerning the magnitude of viruses. It appears, therefore, that direct methods of mensuration only indicate that the active agents are considerably smaller than ordinary bacteria.
The sizes of at least eight viruses have been estimated by means of ultrafiltration, diffusion, or centrifugation. The results obtained for these active agents together with figures for the diameter of the hemoglobin molecule for comparison are given below.
Hemoglobin. For a number of years the molecule of hemoglobin was thought to be 30 uu in diameter. Recently, however, figures (34) derived from the results of Svedberg and Nichol’s (33) centrifugation experiments and Northrop and Anson’s (30) diffusion experiments with hemoglobin indicate that its diameter is approximately 5.5 uu. Many estimations regarding the magnitude of viruses have been based on the former figure for the diameter of the hemoglobin molecule, 30 uu. If this figure is incorrect, many statements concerning the size of viruses are also inaccurateMosaic virus. Duggar and Karrer (17) by means of ultrafiltration found the infectious particles of mosaic virus to be of the same order of magnitude as hemoglobin molecules, namely, 30 uu in diameter. Vinson (34), however, says that Duggar’s experiments interpreted in the light of recent work regarding the size of hemoglobin molecules indicates that the diameter of mosaic virus is about 5.5 uu.
Herpetic virus. Zinsser and Tang (38) by means of ultrafiltration estimated the diameter of herpetic virus to be 20-100 uu. Levaditi and Nicolau (27) in the same way found that the virus passed through membranes which retained toxins, hemolysins, complement, and serum globulins. Bedson (13), however, unable to confirm Levaditi and Nicolau’s (27) results, obtained evidence by centrifugation that herpetic virus is probably of sufficient size to be visible.
Foot-and-mouth disease virus. Olitsky and Boez (31), using ultrafiltration, found that the virus of foot-and-mouth disease is 20-100 uu in diameter. Elford by means of his special membranes estimated it to be 8-12 uu.
Poliomyelitic virus. By means of ultrafiltration, Krueger and Schultz (25), in 1929, found that the virus of poliomyelitis possesses a magnitude not greater than 300 uu. In 1931, by the same means, Clifton, Schultz, and Gebhardt (16) obtained results indicating that the diameter of the virus lies below 50 uu.
Fowl plague virus. By means of ultrafiltration Andriewsky (8) secured a figure of 2.5 uu for the diameter of fowl plaguevirus, while Bechhold and Schlesinger (11) by centrifugation found it to be 120-130 uu.
Bacteriophage. According to d’Herelle (22) and Elford (19), both of whom used ultrafiltration, the diameter of the bacteriophage is approximately 30 uu. Kruger and Tamada (26) by means of purified bacteriophage preparations and ultrafiltration found it to be 5 uu, and Hetler and Bronfenbrenner (24) by means of a diffusion method estimated it to be 1.2-22.8 uu.
Rous virus. According to Zinsser and Tang (38), the Rous virus is 20-100 uu; according to Mendelsohn, Clifton and Lewis (29), 50 uu; according to Frankel (20), 10 uu. All these workers obtained their figures by means of ultrafiltration.
Vaccine virus. Levaditi and Nicolau (27) reported that vaccine virus passes through membranes impervious to toxins, hemolysins, complement, and serum globulins. Bland (15), however, from the results of his centrifugation experiments not only concluded that Levaditi and Nicolau’s findings are incorrect but that vaccine virus is probably large enough to be seen. Bechhold and Schlesinger (11) by means of centrifugation estimated that the active agent is 210-230 uu in diameter, while Yaoi and Kasai (37) working with “purified” virus found that it diffused at the rate of fuchsin particles and is, therefore, not capable of being seen.
One cannot consider the results cited above without being amused and dismayed. Many of the workers seemed in no way concerned about the possibility that they might have been estimating not the magnitude of viruses, but the size of particles of degraded cells to which the viruses were attached. Other investigators, cognizant of the difficulties of the problem! attempted to remove the viruses from such carriers. They were unable, however, to be assured that they had been successful and that they had obtained the correct figures for the size of the different viruses.
From the results of indirect methods of mensuration it is safe to conclude that viruses are small and that some of them may be exceedingly minute. If the figure of 210 uu for the diameter of vaccine virus is accurate, there is no reason as far as size is concerned to suppose that the virus is not a living organism. On the other hand, if the figures of 1.2 uu, 5.5 uu, and 8 uu for the bacteriophage, mosaic virus, and foot-and-mouth disease virus, respectively, are correct, it is obvious that these agents cannot be highly organised, because it is impossible that with such a magnitude they can consist of more than one, or at most several, molecules of protein. Unfortunately, none of the figures can be accepted without reservations. At present the exact size of
The numerous discordant results encountered in the literature dealing with the filterability, size, and visibility of viruses are probably due to inadequate experimentation, careless thinking, prejudice, imperfect experimental methods, and the difficult nature of the problems. One of the great needs at present is improvement in methods of microscopy, filtration, and purification of viruses in order that results obtained will approximate the true size of viruses and not the size of particles of other sorts on which the agents are adsorbed. It must be remembered, however, that the determination of the size of one virus will not establish the magnitude of another, because no more uniformity of dimensions should be expected among these agents than is found among bacteria and protozoa. Furthermore, it is not possible to derive proof of the animate or inanimate nature of viruses even from a correct estimation of their diameters, for, within limits as yet undetermined, life and death are not functions of size.
In this next section on electrical charges, take note once again of the range in estimates and contradictory conclusions made by the researchers. Rivers pointed out that “virus” preparations consisted principally of proteins and bits of degraded cells from the host. This meant that the electrical charge results might not be those of the “virus” particles themselves but of the other materials present within the sample. This inability to distinguish the assumed “virus” from the remaining host and foreign constituents present in the sample is the reason why complete purification and isolation of the assumed “viral” particles from the host components, which has never been achieved, is absolutely necessary. Rivers admitted that there were few experiments that were performed with “protein-free” preparations of “viruses,” and that the methods of purification did not convince him that such purified “viruses” had ever been completely separated from their carriers (i.e. host materials). Even with the modern advances in technology, this inability to completely separate “viruses” from host components was noted in a May 2020 article that stated that “to date, a reliable method that can actually guarantee a complete separation does not exist.” Rivers concluded that the lack of purity meant that it was impossible to state definitely what electrical charge is carried by the “viruses.”
ELECTRICAL CHARGE. Most bacteria and proteins under ordinary biological conditions of hydrogen ion concentration carry a negative electrical charge. When the nature of the viruses became a question of interest, attempts were made to ascertain their behavior in an electrical field in order that it might be compared with the action of proteins and bacteria under similar circumstances.
Bacteriophage. Kligler and his co-workers (41) using a so-called “protein-free” bacteriophage found that the active agent was amphoteric in acid and decidedly alkaline solutions and chiefly negatively charged in neutral and mildly alkaline solutions. Krueger and his associates (42) stated that the bacteriophage is negatively charged between the hydrogen ion concentrations of 9.0-3.4, and positively charged at pH 3.35. Todd (48) found that the active agent carried a negative charge between the hydrogen ion concentrations of 3.36-7.6. The results of Natarajan and Hyde’s (43) experiments indicate (1) that bacteriophages for typhoid bacilli and Flexner’s dysentery bacilli are only electronegative between pH 4.9-9.3 and 5.4-9.3 respectively, (2) that small plaque coliphage is electronegative below pH 8.3, but with greater alkalinity moves to both poles, and (3) that large plaque coliphage is electronegative over a range of pH 5.4-6.1, while at a higher alkalinity it wanders to both poles.
Rabic virus. According to Glusman (40) and his associates fixed rabic virus is negatively charged over a range of pH 6.0-9.3.
Vaccine virus. Douglas and Smith (39) found that vaccine virus carried a negative charge between the hydrogen ion concentrations of 5.5-8.4. The experiments of Yaoi and Kasai (49) revealed that between pH 6-7 more virus collected at the positive than at the negative pole, and between pH 8-9 the active agent was demonstrable only at the anode.
Fowl-pox virus. Kligler and his co-workers (41) found fowl-pox virus in “protein-free” preparations to be positively charged on the acid side, amphoteric in neutral solutions, and negatively charged in alkaline solutions. According to Natarajan and Hyde (43), the active agent is amphoteric over a range of pH 6.4-9.3.
Foot-and-mouth disease virus. Olitsky and Bo& (44) believe that the virus of foot-and-mouth disease is positively charged, while Sichert-Modrow (47) is of the opinion that the active agent carries a negative charge over a range of pH 7.0-8.1.
Pcliomyelitic virus. According to Olitsky, Rhoads, and Long (45) poliomyelitic virus wanders to the anode.
Rous virus. Pulcher (46) found that the Rous virus was adsorbed on electropositive and not on electronegative hemoglobins and concluded that the active agent is negatively charged.
Virus of infectious myxomatosis of rabbits. According to Natarajan and Hyde (43), the virus of infectious myxomatosis of rabbits is electronegative over a range of pH 4.9-9.3.
Herpetic virus. Natarajan and Hyde (43) found herpetic virus to be electronegatively charged only between the hydrogen ion concentrations of 7.0-8.9.
From the results of the work cited above it is obvious that most workers have found that under ordinary biological conditions of hydrogen ion concentration certain viruses in an electrical field wander to the anode. Moreover, many investigators have stated that the viruses under these conditions are negatively charged and in this respect are similar to bacteria, cells, and numerous proteins. Others, however, aware of the fact that virus preparations usually consist principally of proteins and bits of degraded cells from the host, realize that the electrical charges determined might not be those of the virus particles themselves but of their carriers, i.e., material on which the virus particles are adsorbed. It is true that a few experiments have been performed with “protein-free” preparations of viruses. But an examination of the methods of purification fails to convince one that such purified viruses had been completely separated from their carriers. Therefore, at present it is impossible to state definitely what electrical charge is carried by the viruses.
This next section is probably my favorite of the entire paper as Rivers sums up the purification problem perfectly. He started off by admitting that “virus-containing” emulsions consisted chiefly of substances unrelated to the “virus.” Thus, he stated that researchers needed to attempt to obtain the “viruses” either in a pure or in a relatively pure state as it was realized that purified “viruses” are essential for the proper study of problems in the field. These problems related to the aforementioned estimation of the size of “viruses” and the determination of the electrical charge, as well as any investigation into the “immunological” responses attributed to “viruses.” He shared a quote by Murphy who, in working to purify the Rous sarcoma “virus” through various manipulative purification processes, stated that it was “hardly conceivable that the active fraction” obtained after these processes could “carry with it through all these manipulations any living organism or virus.” Murphy felt that he was dealing with an enzyme rather than a “virus.” Rivers then backed up his own assertion from five years earlier in 1927 that “No virus had been obtained in an absoutely pure state” by reiterating that it was unlikely that a “virus” had ever been obtained in a state of absolute purity.
PURIFICATION. Inasmuch as virus-containing emulsions consist chiefly of substances unrelated to the active agents themselves, it is natural that workers should attempt to obtain the viruses either in a pure or in a relatively pure state. Moreover, it is being realized that purified viruses are essential for the proper study of problems in this field, such as the estimatlion of the size of viruses, the determination of their electrical charge, and the investigation of immunological responses excited by them. In addition to the fact that purified viruses are of practical value, it is obvious that such preparations will also be of value to investigators interested in the theoretical problem of the nature of viruses. Indeed, Murphy (52, 55) has already concluded from the results of his experiments on the purification of the Rous agent that this disease-incitant is neither a virus nor a living organism. He states, “It is hardly conceivable that the active fraction which I have thus succeeded in obtaining, a substance purified by repeated precipitations, could carry with it through all these manipulations any living organism or virus. To me the enzyme-like nature of the principle seems to have been conclusively established. . . . .” However, most workers do not believe that Murphy is justified in concluding from the results of such experiments that the Rous agent is not a virus, because at least eight other viruses, e.g., the incitants of infectious myxomatosis of rabbits (58), foot-and-mouth disease (64)) bacteriophagy (50, 56, 57), fowl-pox (56), vaccinia (66, 68)) rabies (66), poliomyelitis (65), and mosaic disease (67) have been subjected to manipulations similar to those used by Murphy and have been obtained, still active, in various states of purity.
Most methods of purification of viruses are based on the principles of precipitation by a variety of chemicals and selective adsorption and elution as used extensively in enzyme work. As yet, it is unlikely that a virus has been obtained in a state of absolute purity. Nevertheless, the results already secured are encouraging and should excite further investigations. It may be possible in this way to attain eventually a more accurate concept of the nature of some viruses. For instance, it may be shown that in certain purified virus preparations the number of nitrogen atoms for each infectious unit or particle is insufficient to warrant the supposition that the agents are living, organized structures. Krueger and Tamada (57) have already suggested this viewpoint.
While it is now stated that “viruses” require a host cell and must be cultured in order to be observed and studied, in the past, claims were made that “viruses” could be grown without cells. Rivers stated that these claims of successful cultivation on lifeless media were not uncommon, and he noted a few cases:
Frosch and Dahmen stated that they were able to cultivate the “virus” of foot-and-mouth disease on ordinary media.
Olitsky reported the cultivation of mosaic “virus” in a cell-free medium.
Eagles and McClean reported that vaccine “virus” is capable of regeneration in a cell-free medium.
Rivers ultimately decided that none of these were true examples of “viruses” being grown in cell-free media, and thus, it was chalked up to contradictory evidence that was brushed aside in favor of the prevailing belief that “viruses” are invisible and incapable of regeneration in the absence of living susceptible host cells. Rivers did note that such a state of affairs would prevent a complete definition of the nature of “viruses.” However, he believed that it was not absolutely essential to see and to cultivate the “viruses” on simple media.
CULTIVATING. In the literature of twenty years ago it is not uncommon to encounter reports in which it was claimed that viruses had been successfully cultivated on lifeless media. These reports have not been confirmed and at present such claims are rarely made. A few, however, have been made in recent years. Frosch and Dahmen (78) stated that they were able to cultivate the virus of foot-and-mouth disease on ordinary media. But the German, English, and American Foot-and-Mouth Disease Commissions were unable to confirm their work. Olitsky (91) reported the cultivation of mosaic virus in a cell-free medium. Nevertheless, upon repeating his work he (92) has been forced to conclude that true multiplication of the virus was not obtained. Recently, Eagles and McClean (75, 76) reported that vaccine virus is capable of regeneration in a cell-free medium. A careful examination of their papers, however, leaves one in doubt as to whether some of their media were cell-free, and as to whether multiplication of the virus occurred in the nutrient materials that undoubtedly contained no cells. In my laboratory (86, 90, 93) during the last four years, Haagen, Muckenfuss, Li, and I have made numerous attempts to cultivate vaccine virus in cell-free media, many of which were similar to if not identical with those employed by Eagles and McClean. None of our efforts was successful. On the other hand, the cultivation of vaccine virus in the presence of cells surviving in vitro has been more consistently successful in our hands and in Maitland’s (88) than it has been in Eagles and McClean’s.
Although the cultivation of viruses in lifeless media has not been accomplished, it is generally conceded that these agents are capable of pullulation in the presence of susceptible cells either surviving or growing in vitro. The viruses of Rous sarcoma (72), Virus III infection of rabbits (69), herpes febrilis (70), fowl-pox (77), vaccinia (79, 80, 86, 88)) rabies (94), foot-and-mouth disease (83,84,85? 89), vesicular stomatitis (73), infectious myxomatosis of rabbits (71, Sl), fowl plague (82), and probably the agents causing common colds (74) and poliomyelitis (87), have been cultivated in the presence of tissues surviving in vitro.
Moreover, the characteristic of species specificity possessed by many viruses is frequently reflected in their in vitro cultivation. For instance, fowl-pox virus (77), innocuous for mice and rats, does not regenerate in cultures of their tissues. Foot-and-mouth disease does not attack chickens and the virus (89) does not grow in cultures consisting of minced chick embryo and plasma. In addition to a species specificity, some viruses exhibit in cultivation experiments a predilection for certain kinds of cells. Fowl plague virus (82) multiplies in the presence of chick embryo skin and brain, but does not regenerate in pure cultures of fibroblasts. Foot-and-mouth disease virus (85) increases in amount when the culture medium contains minced guinea-pig embryo, but does not grow when fibroblasts or bits of heart muscle alone are present. Thus it appears that many viruses are capable of multiplication in tissue cultures and frequently retain under such conditions their species and cellular specificity. Nevertheless, it will be interesting to observe the results of further attempts to circumvent this species and cellular specificity of viruses by in vitro methods of cultivation.
A crucial experiment, if there be one, to decide the question of the autonomy of the viruses is their undisputed cultivation on lifeless media. It may be impossible, however, to accomplish such an experiment with all of the viruses, because some of them may be obligate parasites, as is the malarial organism. Thus in the quest for proof of the nature of viruses, we may find that many of them are invisible and incapable of regeneration in the absence of living susceptible host cells. Such a state of affairs will prevent, for a time at least, a complete definition of the nature of these peculiar incitants of disease. Nevertheless, we should obtain all the facts and make the most of them in the study of biological phenomena and in the better understanding and control of disease. For this purpose it is not absolutely essential to see and to cultivate the viruses on simple media any more than it is imperative to see and to know what electricity is in order to study the phenomena produced by it and to control its activity for our daily needs.
Regarding whether “viruses” are alive or not due to having their own metabolism, Rivers stated that the evidence was that they did not have any such metabolic capabilities. However, he felt that conclusions could not be drawn that “viruses” do not have a metabolism and that they are inanimate because the methods used may not have been adequate.
Adaptation of the “virus” to different hosts was used by researchers in order to state whether or not “viruses” were alive. This essentially meant drawing conclusions from using different materials and different methods in different animals while generating different results. One set of researchers viewed the contradicting outcomes as the result of a “living virus” while another set of researchers saw it as a result of the hosts response. Neither seemed to recognize the fact that it was the different experimental procedures generating different responses and results rather than the act of any “virus” adapting.
METABOLISM. Much of the discussion conc.erning the nature of viruses has centered around the question as to whether they are animate or inanimate. In this relation, one would like to know what the evidence is regarding independent metabolic activities of these active agents. Technical difficulties have hindered this type of experimentation with viruses. Nevertheless, a few investigations (95-99) have been made, the result,s of which were negative. One must not conclude from such negative results, however, that viruses do not possess an independent metabolism and are, therefore, inanimate substances, because the methods used for the detection of the metabolic activities may not have been sufficiently delicate.
ADAPTATION. Certain viruses inoculated into new hosts apparently undergo changes in some of theircharacteristics. Smallpox virus (100, 101) passed through monkeys to rabbits and calves and then back to man is no longer smallpox virus but vaccine virus, a.nd the disease, vaccinia, caused by it is not contagious as is smallpox. The incitant of yellow fever (106, 107) passed through a large number of mice by means of intracerebral inoculations loses much of its pathogenicity for monkeys when inoculated intravenously or intraperitoneally, but gains the power of producing a transmissible encephalitis in monkeys receiving the inoculum in the brain. Such phenomena are spoken of as adaptations of viruses to new hosts, and, inasmuch as adaptation is considered a characteristic of living rather than lifeless material, they have been cited by some investigators (103) as proof of the animate nature of the viruses. On the other hand, workers, who believe that viruses are products of cellular perversion, state that the changes observed in the characteristics of the active agents when they are inoculated into alien hosts are to be expected, inasmuch as mouse, rabbit, monkey, and human cells, because of intrinsic differences, may not always manufacture identical substances as the result of similar stimuli. Therefore, they contend that the changes and adaptations are not accomplished by the agents themselves but by their hosts and, consequently, are not admissible as proof of the living nature of the viruses.
As ”viruses” were incapable of being observed and studied directly, various forms of indirect evidence were utilized in order to infer the presence of these entities. One of the earliest ways to do so was by claiming that a phenomenon known as inclusion bodies was a sign that a “virus” was present. These “bodies” are aggregates of proteins seen in various tissues under microscopy that were taken as an indicator by the researchers that they were dealing with a “virus.” However, it is well-known that inclusion bodies are not specific to “viral” cases and can be found in those without a “viral” disease. They are also not found in all cases of a particular disease, can be found in those without the disease, and are even found in uninoculated cell cultures, as seen with RSV. A 1941 paper by Alfred M. Lucas stated that the “existence of an object which appears to be an inclusion body is not proof of the presence of a virus but merely an indication that a virus should be considered if no bacterial agent can be found.” What this means is that inclusion bodies are nothing more than non-specific indirect evidence used to infer an assumed “virus” if other “causes” are ruled out. This means that finding inclusion bodies is essentially meaningless as a specific sign for the presence of any “virus.” Rivers appeared to understand this as well. After presenting various contradictory interpretations and presentations of inclusion bodies by different researchers, he noted that “inclusions may arise in a number of ways and that they may or may not contain virus.” He felt that making conclusions about what these “peculiar structures” represented was “hazardous at present.”
INCLUSIONS. Within the nucleus and cytoplasm of cells injured by viruses, certain peculiar structures, inclusion bodies, are frequently observed. Although many of these bodies are of importance in diagnostic and experimental work, numerous opinions exist concerning their nature. Lipschtitz believes that the inclusions in many diseases (119) consist of compact masses of virus particles, yet he is of the opinion that such structures in measles (120) are nothing more than altered central bodies. Goodpasture (113) thinks that Negri bodies in rabies are composed of degenerated mitochondria and neurofibrils, while Levaditi (118) and Manouelian (121) consider them protozoa and designate them, respectively, Glugea lyssae and Encephalitoxoon rabiei. Goodpasture and his associates (124, 125) have demonstrated that the incitant of fowl-pox is intimately associated with the Bollinger bodies which are made up of a lipoid capsule within which numerous small coccoid bodies are embedded in a protein matrix. On the other hand, Glaser (112) has presented evidence that the polyhedral bodies, the characteristic inclusions in wilt diseases of caterpillars, consist of non-infectious crystalline protein. Thus, it appears that inclusions may arise in a number of ways and that they may or may not contain virus. Consequently, generalizations regarding these peculiar structures are hazardous at present.
The small coccoid bodies found in fowl-pox by Borrel (109) and in vaccinia by Paschen (122,123) appear to be extremely minute organisms. In fact, one is justified in asking why these bodies are not convincing evidence of the organismal nature of certain viruses. The first reason is that one cannot by morphological and tinctorial data alone determine whether autonomous life exists in such small objects. Another reason is the fact that Goodpasture, while holding the belief that the small coccoid bodies in fowl-pox (124, 125) represent the virus, stated that similar structures, seen in rabic brains (113) and considered of etiological importance by Babes (108) and Koch (114-116), are probably degenerated mitochondria. Moreover, Borrel (110) has described similar bodies in other virus diseases the etiological agents of which have been shown by ultrafiltration to be incapable of resolution by microscopic methods. Furthermore, Craciun and Oppenheimer (111)) who cultivated the small bodies of vaccinia and showed that they are closely associated with the virus, made the following statement, “We have from these studies no morphological proof of an increase in the number of granules, since they cannot readily be distinguished from other granules normally seen in tissue cultures.” Finally, mitochondria in some respects resemble bacteria. They may decrease or increase numerically within cells, and their size and shape may be altered by appropriate stimuli. At times, they actually divide. Nevertheless, mitochondria are not considered autonomous living agents. Consequently, so far as I am aware, there is no convincing evidence-the specific agglutination of virus elementary bodies (184) by antiviral sera will be discussed later-to invalidate the conception that cells under the stimulus of viruses may react by the formation of numerous small coccoid bodies uniform in size and intimately associated with the stimulating agents. One would not consider such bodies microorganisms or hold that they consist of virus alone. Therefore, in spite of definite proof that viruses are present in certain types of inclusions, doubt still exists regarding the organismal nature of the small coccoid bodies found within them.
Other features observed in pathological processes induced by viruses, e.g., hyperplasia and necrosis, are fully as important as are the inclusion bodies. The excessive stimulation of cells seen in some virus diseases, e.g., fowl-pox and warts, leads one by analogy to think of mdignant neoplasms. Undoubtedly a number of fowl tumors are caused by agents separable from cells, and, although there is no proof that mammalian tumors arise in this way, the possibility is worthy of consideration and offers an attractive field for work. The fact, however, that some tumors are produced by filterable agents is by no means conclusive evidence that all neoplasms (217) arise through the activity of such incitants.
In this next section, Rivers admitted that there was an increasing chorus of researchers who believed that “viruses” were nothing more than “merely filterable, invisible, and noncultivable elements of ordinary bacteria.” He presented many scenarios, such as:
The bacteriophage is a form in the life cycle of lysogenic bacteria.
The “viruses” of yellow fever and hog cholera are invisible forms of Leptospira icteroides and B. suipestifer respectively.
The etiological agent of scarlet fever is a filterable form of hemolytic streptococci.
The incitants of poliomyelitis, epidemic encephalitis, fox encephalitis, common colds, measles, and influenza represent certain stages in the life cycle of green streptococci.
Apparently, Rivers was unfamiliar with the fact that this bacterial life cycle process, known as pleomorphism, was observed by many researchers such as Antoine Bechamp, Günther Enderlein, Royal Raymond Rife, and later by many others with the use of dark field microscopy. That bacteria are pleomorphic entities, i.e. having the ability to assume different forms, is an established fact.
VIRUSES AS FILTERABLE FORMS OF BACTERIA. For a long time a few investigators have held that certain virus diseases are induced by ordinary bacteria. Now that attention is being focused on filterable forms of bacteria, workers in increasing numbers (128, 131, 132, 134, 135) are adopting the belief that viruses are merely filterable, invisible, and noncultivable elements of ordinary bacteria. It has been claimed, and evidence of a kind has been offered to substantiate the assertions, that the bacteriophage (165, 166) is a form in the life cycle of lysogenic bacteria, that the viruses of yellow fever (131, 134, 135) and hog cholera (134, 135) are invisible forms of Leptospira icteroides and B. suipestifer respectively, that the etiological agent of scarlet fever (134, 135) is a filterable form of hemolytic streptococci, and that the incitants of poliomyelitis, epidemic encephalitis, fox encephalitis, common colds, measles, and influenza represent certain stages in the life cycle of green streptococci (131). Without going into details of the available knowledge of bacterial life cycles and their invisible and noncultivable forms, one can say that proof of many of the claims regarding them is lacking. In fact, if certain reports are correct, some of the filterable forms of bacteria are much smaller than are many of the viruses. Kendall (131) recently stated that “egg white, filtered through Berkefeld W filters (after dilution with sterile physiological saline solution) is rarely sterile.” Such a statement raises embarrassing questions for workers in the virus field because many viruses will not pass through W filters. Since the existence of bacterial life cycles is doubtful, it seems unwarrantable to offer the presumptive filterable forms of them as evidence upon another unsolved problem, the nature of the viruses.
The thing to notice in this next section on physical and chemical agents is, once again, the often contradictory nature of the evidence presented by different researchers. One researcher would find a certain chemical that had an effect on the “virus,” while another researcher would state otherwise. Some viewed that chemical tests proved “viruses” were protozoa. Others felt that their tests proved the “virus” was an enzyme. Sanderson showed that bacteriophages were not killed by successive freezing and thawings and believed that they were unliving. However, Rivers showed that bacteriophages can be killed by repeated freezing and thawing, thus contradicting Sanderson’s interpretation. Ultimately, Rivers concluded that, regardless of the number of tests with chemical and physical agents that had been devised as criteria for the presence of life or to define the nature of “viruses,” not a single one of them was found to be satisfactory.
EFFECT OF PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL AGENTS ON VIRUSES. Many years ago it was discovered that bile and saponin are injurious to protozoa but with a few exceptions are innocuous for bacteria. Consequently, when the question of the nature of viruses began to attract attention, tests were made to determine what effect bile and saponin have on these incitants of disease. Many viruses, e.g., rabic virus (141, 144), were found to be inactivated and because of this fact certain workers concluded that they are protozoa. Sufficient exceptions, however, have been encountered to invalidate the test as a means either of separating bacteria from protozoa or of defining the nature of viruses. The agent causing Rous’ sarcoma (140) is more resistant to ultraviolet light than are bacteria, and Murphy (220) considers this fact as evidence in favor of his hypothesis of the enzyme-like nature of the virus. On the other hand, bacteriophage (139), the living nature of which many doubt, is just as sensitive to ultraviolet light as are bacteria. Sanderson (153), using a temperature of -78°C., found no diminution in the titer of two strains of bacteriophage subjected to 20 successive freezings and thawings. Since bacteria and cells are killed by repeated freezing and thawing, he concluded that bacteriophage must be something other than a living organism. Rivers (151) showed, however, that colon bacilli, Virus III, vaccine virus, herpetic virus, bacteriophage, complement, and trypsin are all either killed or inactivated by repeated freezing (-185°C.) and thawing and that, as might be expected, some of the agents are more resistant than are others. Hence it is obvious that destruction or inactivation of an active agent by repeated freezing and thawing is not evidence that it possesses life. The observations on heat, desiccation, oxidation, and the effect of dyes have likewise yielded no convincing evidence concerning the nature of viruses. Thus it appears that a number of tests with chemical and physical agents have been devised as criteria for the presence of life or to define the nature of viruses, but no one of them has been found satisfactory.
The spontaneous generation of “viruses” by the host is a concept that defeats the idea that these entities are exogenous outside invaders. If something like a bacteriophage can be produced by a normal bacterium without any external phage present, it shows that these entities arise from a process initiated from within the organism. Rivers noted that Hadley and his co-workers stated that it was possible to obtain bacteriophage from normal bacterial cultures by means of enforced dissociation. Thus, no external source of phage was necessary. Nobel Prize-winning immunologist Jules Bordet was able to do the same, as did other researchers. Rivers presented a few scenarios where “viral” diseases could be induced by injecting toxic substances such as tar and arsenic into chickens, as well as an instance where a tumor-producing extract could be obtained from healthy chickens. While Rivers thought that the interpretation of the evidence was potentially fundamental to biology, he excused it as being due to contamination by the researchers working in labs with similar materials as well as the possibility that “latent viruses” were hiding within the healthy hosts.
SPONTANEOUS GENERATION OF VIRUSES. The origin as well as the nature of viruses constitutes a question of interest. The intimate relation between these active agents and their host cells has induced more than one investigator to view the host cell as the source or origin of viruses. Indeed, reports of experimental work have appeared leading to claims that normal cells have been induced to manufacture certain viruses. According to Carrel (156, 157), minced chick embryo mixed with tar, indol, or arsenic and injected into normal chickens in a small percentage of instances gives rise to tumors resembling Rous’ sarcoma no. 1 and transmissible by cell-free filtrates. Fischer (163) by treating cultures of normal cells with arsenic obtained on one occasion a filterable agent capable of causing tumors. Carrel was unable to confirm Fischer’s work. Murphy (52, 167), by means of a method the details of which have not been described, reported that he was able to extract a filterable tumor-producing agent from the gonads of normal-appearing Plymouth Rock roosters.Recently, Hadley and his co-workers (166) stated that it is possible to obtain bacteriophage from normal bacterial cultures by means of enforced dissociation. Although no worker in this field has claimed to have generated living organisms from inanimate matter, it appears that a few believe that they have by certain manipulations induced cells to yield substances which possess some of the attributes of life, notably that of increasing without limit.
The observations described above are suggestive, and, if confirmed and found to warrant the interpretation given them by Carrel, Murphy, Fischer, and Hadley, will prove to be of fundamental biological importance. Unfortunately, however, all of the experiments yielding the observations were actively referred to were conducted in laboratories where workers engaged in the study of agents similar to those supposedly brought into existence. In such laboratories and with such materials it is always difficult for one to rule out the possibility of contaminating normal animals, tissues, bacteria, emulsions, and filtrates. This fact has long been appreciated by workers in vaccine virus laboratories and it delayed the acceptance of the experimental transformation of smallpox virus into vaccine virus. Therefore, experiments of the nature described should never be conducted in rooms used for the study of agents similar to those for which a search is being made. The workers who believe that they have induced viruses to come into existence have not excluded the possibility of the preexistence of latent viruses or of small amounts of virus in the supposedly normal embryos, gonads, chickens, and bacterial cultures utilized in the experiments. This possibility is emphasized by Flexner’s (164) work on poliomyelitis, for he was able to demonstrate the presence of virus in the nasal washings from normal contacts. The possibility outlined is further emphasized by Andrewes and Miller’s (155) experience with Virus III in rabbits, by Cole and Kuttner’s (158) work with the salivary-gland virus in guinea pigs, and by the work upon virus carriers in general among animals, plants (168) and bacteria.
CGI (Computer-Generated Imagery): The only way you will ever see “antibodies” attacking “viruses.”
Rivers next discussed “immunity” in relation to establishing the nature of “viruses.” It is important to note that, regarding antibodies and “immunity,” researchers are utilizing one hypothetical entity in order to define another. While Rivers spoke as if the antibody and antigen concepts are established facts, he remarked that if the concept of the nature of antigens is correct, “viruses” are proteins or are closely linked to proteins. Thus, the interpretation of the nature of the “virus” rests upon the correctness of the nature of the antigen concept. He felt that the rise of these (hypothetical) antibodies that differed between host cell and antigen adduced (led one to believe) the exogenous rather than the endogenous origin of the “viruses.” Regardless, Rivers admitted that the mode of action of neutralizing antibodies was not clearly understood, and when speaking of antibodies causing flocculation (clumping together), he shared that various researchers noted the “immunological” phenomena in “virus” maladies are comparable to those induced by toxins. While Rivers felt that “immunological” observations were important, he admitted that this method of approach had not brought about a definite solution to the problem of the nature of “viruses.”
IMMUNITY. Most virus diseases lead to a marked and lasting immunity in recovered hosts. Not only are the but in their sera antibodies capable of hosts refractory to reinfection neutralizing the viruses are demonstrable. What bearing have these facts upon the nature of viruses? In the first place, it is certain that viruses are highly antigenic. Furthermore, if our concept of the nature of antigens is correct, the viruses are proteins or are closely linked to proteins. Moreover, the agents are not only antigenic, but they give rise to antibodies different from those excited by proteins of the host cells. This is true even of the bacteriophage (188). These facts have been adduced as evidence of the exogenous rather than the endogenous origin of the viruses. Thus, the antigenic nature of viruses appears to be prejudicial to the idea that they are products of cellular activity. The notion, however, that a lifeless agent may be injurious to the cell creating it and that it may induce immunological responses independent of those excited by the cell, loses some of its fantastic qualities when one considers the well-known facts that lens protein is not species specific but organ specific and that sympathetic uveitis in the uninjured eye is caused not by microorganisms but by the reaction of the body to substances derived from injured cells of the other uveal tract.
In addition to the neutralizing antibodies, whose mode of action is not clearly understood, complement-fixing antibodies and antibodies causing flocculation in virus emulsions have been described. Schultz and his associates (191-195) contend that the latter types of antibodies are not excited by viruses and that the immunological phenomena in virus maladies are comparable to those induced by toxins. In spite of their contentions, sufficient evidence has been adduced by different workers to make it more than likely that certain virus diseases lead to the production (176, 177, 180, 199) of the antibodies mentioned. Furthermore, Ledingham (184) has recently demonstrated that Borrel bodies in fowl-pox and Paschen bodies in vaccinia are specifically agglutinated by antifowl-pox and antivaccinal sera respectively. The results of these experiments indicate to Ledingham that the elementary bodies are living organisms and represent the virus. There is no reason to doubt that specific agglutinations of the bodies occurred in the manner described by Ledingham, and one cannot deny that such a phenomenon is presumptive evidence of the organismal nature of the bodies. Yet one dare not say categorically that his experiments are unequivocal evidence that the elementary bodies represent virus alone, because it has been shown by Jones (182, 183) that collodion particles treated with a variety of proteins and then thoroughly washed are specifically agglutinated by the proper antisera. Thus, the Borrel and Paschen bodies without being organisms yet having virus adsorbed on them might nevertheless be specifically agglutinated by appropriate antiviral sera.
Gye (181) states that Rous virus repeatedly injected into alien hosts excites two groups of antibodies, one of which acts on the virus itself, while the other operates on the “specific factor” derived from the host cell. According to him, either set of antibodies inactivates the virus. This fact is offered by him as further evidence of the dual nature of the causative agent of fowl tumors. Murphy (189) and Sittenfield (196-198) have reported the presence in Rous sarcoma of a substance that inhibits the action of the etiological agent, and the first mentioned worker is of the opinion that the “inhibitor” differs from ordinary virus antibodies. The presence of this “inhibitor” together with other phenomena has induced Murphy (220) to believe that immunity to the Rous agent is unlike that observed in virus maladies and lends evidence to his view that the Rous agent is not a virus. Inhibiting substances, however, have been obtained from tissues infected with viruses, for example, a substance restraining the action of rabic virus has been demonstrated by Marie (186) in the brains of rabid animals. Furthermore, Andrewes’ (172, 173) work appears to indicate that the immune responses excited by the filterable agents of fowl tumors may not be unique and may possess much in common with those encountered in other virus diseases.
From what has been said, it is obvious that immunological phenomena are playing an important role in discussions concerning the nature of viruses. As yet this method of approach has not brought us to a definite solution of the problem.
Rivers finished up his review on the nature of “viruses” by presenting the various differing interpretations on the concept of the “virus.” These invisible entities were regarded as either:
Living contagious fluids
Oxidizing enzymes
Protozoan parasites
Inanimate chemical substances
Minute living organisms (related to bacteria)
Rivers noted that depending on the researchers, the rabies “virus” was either an enzyme, a parasite, a protozoon, or an unknown living organism. He stated that researchers were divided over whether bacteriophages were an inanimate agent or a living organism. The fowl-pox “virus” was thought of as either a protozoan parasite, a nucleoprotein poison manufactured by “infected” cells, or a minute coccoid organism capable of regeneration in parasitized cells. The agent associated with Rous sarcoma was either animate, a living organism mixed with an inanimate substance, an enzyme-like substance, or a transmissible mutagen.
Rivers highlighted these numerous competing concepts in order to show how radically different the ideas concerning the nature of “viruses” are from one another. He then proceeded to explain the main conceptions of “viruses,” with the first two scenarios explaining how a stimulus induces a normal cell to create a substance X, which may either remain free or become closely bound to a part of the cell. In Rivers’ third example, which he considered the most popular, X is a minute living organism that enters cells, multiplies, and produces disease. Thus, there is a distinct difference where X is considered an inanimate substance that results from cellular perversion in the first two scenarios, while X is viewed as an autonomous organism in the last scenario. Regardless of the scenarios that Rivers provided attempting to explain “viral” formation, he admitted that there was no unequivocal evidence of the validity of any of these concepts.
CONCEPTS OF THE NATURE OF VIRUSES. A review of the data by means of which one arrives at a concept of the nature of viruses has been presented. Now it will be interesting to see what notions certain workers have concerning some of them.
Beijerinck (202) considers the virus of mosaic disease to be a living contagious fluid; Woods (228), an oxidizing enzyme; Goldstein (212), a protozoan parasite; Vinson (67), an inanimate chemical substance. Most workers, however, believe that it is a minute living organism.
Hijgyes (216) is of the opinion that the incitant of rabies is an enzyme or “alternatively, that the tissues themselves might spontaneously become virulent as the result of changes in their chemical composition.” At one time Remlinger said, “The rabies virus, which is at once filterable, diffusible and capable of reproducing the disease from case to case, appears to occupy a place midway between the microbes and the diastases.” Recently, however, he (221) has published an article on the evolution of the parasite of rabies. Levaditi (118) and others (121, 225) have presented evidence in favor of the idea that the causal agent is a protozoon. The majority of investigators hold the concept that the incitant is a living organism whose nature is not definitely known.
Numerous workers believe that the bacteriophage is an inanimate agent, while others are convinced that it is a living organism. Ideas, however, concerning the nature of the inanimate transmissible substance or the animate organism vary. For details of the different concepts one is referred to papers by Twort (226, 227), d’Herelle (103), Bordet (203), Bronfenbrenner (95), Burnet (206), and Hadley (165, 166).
The incitant of fowl-pox has been described by certain investigators as a protozoan parasite. Sanfelice (222, 223) suggested that it is a nucleoproteid poison manufactured by infected cells. Borrel (log), Goodpasture (124, 125), and Ledingham (184) hold that it is a minute coccoid organism capable of regeneration in parasitized cells.
Rous and others are prepared to entertain the idea that the causal agent of Chicken Tumor No. I is animate. Gye (215) believes that it consists of two factors, one of which is a living exogenous organism, the other an inanimate specific factor derived from infected cells. Murphy (52, 55), at one time, spoke of the Rous agent as an enzyme-like substance. Recently, however, he (220) has compared it to filterable substances capable of transforming melitensis (204,205) into paramelitensis organisms and of converting one type specific pneumococcus (201) into another type specific form. In regard to the matter he says (22O), “Thus we have a group of agents, products of specialized cells capable of conferring the peculiar type quality to undifferentiated cells of the same species which, in turn, may produce the active factor and transmit this to their descendants.” For this type of agent he proposes the name transmissible mutagens.
Sufficient ideas concerning the nature of viruses have been cited to illustrate how radically some differ from others. Many of them, particularly the ones dealing with the origin and reproduction of inanimate substances that behave in a manner similar to that of living organisms, lack precision. In a general way, however, the different concepts can be arranged in groups and it seems advisable to state and to portray diagrammatically several of the popular ones.
According to one conception, certain stimuli produce changes within cells that are inherited by daughter cells. Once the mutations occur, cells of the new type continue to be formed though the stimuli disappear. No agents separable from the cells are demonstrable, and immunological phenomena in this type of disease differ from those observed in virus maladies. Ordinarily this idea of the causation of disease and the concepts concerning the nature of filterable viruses are not grouped together. Yet in some respects they are not dissimilar and many hold the view that malignant neoplasms arise in some such way. See figure 1.
Another notion is that appropriate stimuli induce normal cells to make a substance x which is closely bound to parts y of the cells. Thus an xy complex is formed. This complex, separable from the cells, yet capable of inciting its own production by them, either passes directly into daughter cells, or, having become extracellular, enters another set of normal cells. The xy complex is antigenic, and cells freed from it presumably become normal again. See figure 2.
Still another idea is that certain stimuli incite normal cells to produce a substance x which is not closely bound to parts of the cells, X, separable from cells, yet capable of impelling its formation by them, either passes directly into daughter cells, or, having become extracellular, enters a new group of normal cells. X is antigenic and cells freed from it presumably become normal again. See figure 3.
Finally there is the concept most generally held that x is not a product of the perverted activity of cells but is a minute living organism. X enters cells, multiplies, produces disease, is separable from cells: and is antigenic. Cells freed from it presumably become normal again. At times, x is absorbed by particles y of host cells and evidences of an xy complex are obtained. See figure 4.
For practical purposes it makes little difference which one of the last three concepts is accepted. Theoretically, however, x of the second and third conceptions is quite different from x of the fourth. In the second and third, x, a product of cellular perversion, is an inanimate agent, while in the fourth it is an autonomous organism. No unequivocal evidence of the validity of any of the concepts has been adduced.
Rivers concluded by acknowledging the confused state of the evidence concerning “viruses,” noting that this confusion had made it exceedingly difficult to define their nature. He felt that the easiest way out of their dilemma would be to accept “viruses” as minute organisms. However, Rivers warned of quickly accepting presumptive evidence as “viruses” may be either minute organisms, forms of life unfamiliar to us, inanimate transmissible incitants of disease, or all of the above.
Conclusion
The confused state of our knowledge of the viruses at the present time makes it exceedingly difficult to define the nature of these active agents. The easiest way out of the dilemma, however, would be the acceptance of the presumptive evidence that viruses are minute organisms. Yet the easiest way and the one that best fits the experiences of the day may not be the right one. Furthermore, excessive skepticism and the habit of too readily accepting presumptive evidence are equally productive of sterility. Unless viruses represent a form of life unknown to us, proof of their living nature would not be a striking discovery. If, however, some of them are not animate, absolute proof of such a fact would be of fundamental biological importance. Therefore, care should be exercised that immoderate skepticism on the one hand, and the mental satisfaction secured by accepting presumptive evidence on the other, do not dull our efforts to obtain a better understanding of the viruses, some of which may be minute organisms, while others may represent forms of life unfamiliar to us, while still others may be inanimate transmissible incitants of disease. In any event, we are face to face with the “infinitely small in biology,” and, if there be a sharp demarcation between life and death, then scientists, investigating the nature of viruses, are working near the line that separates infinitely small living organisms from inanimate active agents.
From these two presented articles from two different points in time in the history of virology (Rivers in 1932 and Summers in 2014), it should be clear why it is difficult for virologists to define the nature of the “virus.” Researchers needed to invent, and then continually reinvent, the nature of the “virus” as the foundation that virology is built upon is conceptually weak. It is full of contradictions that have cracked the very infrastructure that was put in place. There were never any submicroscopic entities that were being studied by the various researchers over the last century. As there were no “viruses” to study and characterize, there was no agreement at all amongst the various researchers as to the nature of the invisible concept crafted inside of their minds. They had tricked themselves, through shoddy indirect pseudoscientific evidence, into believing that they were studying something real based upon lab-created effects without an identifiable cause. This is why the “virus” has been continually defined for what it isn’t, rather than for what it supposedly is. The magical “virus” skirts the line between life and death, microbe and molecule, enzyme and ferment. It is unlike anything else seen in nature, and for this very reason, its nature remains mysterious and incomplete. This should be the very first clue that there is nothing scientific about the “virus,” as science only deals with the natural world and its phenomena, not the supernatural. However, within the supernatural realm is where the “virus” concept will remain, ready and waiting to be reinvented upon the arrival of the latest technology for the next best indirect measurement. This will be utilized to continue fooling the researchers, as well as the public that blindly trusts in them to know better, that these fictional entities exist in nature, when, as Thomas Rivers kindly pointed out, “viruses” have never once been observed there. Thus, the nature of the “virus” will continue to remain merely an invention of the imagination of the most ardent admirers of these invisible boogeymen—the virologists.
It’s been a while since we’ve heard of any strange happenings on planet Earth’s strangest place, Antarctica, but just when you think everyone has forgotten about that continent’s strange connections to Herman Goering, Rudolf Hess, Buzz Aldrin, Patriarch of Moscow Kirill III, or Obama Secretary of State (and current Bai Den Dzhao “Climate Change Tsar) John Ketchup Kerry, something comes along that makes one think that, once again, something is “up” down there. Indeed, there is in this article shared by S.D. something that caught my attention, and makes me go “hmmm”; see if you can spot it:
Now granted, China has been in Antarctica for a while, and like everyone else “down there,” it has been conducting all sorts of research. One can only assume that they have an interest in the neutrino detector down there, and a host of other things as well. But I have difficulty imagining that the Chinese Communist Party’s interest is purely scientific, just as I have a tremendous difficulty that Herman Goering’s interest was purely scientific and that he was just sponsoring a glitzy science project. Of course, we had the “commerce and lubricants” explanation for Goering’s interest (and the British raising the subject of Antarctica with Rudolf Hess after the latter had flown to Britain on his infamous and ill-fated peace mission, a topic unfortunately too long and weird to get into here, but if you’re interested, see my book Hess and the Penguins). Then there was Admiral Byrd’s Operation High Jump, which was quite literally a fully-fledged combined arms operation which invaded the continent, but oddly, did so by landings everywhere but where the Nazis had explored.
And now the Chinese are sending a little flotilla of two icebreakers and a cargo ship to build yet another research facility there. So what is it about the place that attracts the attention of fascist Germany, communist China, and capitalist America, and why are the cover stories explaining that interest so laughably transparent? From “we need lubricants and can get it from whaling” (Nazi Germany), to “we need to test our new military equipment and combat capability under Arctic conditions, and we need to do it down there even though our access to the Arctic via Alaska and Canada is so much easier” (the Americans and Operation High Jump), to “we need to monitor neutrinos” (pretty much everyone), to “what I saw down there was pure evil” (allegedly from Buzz Aldrin), to “I need to personally check out climate change” (Ketchup Kerry, when interrupting a diplomatic junket in 2016), and now to Communist China, which, according to the article in search of its own explanation, is offering this one for your consideration:
Work on the first Chinese station in the Pacific sector began in 2018. It will be used to conduct research on the region’s environment, state television reported.
China has four research stations in the Antarctic built from 1985 to 2014. A U.S.-based think tank estimated the fifth could be finished next year.
The facility is expected to include an observatory with a satellite ground station, and should help China “fill in a major gap” in its ability to access the continent, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) said in a report this year.
The station is also well situated to collect signals intelligence over Australia and New Zealand and telemetry data on rockets launched from Australia’s new Arnhem Space Centre, it said.
China rejects suggestions that its stations would be used for espionage.
Oh those clever, nasty, sneaky Chinese! Why, they’re building a fifth station in Antarctica because they need to spy on arch-rivals Australia and New Zealand!
As explanations go, this one is right up there with Reichsmarschall Goering’s “we need lubricants from whales” and Admiral Byrd’s “we need to test equipment in Arctic conditions” explanations for sheer brassy and ultimately nonsensical chutzpah. Now, I have no difficulty imagining that the Chinese would want to spy on Australia and New Zealand. They spy on everyone else, so why should Aussies and Kiwis get an exemption? And I have no doubt that Antarctica would be an ideal place from which to listen in. But my problem is that the Chinese probably already havethat capability to listen in, and that building yet another base in Antarctica seems to be a rather cost-ineffective way to do so: why not just launch another geo-synchronous satellite in orbit over those recalcitrant Aussies and Kiwis, and save some money? So, assuming that the “environment” and “listening in” explanations offered by the article are true, then what about the south pole gives such a unique perspective on the planet’s environment, and more importantly, who is really the target of those eavesdropping efforts? Since the American corporation Raytheon announced its own presence on the continent, that would be a possible target. Or maybe it is “someone else”? Is someone sending messages in the aurora australis?
Who knows? But it is perhaps telling that the Chinese, whatever their motivations, appear to be in a hurry to complete that fifth Chinese Antarctic “research station.”
Of course, there’s a final possibility, namely, that an Antarctic research station, as the article avers, could help monitor Australian space launches… but it could just as easily monitor comings and goings from and to the planet that might be taking place down there….
As soon as I began writing about COVID in the spring of 2020, I made the case that SARS-CoV-2 hadn’t been proved to exist.
I then met Tom Cowan, Andrew Kaufman, and Christine Massey. I became aware of the work of Stefan Lanka. They were making a wide challenge about viruses in general:
No actual isolation; no proof of existence; instead, a parade of false claims and obfuscations from official sources.
A few years later…and the number of serious researchers who are coming to the same conclusion has expanded significantly. (You can find links to some of these researchers at Christine Massey’s Substack page )
The new work isn’t just a repetition of the original challenge to official authority. It attacks fake viruses from a number of angles. The shocks keep coming.
This story isn’t going away. It’s building.
It reminds me of the vaccine story. When I first started writing about dangerous and ineffective vaccines, in 1987, there were dozens of writers, present and past, who had covered similar ground—going back many decades. But that was nothing compared with…
The strength of that story now, in 2023, after the catastrophe of the COVID vaccines.
This is what I believe is going to happen to the fake virus story—against even longer odds. I say “longer,” because the proofs that viruses aren’t real by any scientific standard will undermine and detonate the very center of the medical cartel, which is all about germ theory.
Germ theory is marketing. The marketing of (toxic) drugs and vaccines for thousands of so-called distinct diseases, each supposedly caused by a unique germ.
When that fiction falls, the whole house collapses.
Going back as far as the beginning of the 20th century (and farther), another paradigm about disease emerged. It came to be called “holistic.” Probably not the best label. But the idea was: look at the whole body, the whole person. Look at body processes as connected and inter-related. Understand disease and health in those larger terms. Include environmental effects—basic sanitation, pollution, toxic chemicals, nutrition, the rise of the middle class out of poverty.
Something needs to be pointed out here. The holistic paradigm is a very difficult approach, in terms of making it pay off in real cures. It always has been difficult. Thousands of methods have been suggested. Many of these tend to mirror the medical strategy: find magic bullet solutions, take short cuts. Market them. Claim temporary fixes are permanent.
Treating the body and the person as a whole, taking in the mind-body connection—this is by no means a walk in the park.
Therefore, sooner or later, many people, discouraged, fall back on medical answers and germ theory.
The work of the no-virus pioneers provides an absolutely essential antidote to that surrender.
Because what are people surrendering to? The convenient fiction that viruses are everywhere, causing separate diseases. Convenient fiction was how viruses were willed into existence in the first place:
Doctors couldn’t cure their patients. So they looked for “something that was missing.” A hole in their hypotheses. And they claimed they found it.
Tiny particles no one had ever seen. No one had ever isolated. “This is the key. This is the great discovery.” It was a self-serving fairy tale. An excuse for treatment failure.
It kicked off millions of efforts to assure one and all that viruses were real. Marketing, parading as science.
Where were these viruses being discovered? In proprietary labs. No civilians permitted. Doors locked. Only the experts could understand the details of their own isolation of the tiny particles.
The particles which had been fantasized into existence.
We’re actually looking at a magic-myth story. Explorer-knights (doctors, researchers) are searching for an invisible dragon object which is crippling the population. These heroes finally corner it and isolate it and go to work decimating it and all its variants.
But the real ending to that story is now being provided by the multiplying number of independent researchers, who are proving the invisible dragon object was never cornered or identified or isolated.
Instead, the so-called explorer-knights made up, invented, fabricated the idea of the object to begin with.
That’s the magic. Sleight of hand. That’s the myth. Secret lab procedures that, when exposed, turn out to assume what they’re trying to prove. Also known as circular reasoning.
The whole story has come unglued.
For now, I’ll conclude with this analogy. A group of elite researchers claim that, 49 trillion light years from Earth, there is a flaming star the size of the Milky Way. At the center of that star, buried within a supernatural vault, there is a tiny, tiny purple man with green toes and orange hair who is causing all trouble and all destruction circulating throughout the universe. He’s there. He’s been “isolated.”
Given that incredible tale, would you expect, would you really expect there can be ANY sort of test which would prove the existence of that tiny man?
Could ANY test be produced that would be authentic?
So, in the case of the wild virus fairy tale, are we looking at proofs of existence and isolation that need to be improved, in order for us to accept them?
Or are we, instead, looking at the tiny purple man, about whose existence there are no possible proofs at all?
Because the story is so absurdly outrageous.
I’m thinking we’re dealing with the tiny purple man. And this may be the next chapter in the no-virus revelation:
The original concoction of viruses was so crazy, every so-called proof is going to be circular, mindless, and futile.
“You mentioned “DNA targeting.” yes, indeed, this is possible, but is it happening? I seriously doubt it. If medical/pharmaceutical experts cannot isolate a virus, RNA, or spike protein, they cannot (not capable) of working with DNA targeting, as assumed.”
Viruses/Virology: Promoting With Glorified And Catchy Language
About the view that vaccine(s) may include some type of DNA targeting, I responded as follows:
Being a chemist/scientist all my life, and mainly in the pharmaceutical area, when I read about pharmaceuticals, including viruses and vaccines, it is evident to me that medical experts clearly describe chemistry in a glorified and catchy language. However, most of their claims do not make sense and are often false and fraudulent.
You mentioned “DNA targeting.” yes, indeed, this is possible, but is it happening? I seriously doubt it. If medical/pharmaceutical experts cannot isolate a virus, RNA, or spike protein, they cannot (not capable) of working with DNA targeting, as assumed. So, it is fancy language to impress that something (high-level “science”) is happening.
On the other hand, as I described (here and here), it looks like they are injecting partial or unpurified cell culture (as a “vaccine”), assuming it is mRNA and is causing the problems (adverse effects), including deaths.
The only and easiest/quickest way to find out is to get an audit done by experts with experience in isolation/purification to establish if the mRNA/vaccine is pure as described or junk.
However, in the current (regulatory) system, an audit is done by experts who have no or limited experience in isolation and purification and have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, so they will provide fancy stories and seek more funding for “research” to prepare for next “pandemic” and “vaccine.”
Further information on the topic may be found here: Helpful Notes, the Book, and Blog by the author (Dr. Qureshi), who worked at Health Canada as a Research Scientist and had 35+ years of bench science experience in substance isolation, characterization, and analytical testing among other specialties.
There is a complex history behind Israel’s October 2023 plan to “Wipe Gaza off the Map.”
It’s genocide, an absolute slaughter:
“We are going to attack Gaza City very broadly soon,” Israel’s chief military spokesman, Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, said in a nationally broadcast address, without giving a timetable for the attack.”
It’s a criminal undertaking based on Israel’s doctrine of “Justified Vengeance” which was first formulated in 2001.
(See below: my January 2009 article published at the very outset of Israel’s 2008-2009 invasion of Gaza under “Operation Cast Led”)
The “Justified Vengeance” doctrine propounds in no uncertain terms that(despite its limited military capabilities) Palestine rather than Israel is “the aggressor” and that Israel has the right to defend itself.
“U.S. intelligence say they weren’t aware of an impending Hamas attack.
Did Netanyahu and his vast military and intelligence apparatus (Mossad et al) have foreknowledge of the Hamas attack which has resulted in countless deaths of Israelis and Palestinians.
Was a carefully formulated Israeli plan to wage an all out war against Palestinians envisaged prior to the launching by Hamas of “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm”?
This was not a failure of Israeli Intelligence, as conveyed by the media. Quite the opposite”
The History of False Flags: “The Green Light to Terror” (1997), The “Bloodshed as a Justification” to Wage War
“…This is the “green light to terror” theme which the Military Intelligence (Ama”n) has been promoting since 1997, when its anti-Oslo line was consolidated. This theme was since repeated again and again by military circles, and eventually became the mantra of Israeli propaganda…
The ‘Foreign Report’ (Jane’s information) of July 12, 2001 disclosed that the Israeli army (under Sharon’s government) has updated its plans for an “all-out assault to smash the Palestinian authority”
The blueprint, titled “The Destruction of the Palestinian Authority and Disarmament of All Armed Forces”, was presented to the Israeli government by chief of staff Shaul Mofaz, on July 8 [2001].
The assault would be launched, at the government’s discretion, after a big suicide bomb attack in Israel, causing widespread deaths and injuries, citing the bloodshed as justification.” (Tanya Reinhart, December 22, 2001)
Ariel Sharon: “A 1948 Style Solution”
According to the Prof. Tanya Reinhart:
“Mass expulsion could occur at some later stage of the ground invasion [2002- ], were the Israelis to open up Gaza’s borders to allow for an exodus of population … Expulsion was referred to by Ariel Sharon as the “a 1948 style solution”. For Sharon “it is only necessary to find another state for the Palestinians”. -‘Jordan is Palestine’ – was the phrase that Sharon coined.” (Tanya Reinhart, op cit)
The “Hamas-Mossad Partnership”
What is now unfolding in Gaza is part of a longstanding intelligence agenda, which has been on the drawing board of successive Israeli governments for more than twenty years. Founded in 1987 with the support of Israel, “The Hamas-Mossad partnership” is confirmed by Netanyahu:
“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas. … This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (March 2019 Statement quoted by Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added)
“Support” and “Money” for Hamas
“Transferring Money to Hamas” on behalf of Netanyahu is confirmed by a Times of Israel October 8, 2023 Report:
“Hamas was treated as a partner to the detriment of the Palestinian Authority to prevent Abbas from moving towards creating a Palestinian State. Hamas was promoted from a terrorist group to an organization with which Israel conducted negotiations through Egypt, and which was allowed to receive suitcases containing millions of dollars from Qatar through the Gaza crossings.” (emphasis added)
Benjamin Netanyahu’s position defined several years prior to the October 7, 2023 “State of Readiness For War” consists in the total appropriation of Palestine Lands as well as the outright exclusion of the Palestinian people from their homeland:
“These are the basic lines of the national government headed by me: The Jewish people have an exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel — in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan, Judea and Samaria.” (January 2023)
The Role of Mossad
The doctrine of “Justified Vengeance” initiated in 2001, is the cornerstone of Israel’s intelligence narrative. It provides a justification to carry out acts of genocide, with the support of the International community, first in Gaza, then in the West Bank.
These official figures are meaningless, intelligence agencies do not reveal the sources of their funding or the size of their staff (which are in excess of the figures quoted above).
Mossad (Foreign Intelligence) together with Shin Bet (Domestic National Security) and Aman (Military Intelligence) is the main actor in the conduct of “false flag operations”. It’s covert capabilities are extensive. It has over the years infiltrated both Hamas and the Palestinian National Authority, It also exerts –in liaison with US intelligence– control over Al Qaeda operatives, ISIS and Daesh throughout the Middle East.
Mossad’s mandate is to create “divisions” within the Palestinian Resistance Movement, while sustaining fear and routine terrorist false flag events against innocent Israeli civilians, which sustains the legitimacy of the “Justified Vengeance” narrative.
Chronology
Let us briefly review the history, the various stages following the:
Failure of Oslo I and II (1993-95) and The Assassination of Yitzhak Rabin (1995)
2001. “Operation Justified Vengeance”
Presented in July 2001 to the Israeli government of Ariel Sharon by IDF chief of staff Shaul Mofaz, under the title:
“The Destruction of the Palestinian Authority and Disarmament of All Armed Forces”.
See the Analysis of Tanya Reinhart and the Jane Report quoted above and in the article below).
“Operation Justified Vengeance” was also referred to as the “Dagan Plan”, named after the late General Meir Dagan, who headed Mossad, Israel’s foreign intelligence agency from 2002-2011.
The longer term objective of “Operation Justified Vengeance” (2001) was and remains the expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland.
2002. Decision to Build the Infamous Apartheid Wall by Sharon Government
2004. The Assassination of Yasser Arafat
It was ordered by the Israeli Cabinet in 2003. It was approved by the US which vetoed a United Nations Security Resolution condemning the 2003 Israeli Cabinet decision. It was undertaken by Mossad. (See details in article below)
2005. The Removal, Under Orders of PM Ariel Sharon of All Jewish Settlements in Gaza.
Proposed in 2003 by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, implemented in August 2005 and completed in September 2005.
A Jewish population of over 7,000 was relocated. This relocation was required to transform the Gaza Strip into “An Open Air Prison”
2006. The Hamas Election Victory in January 2006.
Without Arafat, the Israeli military-intelligence architects knew that Fatah under Mahmoud Abbas would loose the elections.
2008-2009. “Operation Cast Lead”
In 2008 the “Bloodshed Justification” was an essential component of the military-intelligence agenda, which was first formulated in the 2001 “Operation Justified Vengeance”:
“The Destruction of the Palestinian Authority and Disarmament of All Armed Forces”
The killing of Palestinian civilians was justified on “humanitarian grounds.” as formulated in the “Operation Justified Vengeance Report”.
—Michel Chossudovsky, May 15, 2021, October 23, 2023
Below is my article published in early January 2009, at the height of the 2008-2009 Operation Cast Lead
The Invasion of Gaza: Part of a Broader Israeli Military-Intelligence Agenda
by Michel Chossudovsky, January 2009
“Operation Cast Lead”
The aerial bombings and the ongoing ground invasion of Gaza by Israeli ground forces must be analysed in a historical context. Operation “Cast Lead” [2008] is a carefully planned undertaking, which is part of a broader military-intelligence agenda first formulated by the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2001:
“Sources in the defense establishment said Defense Minister Ehud Barak instructed the Israel Defense Forces to prepare for the operation over six months ago, even as Israel was beginning to negotiate a ceasefire agreement with Hamas.”(Barak Ravid, Operation “Cast Lead”: Israeli Air Force strike followed months of planning, Haaretz, December 27, 2008)
It was Israel which broke the truce on the day of the US presidential elections, November 4:
“Israel used this distraction to break the ceasefire between itself and Hamas by bombing the Gaza strip. Israel claimed this violation of the ceasefire was to prevent Hamas from digging tunnels into Israeli territory.
The very next day, Israel launched a terrorizing siege of Gaza, cutting off food, fuel, medical supplies and other necessities in an attempt to “subdue” the Palestinians while at the same time engaging in armed incursions.
In response, Hamas and others in Gaza again resorted to firing crude, homemade, and mainly inaccurate rockets into Israel. During the past seven years, these rockets have been responsible for the deaths of 17 Israelis. Over the same time span, Israeli Blitzkrieg assaults have killed thousands of Palestinians, drawing worldwide protest but falling on deaf ears at the UN.” (Shamus Cooke, The Massacre in Palestine and the Threat of a Wider War, Global Research, December 2008)
Planned Humanitarian Disaster
On December 8, [2008] US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte was in Tel Aviv for discussions with his Israeli counterparts including the director of Mossad, Meir Dagan.
“Operation Cast Lead” was initiated two days day after Christmas. It was coupled with a carefully designed international Public Relations campaign under the auspices of Israel’s Foreign Ministry.
Hamas’ military targets are not the main objective. Operation “Cast Lead” is intended, quite deliberately, to trigger civilian casualities.
What we are dealing with is a “planned humanitarian disaster” in Gaza in a densly populated urban area. (See map below)
The longer term objective of this plan, as formulated by Israeli policy makers, is the expulsion of Palestinians from Palestinian lands:
“Terrorize the civilian population, assuring maximal destruction of property and cultural resources… The daily life of the Palestinians must be rendered unbearable: They should be locked up in cities and towns, prevented from exercising normal economic life, cut off from workplaces, schools and hospitals, This will encourage emigration and weaken the resistance to future expulsions” Ur Shlonsky, quoted by Ghali Hassan, Gaza: The World’s Largest Prison, Global Research, 2005)
“Operation Justified Vengeance”
A turning point has been reached. Operation “Cast Lead” is part of the broader military-intelligence operation initiated at the outset of the Ariel Sharon government in 2001. It was under Sharon’s “Operation Justified Vengeance” that F-16 fighter planes were initially used to bomb Palestinian cities.
“Operation Justified Vengeance” was presented in July 2001 to the Israeli government of Ariel Sharon by IDF chief of staff Shaul Mofaz, under the title “The Destruction of the Palestinian Authority and Disarmament of All Armed Forces”.
“A contingency plan, codenamed Operation Justified Vengeance, was drawn up last June [2001] to reoccupy all of the West Bank and possibly the Gaza Strip at a likely cost of “hundreds” of Israeli casualties.” (Washington Times, 19 March 2002).
According to Jane’s ‘Foreign Report’ (July 12, 2001) the Israeli army under Sharon had updated its plans for an “all-out assault to smash the Palestinian authority, force out leader Yasser Arafat and kill or detain its army”.
“Bloodshed Justification”
The “Bloodshed Justification” was an essential component of the military-intelligence agenda. The killing of Palestinian civilians was justified on “humanitarian grounds.” Israeli military operations were carefully timed to coincide with the suicide attacks:
“Operation Justified Vengeance” was also referred to as the “Dagan Plan”, named after General (ret.) Meir Dagan, who currently heads Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency.
Reserve General Meir Dagan was Sharon’s national security adviser during the 2000 election campaign. The plan was apparently drawn up prior to Sharon’s election as Prime Minister in February 2001. “According to Alex Fishman writing in Yediot Aharonot, the Dagan Plan consisted in destroying the Palestinian authority and putting Yasser Arafat ‘out of the game’.” (Ellis Shulman, “Operation Justified Vengeance”: a Secret Plan to Destroy the Palestinian Authority, March 2001):
“As reported in the Foreign Report [Jane] and disclosed locally by Maariv, Israel’s invasion plan — reportedly dubbed Justified Vengeance — would be launched immediately following the next high-casualty suicide bombing, would last about a month and is expected to result in the death of hundreds of Israelis and thousands of Palestinians. (Ibid, emphasis added)
The “Dagan Plan” envisaged the so-called “cantonization” of Palestinian territories whereby the West Bank and Gaza would be totally cut off from one other, with separate “governments” in each of the territories. Under this scenario, already envisaged in 2001, Israel would:
“negotiate separately with Palestinian forces that are dominant in each territory-Palestinian forces responsible for security, intelligence, and even for the Tanzim (Fatah).” The plan thus closely resembles the idea of “cantonization” of Palestinian territories, put forth by a number of ministers.” Sylvain Cypel, The infamous ‘Dagan Plan’ Sharon’s plan for getting rid of Arafat, Le Monde, December 17, 2001)
The Dagan Plan has established continuity in the military-intelligence agenda. In the wake of the 2000 elections, Meir Dagan was assigned a key role. “He became Sharon’s “go-between” in security issues with President’s Bush’s special envoys Zinni and Mitchell.” He was subsequently appointed Director of the Mossad by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in August 2002. In the post-Sharon period, he remained head of Mossad. He was reconfirmed in his position as Director of Israeli Intelligence by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in June 2008.
Meir Dagan, in coordination with his US counterparts, has been in charge of various military-intelligence operations. It is worth noting that Meir Dagan as a young Colonel had worked closely with defense minister Ariel Sharon in the raids on Palestinian settlements in Beirut in 1982. The 2009 ground invasion of Gaza, in many regards, bear a canny resemblance to the 1982 military operation led by Sharon and Dagan.
Continuity: From Sharon to Olmert
It is important to focus on a number of key events which have led up to the killings in Gaza under “Operation Cast Lead”:
1. The assassination in November 2004 of Yasser Arafat.
This assassination had been on the drawing board since 1996 under “Operation Fields of Thorns”.
According to an October 2000 document
“prepared by the security services, at the request of then Prime Minister Ehud Barak, stated that ‘Arafat, the person, is a severe threat to the security of the state [of Israel] and the damage which will result from his disappearance is less than the damage caused by his existence’”. (Tanya Reinhart, Evil Unleashed, Israel’s move to destroy the Palestinian Authority is a calculated plan, long in the making, Global Research, December 2001. Details of the document were published in Ma’ariv, July 6, 2001.).
Arafat’s assassination was ordered in 2003 by the Israeli cabinet. It was approved by the US which vetoed a United Nations Security Resolution condemning the 2003 Israeli Cabinet decision. Reacting to increased Palestinian attacks, in August 2003, Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz declared “all out war” on the militants whom he vowed “marked for death.”
“In mid September, Israel’s government passed a law to get rid of Arafat. Israel’s cabinet for political security affairs declared it “a decision to remove Arafat as an obstacle to peace.” Mofaz threatened; “we will choose the right way and the right time to kill Arafat.” Palestinian Minister Saeb Erekat told CNN he thought Arafat was the next target. CNN asked Sharon spokesman Ra’anan Gissan if the vote meant expulsion of Arafat. Gissan clarified; “It doesn’t mean that. The Cabinet has today resolved to remove this obstacle. The time, the method, the ways by which this will take place will be decided separately, and the security services will monitor the situation and make the recommendation about proper action.” (See Trish Shuh, Road Map for a Decease Plan, www.mehrnews.com November 9 2005)
The assassination of Arafat was part of the 2001 Dagan Plan.
In all likelihood, it was carried out by Israeli Intelligence. It was intended to destroy the Palestinian Authority, foment divisions within Fatah as well as between Fatah and Hamas. Mahmoud Abbas is a Palestinian quisling.
He was installed as leader of Fatah, with the approval of Israel and the US, which finance the Palestinian Authority’s paramilitary and security forces.
2. The Removal, Under the Orders of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2005, of All Jewish Settlements in Gaza.
A Jewish population of over 7,000 was relocated.
“It is my intention [Sharon] to carry out an evacuation – sorry, a relocation – of settlements that cause us problems and of places that we will not hold onto anyway in a final settlement, like the Gaza settlements…. I am working on the assumption that in the future there will be no Jews in Gaza,” Sharon said.” (CBC, March 2004)
The issue of the settlements in Gaza was presented as part of Washington’s “road map to peace”.
Celebrated by the Palestinians as a “victory”, this measure was not directed against the Jewish settlers. Quite the opposite: It was part of the overall covert operation, which consisted in transforming Gaza into a concentration camp. As long as Jewish settlers were living inside Gaza, the objective of sustaining a large barricaded prison territory could not be achieved. The Implementation of “Operation Cast Lead” required “no Jews in Gaza”.
3. The Building of the Infamous Apartheid Wall
This was decided upon at the beginning of the Sharon government in 2002. (See Map below)
4. The Hamas Election Victory in January 2006.
Without Arafat, the Israeli military-intelligence architects knew that Fatah under Mahmoud Abbas would loose the elections. This was part of the scenario, which had been envisaged and analyzed well in advance.
With Hamas in charge in Gaza, using the pretext that Hamas is a terrorist organization, Israel would carry out the process of “cantonization” as formulated under the Dagan plan. Fatah under Mahmoud Abbas would remain formally in charge of the West Bank. The duly elected Hamas government would be confined to the Gaza strip.
Ground Attack, 2008-2009
On January 3, [2009] Israeli tanks and infantry entered Gaza in an all out ground offensive:
“The ground operation was preceded by several hours of heavy artillery fire after dark, igniting targets in flames that burst into the night sky. Machine gun fire rattled as bright tracer rounds flashed through the darkness and the crash of hundreds of shells sent up streaks of fire. (AP, January 3, 2009)
Israeli sources have pointed to a lengthy drawn out military operation. It “won’t be easy and it won’t be short,” said Defense Minister Ehud Barak in a TV address.
Israel is not seeking to oblige Hamas “to cooperate”. What we are dealing with is the implementation of the “Dagan Plan” as initially formulated in 2001, which called for:
“an invasion of Palestinian-controlled territory by some 30,000 Israeli soldiers, with the clearly defined mission of destroying the infrastructure of the Palestinian leadership and collecting weaponry currently possessed by the various Palestinian forces, and expelling or killing its military leadership. (Ellis Shulman, op cit, emphasis added)
Nakba 2.0: Mass Expulsion and a Ground Invasion Contemplated
The broader question is whether Israel in consultation with Washington is intent upon triggering a wider war.
Mass expulsion could occur at some later stage of the ground invasion, were the Israelis to open up Gaza’s borders to allow for an exodus of population.
Expulsion was referred to by Ariel Sharon as the “a 1948 style solution”. For Sharon
“it is only necessary to find another state for the Palestinians. -‘Jordan is Palestine’ – was the phrase that Sharon coined.” (Tanya Reinhart, op cit)
Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, Editor of Global Research.
Mainstream media aren’t talking about it, but it’s an open secret: some 50 years ago, the US and Israel created Hamas—as an offset and competitor to Yasser Arafat and his Palestine Liberation Organization.
It was one more brilliant (aka asinine) example of meddling and launching endless enemies, who become our enemies when they turn on us. The CIA has specialized in this, all over the world.
The US and Israeli governments launched CIA and Mossad. These intel giants were tasked with collecting and interpreting information on potential enemies.
Of course, CIA and Mossad expanded their mandates and operations. Immediately. And that’s where the real trouble came.
“Let’s subvert our enemies. Let’s undertake hundreds and thousands of clandestine operations to neutralize and destroy our enemies. In the process, we can invent groups who will serve us and do the destroying for us…”
Yeah. Sure. A perfect formula for suicide.
And it caters to exactly the people you never want to give any power to. The chessboard game-playing crazies. Namely, your own operations case officers and planners.
THESE guys are loved by all sorts of big-time corporate and financial players (in the US and Israel), who are looking for a leg up in their foreign expansions efforts: finding new resources abroad, finding new markets, finding new corrupt allies.
Protecting national interests becomes EMPIRE.
Empire perverts and subverts little items like national Constitutions and the basic rule of law. “The law is for suckers. We’re the intel community. Just let us do our jobs. We know how to capture and win whatever we can get our hands on. Life is nothing more than winners and losers. Face it. And we’re the pros.”
Which takes us much deeper into the rabbit hole. Into places where morality and reality clash. Where sympathy and common sense clash. Where the whole idea of what an independent nation is and should be is challenged and potentially destroyed.
This rabbit hole is where many people don’t want to go. It challenges and nullifies, they believe, every important human impulse.
Is there an Electric Universe perspective on time? Rather than to convince you that time has dimensions, the goal here is to convince you that our ancestors thought so.
If you believe an ancient Japanese text which says that a new planet, Venus, entered our solar system, perhaps you will believe an Egyptian text that says time has three dimensions just as space does.
We begin with a four-point analysis and exploration of time gleaned from classical physics:
1) The reality of a “present moment” is on shaky ground;
2) The rate at which time flows is unclear;
3) There are lines of time as well as points of time;
4) Multiple versions of systems can simultaneously exist.
It’s also appropriate to acknowledge ancient knowledge that can be derived from the Hermetica—writings from various historical periods, though most ideas have their origins in the very distant past of Egypt tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago.
Michael Clarage, PhD, Astrophysicist and Lead Scientist of SAFIRE, states his arguments, from classical physics and older civilizations, for a modern perspective of time.
It is a common misconception that blood types are genetically determined and unchangeable. In fact, blood types are nothing more than an illusion, influenced by environmental factors, diet and individual life experiences, medications and shocks. The idea of fixed blood types only serves to perpetuate the myths of special “bloodlines” and to boost the blood business.
Virology and Genetics: The Art of Distraction
The introduction of blood groups and the Rhesus factor has contributed more to confusion than enlightenment. Instead of providing clear answers, new subgroups are constantly being introduced to circumvent existing contradictions. This approach is very reminiscent of virology, where new mutations are constantly being postulated to support the basic assumptions. It is obvious that financial interests and not scientific accuracy are the priority here.
Blood Transfusions: A Risky Business
Blood transfusions are often presented as a safe medical practice. But reality looks different. The risks are significant and the mortality rate for patients receiving a transfusion is alarmingly high. The question arises as to whether the quality of the blood reserves is guaranteed at all. Figures suggest the risk of mortality is six times higher in patients who receive a blood transfusion than those who do not.
Interest groups: profit over truth
It is clear that certain interest groups benefit from perpetuating these myths. The virus existence question serves as a catalyst to expose the misinterpretations and unscientific nature of medicine. It is high time we let go of outdated assumptions and accept the real facts.
Genetics and Blood Types: The Fallacious Path of Uncontrolled Interpretation
In genetics we encounter a familiar pattern that is reminiscent of the debate over blood types. Instead of offering clear answers, science tends to arbitrarily interpret and assign genes.
When a genetic theory is questioned, instead of reassessment, even more complex assumptions are added. What was once thought to be a single gene is now presented as a complex combination of multiple genes, splicing and other factors. Such convoluted interpretations often only serve to support old, debunked theories.
To make matters worse, markers in genetics similar to “blood groups” can be defined and even patented without sufficient verification. It is becoming increasingly clear that financial interests overshadow scientific integrity. It is high time that we look critically at these uncontrolled interpretations and turn to sound scientific findings.
Conclusion: The déjà vu of scientific interpretation
Once you understand the mechanism of scientific interpretation, you realize that it is a recurring pattern. This mechanism is based on the practice of supporting unclear or refuted theories with increasingly complex assumptions and interpretations instead of critically reconsidering or correcting them. This often happens without sufficient scientific control and is driven by financial interests. Once this process is recognized, it appears like déjà vu in many areas of science.
The virus existence question serves as an eye-opener and shows how profound and far-reaching such uncontrolled interpretations are anchored in science. It is time we move away from such practices and adopt a truly scientific approach.
Do you really believe that a simple blood test can reveal your genetic history and heritage? Let us show you why common ideas about blood groups and bloodlines are far from scientific reality.
Blood: The Liquid Enigma of Our Existence
Have you ever stopped and thought about the mysterious fluid that runs through our veins? Blood, often seen as a reflection of our ancestry and identity, holds secrets far beyond what we have previously been told.
Dozens of blood groups and subgroup systems
Let’s start with a startling fact: there is not just the ABO and Rhesus blood group system that we are so familiar with. There are DOZENS of blood group systems! Each system with its own binding reactions.
What does that mean? It shows that the idea of a “specific” blood type that makes us unique is actually much more complex and non-specific than we thought.
Change in blood group
Now for an even more amazing fact: our blood type can change throughout our lives.
Yes, you’ve read correctly.
What is often viewed as an immutable marker of our identity can actually change. And not only that, scientists can artificially change blood types in laboratories!
But why is this so important? Because it challenges the common idea that our blood is an immutable witness to our genetic ancestry and history.
Lack of ideas: When blood is mixed wildly
If rabbits and monkeys were involved in the discovery of the Rh factor, how reliable is our understanding of blood groups and their meaning?
Theoretical expansion of the system: If we continue to rely on non-specific experiments, such as the monkey-rabbit experiment, we could theoretically “discover” an infinite number of new blood group systems.
Imagine if we injected monkey blood into frogs and then transferred this antiserum to human blood. This could lead to a hypothetical “Rhesus frog system”. And if we pursue this approach, we could create a new system with each combination of animals.
This shows how easy it is to develop complex and potentially misleading systems on unsound foundations.
The truth is that blood is constantly moving and changing, just like us. It is a living, breathing system that responds to our environment, our choices and our health. The idea that it divides us into simple categories is an illusion.
Own blood vs. foreign blood: Same challenges when it comes to compatibility
It is a common misconception that using your own blood in transfusions is automatically safer than using donor blood. In fact, both variants have similar challenges in terms of tolerability.
Need for compatibility testing
The fact is that blood group determination alone is not sufficient to ensure the tolerability of a blood transfusion. There are many subgroups and other factors such as the unscientific Rhesus factor that are taken into account. Therefore, a compatibility test is carried out before each transfusion to ensure that the donor and recipient are compatible.
What are blood groups?
The claim of blood groups is an attempt to explain the phenomenon of “incompatibility” of blood from different people in terms of Mendelian genetics.
Since the energy content of the cell membranes and the proteins dissolved in the body and blood are constantly changing, the blood groups also change. There are currently 29 “officially” approved, diverse blood group systems.
Drs. Tom Cowan and Mark Bailey challenge an article posted on October 4, 2023 by HART (a group of scientists in the UK) titled “Why HART uses the virus model — Arguments against ‘the virus doesn’t exist’ “.
Tom and Mark go over all key points made in the article.
It’s clear that the HART group has no idea what has been revealed in the research done by those who been exposing the false foundation of virology.
HART has somehow missed a foundational point of the “no virus” research — that no infectious “virus” has ever been isolated in the entire history of virology and that the “no virus” research shines a light on the fraud of all so-called infectious viruses.
Here is how HART group describes themselves at their website:
“HART is a group of highly qualified UK doctors, scientists, economists, psychologists and other academic experts. We came together over shared concerns about policy and guidance recommendations relating to the COVID-19 pandemic.
We continue to be concerned about the lack of open scientific debate in mainstream media and the worrying trend of censorship and harassment of those who question the narrative. Science without question is dogma.”
We are providing a transcript of one of Dr. Tom Cowan’s recent weekly webinars. His research (and that of many others) that shreds the heavy veil of lies about our human biology (and the biology of the animal world) is essential for us all to understand. The mind control involved in modern “medicine” is deeply entrenched.
Just as we as a species have been easy to control via politics, religions, and false narratives about our true nature and our history, “science” has been used in the same way. These deceptive narratives keep us trapped in a world of ever-spawning sub-narratives laced with fear. This latest whirlwind of information related to mRNA vaccines, spike protein, DNA contamination, shedding, etc. pushes us to get a better grip on what is really possible and ultimately what is true.
~ Kathleen
“You see, the tendency here, especially amongst the so-called freedom community, is they like to pick up on these studies to attempt to demonstrate or prove that these vaccines, so-called, are horrible, and they’re causing myocarditis, and they’re doing so through the mechanism of the creation of this so-called spike protein.
“I am not arguing against the fact that the injections are horrible, or that they give people myocarditis or otherwise heart problems. I’m talking about the mechanism. Because the mechanism is everything. It has to do with, eventually, how you think about this whole thing. What is actually happening. And even, eventually, how to treat it.
“Because I have no sympathy for the argument advanced by so many doctors. ‘Tom, what difference does it make whether there’s actually mRNA in the injections or whether there’s spike proteins or whether there’s a virus?’
“It makes all the difference in the world. Because if you can’t understand what’s happening or at least disprove that this particular thing is happening, you will will eventually be led astray.
“You will also eventually scare and frighten people more than you should. And there is no benefit from being ignorant about what happens and using anti-scientific thinking to make claims about what’s happening that are easily disproven.”
[…]
“So there is no such thing as a monoclonal or antibody specificity. So all these papers alleging that they found the spike protein, that the spike protein is a mechanism of damage, need to be tossed out as uncontrolled anti-scientific garbage.”
[…]
“So again, there is no actual clear scientific evidence that this process would result in pure mRNA of a specific type that could be put into these vials, that could produce a spike protein, and that could be the saving grace of the pharmaceutical industry with further mRNA vaccines.
“It’s simply the old culturing non-specific stuff that they’ve been doing all along with viruses and claiming they’re actually doing something a lot more sophisticated then they actually know how to do.”
So today I wanted to talk about the question again, which we’ve dealt with a little bit.
Is there spike proteins being made as a result of COVID shots?
But then taking it back even a step further. So this, we’re told, is a new mRNA technology that has been developed over many years. Robert Malone was one of the people who worked on the development of this technique, we’re told.
And I received an interesting series of short papers by a friend and colleague, Saeed Qureshi.
So many of you know him. I believe he’s a biochemist and works in pharmacy kind of things, who’s been very vocal about the non-existence of the virus, or at least the inability to prove that viruses actually exist.
And he sent me some papers where he goes through the argument of whether there is actually mRNA in the mRNA shots. Imagine that.
And I can imagine that most of you can imagine that because we’ve heard so many things that simply aren’t true.
When people say, ‘but there’s got to be something that is true’… And right now I’d be hard pressed to think of what in modern medicine and biology is, in fact, accurate. I’m sure there’s something. Like we have a head on top of our chest, sort of.
So we’re going to take a look at that. Before we look at that, we need some background, which is again, going over old hat.
Most of things, probably these days have a little bit of old hat in them. And that is, we have to really understand what this question of antibody specificity — and I’ll tell you a little more about what I mean by that.
But I also want to point out that probably the best paper that was written on this was written by our friend Mike Stone at Viroliegy called Antibody Specificity?
So if you’re really interested in this subject you should check out that paper on that website. So this is, again, me lifting things from other people. But as I always say, at least I acknowledge that.
So let’s get into the question first of antibody specificity. And before I do that, I have something I wanted to show you. So share the screen.
I don’t know this guy Daniel Dennett.
“There’s simply no polite way to tell people they’ve dedicated their lives to an illusion.”
So, I guess you can forget about worrying about that, because if there’s actually no way to do that and “be polite’ or maintain connection, then you don’t have to bother trying to think about what the best way would be, because there’s no way. So you might as well just say it the best way you know how.
So here’s some papers — some quotes from peer reviewed journals. The first three that I’ve probably shown before. (Can make this a little bigger.) This is about antibodies. Again, these were all lifted from peer reviewed journals.
[TCTL editor’s note: Here Tom Cowan shares some images of papers and reads from them.]
“The idea of poison and antidote led to the belief that the antidote would precisely combine with the poison and thus neutralize it. Even if death occurred when treated with the antidotes, which was often the case with mercury and arsenic, the justification was that it would prevent infecting others or that the person would have died more quickly without treatment.
“When Paul Ehrlich, who invented chemotherapy and the immune theory, slowly poisoned horses with toxic plant extracts so that they could survive otherwise lethal concentrations of the poison for a time, he found that there was an increase in protein in the blood. Since that time, these proteins have been referred to as an antidote and, in the modern version, as an anti-body.
“In reality, the body builds new vessels with these proteins, called globulins, seal all other cells and tissues with them, regulates blood clotting and thus wound healing. Paul Ehrlich’s misconception that these antidote proteins fit the toxins exactly like a key in a lock is the basis of all immune theories.”
So this paragraph essentially encapsulates the reason why I keep saying there’s no immune system.
This is the foundation of the immune theory — that we make proteins called antibodies, which are, in fact, globulins — which I would say are non-specific, unlike the specificity which is claimed. And I’ll get into more what I mean by that in a minute. So they’re not specific to anything in any virus or any protein.
They are non-specific proteins that regulate clotting and wound healing. So they cannot be used in any way to identify the protein. That’s what it means by specificity.
And since the time of Ehrlich, there have been probably thousands of papers going into the molecular details of how this specificity comes about. But the fact of the matter is, nobody has been able to prove specificity — meaning one antibody is specific, that binds and only binds to one specific antigen or protein or part of a protein or toxin. That’s what we mean by specific.
The antibody, if it was specific, could be used to identify the protein. If it’s not specific, it can’t be used to identify the protein. That should be obvious.
And so specific means it’s unique to that protein. Non-specific means it’s not unique to that protein.
If it’s specific, it can be used to identify the protein, since that’s the only possible thing it could be reacting to. If it’s non-specific, then it can’t possibly be used to identify the protein.
So next:
“In reality, these globulins, which are presented as antibodies and used in antibody tests, only come in a few size classes and different charge states. Only the size and the state of charge on the one hand and the composition of the liquids on the other hand in which the antibodies are supposed to react with the ‘bodies’ decide whether a reaction will occur or not. Even a slight change in fluid composition, temperature, or pH can cause antibodies to bind to all substances or none.”
And this is the case that the antibodies are not specific, and that they’re reacting to non-specific proteins. And the reaction is more based on the composition of the fluid, such as the temperature or the pH, or maybe the oxidation reduction potential, or maybe some other things, but they are not reacting to a specific antigen protein or toxin at all.
“This is the reason why all antibody tests, e.g. against pathogens, types of cancer etc. can be easily manipulated, are arbitrary and without any meaningfulness. Even the package inserts for these tests state that there is no (calibration) standard. Even if the disease-causing viruses existed, ‘antibody tests’ could not detect them.”
So, that is the basic argument that they’re manipulatable, they’re changed depending on the conditions of the fluid that they’re in.
They can’t possibly identify a protein or a virus or a toxin. They’re just, as they say, non-specific proteins that regulate blood clotting and wound healing. And so this is a very important fact as we go forward in this discussion.
Okay, next.
So I’m going to switch here to a slightly different.
Before I get into the spike protein and the mRNA —
This, unfortunately, title is called “Biden Quotes”. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen this. Apparently Biden said:
“I said I’d cure cancer. They looked at me like, ‘Why cancer’? Because no one thinks we can. That’s why. And we can. We ended cancer as we know it,” Biden said during a speech in the East Room of the White House.
Well, that’s good to know. So one less thing we all have to worry about, according to Joe Biden.
And then just highlight this and then I’m going to bring this up.
Okay. So this is a little bit of a switch of subjects. But I found this interesting and you’ll see how it relates to the topic. This was posted on something called US Mortality by someone who I don’t think I know. I may know them, named Ben. So I don’t really know who Ben is. I’ve seen some of his stuff just recently and it looks great. So I applaud Ben, whoever you are, you’re doing some great stuff. And, in particular, for thinking properly, because that’s what it all is based on.
So we all know that it certainly doesn’t reduce the death rate. That’s easy to show with just epidemiology. But here’s the question — because people, including myself before I really toned or honed my thinking process had questions about this. Because it seems like in previous times, 50-60 years ago, there was more of a disease called measles than there is now. And so, now that I know more about it, I know how difficult it is to make that diagnosis. And how difficult that kind of conclusion is to make on pure epidemiology or pure observation.
So it’s one of those things that — it seems like there’s less measles. But the question here is, has it been actually proven whether or not there’s more or less measles? That the MMR vaccine has been shown to reduce the number of measles cases?
So, again, the thinking process is: this is a claim. You don’t have to know anything else about the situation but the claim is the MMR vaccine has reduced the number of measles cases.
So that claim should be provable or disprovable by doing a proper study with a control — giving one group of people or children who haven’t had measles the MMR and another group of more or less identical children, not giving them the MMR, and then looking at the cases and seeing if you can detect a difference.
Anything else but that, any observation or any other epidemiological information can’t come up with that answer. This is the only way to do it. That should be obvious.
So we’re investigating the claim that the MMR vaccine reduced the cases of measles.
So here’s what the CDC says: that the MMR vaccine protects against measles, mumps and rubella. Two MMR vaccines are available — MMR II and PRIORIX, fully interchangeable. So you can use either one.
And then they go according to the Mayo Clinic — What is Measles? So they give you a bunch of of symptoms. And in particular I want to mention they tell you about Koplik’s spots, the white spots with the bluish white centers on a red background inside the lining of a cheek.
And as I said, this is the so-called pathonomonic feature of a case of measles, except 40% or so of children who are told they have measles don’t have Koplik’s spots. So that’s apparently non-Koplik’s spots measles, which is odd because that’s how you know it’s measles. So how can there be a non-Koplik’s spot measles? But anyways. So these are the symptoms of a child or a person with measles. Occurs in stages over two weeks.
So now that we know what measles looks like, let’s look at the package insert of the two products, he says.
So, these were the clinical trials that demonstrated that these vaccines reduce the case of measles. And as he points out this is the MMR II, quoting here they “demonstrate that the antibody response rates to measles, mumps, and rubella among children who received MMR II manufactured with rHA will be similar to the antibody response rates among children who receive MMR manufactured with” some other antigen and to demonstrate that MMR II will induce acceptable antibody response rates to measles, mumps, and rubella. And it’s well tolerated.
So in other words, the demonstration that the MMR II works to prevent cases of measles has no clinical indications as endpoints, no placebo was used. They only looked at antibodies under the claim that the antibodies tell you specifically that this child had or didn’t have measles. And as we now know that isn’t possible with an antibody test.
So this is an anti-scientific study, which can tell you nothing about whether the MMR II vaccine reduced the actual cases of clinical measles or not.
So let’s look at the other one, the PRIORIX. The second current vaccine was also compared to antibody responses, this time to the antibody responses of MMR II.
In other words, they inject a poison in you. They see that you have a non-specific repair mechanism activated by this injection of the poison. They claim that that means that you have an immunity against measles. And then the second vaccine, they compare it to the first one, which was fraudulently and anti-scientifically done. And then they compare the antibody response relative to MMR II, and they find that it’s basically similar. Therefore, they both protect you against measles.
When in reality that just means they both created approximately the same sort of tissue damage because they’re both poisons. And they, therefore, create the same amount of bodily response, non-specifically to heal the damage.
Now third one, MMR II (HSA), since 1978, they say that the efficacy of measles, mumps, rubella was established in a series of double-blind controlled trials, of which only these two references mentioned measles. So only this one study is — so that’s the only study that actually has anything to do with measles. And so here he has a link to the studies. And according to the study, the vaccines were compared for their clinical reaction and their antibody response.
He says he doesn’t have access to the full text, but according to the abstract the endpoints did not include the case rate of measles or deaths.
And here you can see the clinical reaction rate and antibody, were compared in children given three vaccines — so they’re compared these to the previous two. And they say they did it with the clinical reaction. So finally we get actually a trial that’s looking at whether the children got sick or not. But how did they do it?
So they did it with a clinical trial of 300 children that did not have measles. They split them into three groups. They use two measles vaccines and a placebo. And then they monitored them for three weeks.
So even though they did use a placebo, they gave them these two different measles vaccines. And then they monitor them for a total of three weeks to see whether that protected them against measles.
And what did they actually do? Did they actually look for all the clinical signs of measles? No, they simply did a rectal temperature every day, I guess, for those three weeks. And that was the only clinical sign that they measured. And if they had no more signs of a rectal increase in temperature that, apparently, meant they were protected for life against measles or three weeks.
So this is about as crazy as you can get. It goes back to an experiment in ’69 in Honduras where 300 children were monitored for three weeks. No efficacy for measles cases or deaths was established. All subsequent studies rely on this original study.
This is yet another example of these doctors thinking that somebody must have proved this. Somebody must have shown that the cases go down. When this is the only trial, apparently, that actually did anything clinical at all. And it was — all they did was measure the rectal temperature for three weeks, which has nothing to do with the alleged protection against measles or the reduction of cases or death or anything else that is claimed for this measles vaccine.
So you would have to say that there is no evidence that any MMR shot or any measles vaccine, reduced the cases of measles or the death rate for measles. Full stop.
And if you disagree with that, you’re going to have to send us a study that shows that that’s the case. And my guess is you will not be able to do that.
Okay. So now with that background, we can then go to the first question. Are we, as this paper claims… one of the most important papers on the molecular mechanism of the detection of recombinant spike protein in the blood of individuals vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.
Here is the author [Carlo Brogna], apparently in Italy.
So, of course, we go down to the methods section and ask. So how did he detect this recombinant spike protein in the blood of individuals vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2?
And lo and behold, no surprise, probably. We go down to the experimental procedures… informed consent… 20 human samples were collected from vaccinated subjects with informed consent. The geometric mean of their antibodies′ titer versus spike protein was such and such after 60 days. In addition 20 human biological samples were collected from unvaccinated subjects wtih informed consent.
And so they were different. These ones who had not undergone COVID-19 and didn’t have the vaccine, and presumably had less tissue breakdown, were negative for these antibodies — which according to them, proves that the spike protein is created in the blood through vaccination, and is part of the illness they’re calling COVID-19.
So again, the whole thing rests on the fact that the only thing that they measured here were antibodies. They were claiming that the antibodies were specific for the spike protein. Therefore, if they find the spike protein in the blood of vaccinated or people who allegedly had COVID, that means that they had spike protein disease. Whereas the people who were healthy and then, presumably not breaking down their tissues, didn’t have to make non-specific antibodies. So the antibody tests were negative.
It has nothing to do with spike proteins or viruses at all.
So again, it doesn’t mean that I’m saying — we’re talking the mechanism here, not whether some people who allegedly had some non-specific illness called COVID-19 were sick. Maybe they were and maybe they were breaking down. And I’m not exonerating these injections.
For sure, if you inject somebody, as we’ll see with non-specific cell culture goop, you will make them sick. Their tissues will break down and they will have increased antibodies.
The question we’re dealing with here is not whether things can make people sick, or injections of poisons can make people sick. It’s whether the antibodies prove that this is a spike protein or a spike protein coming from a virus, and the spike protein is made by the alleged mRNA in the injection.
So, let me just go through, well, let me go to the next one here.
You see, the tendency here, especially amongst the so-called freedom community, is they like to pick up on these studies to attempt to demonstrate or prove that these vaccines, so-called, are horrible, and they’re causing myocarditis, and they’re doing so through the mechanism of the creation of this so-called spike protein.
I am not arguing against the fact that the injections are horrible, or that they give people myocarditis or otherwise heart problems. I’m talking about the mechanism because the mechanism is everything. It has to do with, eventually, how you think about this whole thing. What is actually happening. And even, eventually, how to treat it.
Because I have no sympathy for the argument advanced by so many doctors. ‘Tom, what difference does it make whether there’s actually mRNA in the injections or whether there’s spike proteins or whether there’s a virus.’
It makes all the difference in the world. Because if you can’t understand what’s happening or at least disprove that this particular thing is happening, you will will eventually be led astray.
You will also eventually scare and frighten people more than you should. And there is no benefit from being ignorant about what happens and using anti-scientific thinking to make claims about what’s happening that are easily disproven.
So when you say, okay, well, how did this paper that’s so crucial to our understanding that it’s the spike protein that’s causing myocarditis — how did they detect the spike protein?
And no surprise there. If you go to the method section, you see:
“We performed extensive antibody profiling…” and then there’s a whole other bunch of immune profiles, antibodies against the human-relevant virome. These are all downstream antibody testing, all of which are non-specific and can’t possibly tell you that there was a spike protein.
And here again you see this immunophenotyping, and it’s all about detecting antibodies against previous infection, SARS-Cov-2 spike protein specific T-cell responses and other antibodies.
They never actually assay for spike protein directly in the fluids. They sometimes look for pieces which they allege, through other antibody testing previously done, that those come from the spike protein.
It all basically boils down to: Are antibodies specific? And the answer, as I said, is clearly no.
So, this brings up another interesting question.
So somebody could say, ‘Okay, Cowan, how can you actually go about proving whether these antibodies are specific or not? Like what should we do?’
Just like we outlined with how they should go about proving there is a virus or not with our viral challenge, here I will outline how you would go about, if you wanted to do proper, reasonable, logical science, proving that antibodies are specific and not just non-specific reactions to tissue breakdown. So it would go something like this:
You would give a substance, preferably a toxic substance or a substance that causes damage, like a vaccine (so-called), or an injection, or some sort of cell culture goop or nanoparticles. And
then you would get breakdown of the tissue. If you don’t give any toxic substance, you won’t get any tissue breakdown, presumably, and then you won’t get any antibodies produced, and then you don’t have anything to study. So you give the substance, you get the tissue breakdown.
And then you inject the antibody or take a sample and mix it with the antibody that you believe — this is what you’re going to test — is specific for a certain protein.
They say that if this antibody binds, and therefore makes some sort of reaction, that’s proof of specificity. But what they should do is give the same person or animal a different substance that couldn’t possibly have a spike protein in it, but is also toxic to the tissues and causes a similar amount of tissue damage. Then you once you get the tissue damage, you take a sample or inject the antibodies, or mix it with antibodies in the sample, or inject the antibody into the person, and see if it binds the same antibody.
If it binds — and obviously the insult, the toxin, was different — that proves that the antibodies are not binding to a specific toxin, they’re binding to non-specific toxins and, in particular, they’re being produced in reaction to tissue damage.
So that’s the first of two controls that you would do.
The second is you would give this toxic substance — let’s say something you claim is a spike protein or an mRNA — you would see the tissue damage. And then you would inject it with the antibody that you claim is specific, see if it binds. and see if it lights up and you can detect it. And if it does, you claim that that binding proves that it’s protein specific.
But then, give the same substance (your so-called spike protein), you get the tissue breakdown, but this time you inject or mix it with a different antibody, not the antibody that you say is specific to the spike protein, but a totally different antibody. That of course shouldn’t bind. And if it does, it tells you that antibodies are binding non-specifically, and you cannot use it to prove the existence of that antigen or that protein in the first place.
Every single paper that does that, that uses antibodies to make this claim, should obviously include both of those steps. And yet, none of us can find a paper that ever includes both of those steps. Therefore, they’re all anti-scientific. They are not using appropriate controls and not following the scientific method.
And this is why one of the world’s leading authorities on antibodies, and particularly monoclonal antibodies (monoclonal means they’re specific to one antigen) and that’s Clifford Saper, Harvard Medical School Professor. And this is a quote from one of his papers.
“No, there is no such thing as a monoclonal antibody that, because it is monoclonal, recognizes only one protein or only one virus. It will bind to any protein having the same (or a very similar) sequence.”
So there is no such thing as a monoclonal or antibody specificity. So all these papers alleging that they found the spike protein, that the spike protein is a mechanism of damage, need to be tossed out as uncontrolled anti-scientific garbage.
If you want an analogy, I came up with one just before this that may help.
So let’s say you have a balloon and you cut the balloon with a knife or some object. And then you put duct tape on it to fix the balloon. And then you claim that because you were able to fix the balloon with duct tape this proves that the knife was the mechanism that cut the balloon.
That’s essentially what they’re doing. They’re saying essentially that the duct tape is somehow specific to the mechanism of injury, which is a knife.
So the first control experiment you would need to do is take the balloon and cut it with a scissors, and then use your duct tape and see if you could fix the balloon. Because if you could, this would demonstrate that your conclusion originally was wrong, that it is not specific to a knife, because it works just as well with a balloon cut with a scissors.
And then the next control experiment you would do is you would take the balloon and you would cut it with a knife. But this time you would try to fix the balloon with, say, elephant tape. I’m not sure what that is, but I’ve heard that that actually works sort of like duct tape. And if that works to fix the balloon, which it would, that would tell you that the type of tape, i.e. the antibody, is not specific to the mechanism of injury, that is to say a knife — that any similar tape would work.
So again, similarly, many antibodies will bind to that protein, or to that injured tissue, because the antibodies are not specific to the protein. They’re specific to the tissue injury.
So many different mechanisms of injury, and many different antibodies will work. And if you don’t believe me, send me a paper where they did both of those controls, and I and others will admit we’re wrong. Except that won’t happen, because none of the so-called scientists will be able to do that. Because, as far as we can see, it doesn’t exist.
And so, once again, we are putting out very specific guidelines to prove us wrong. And the people who are attempting to do that seemingly never are able to do that, because those papers don’t exist.
And then, finally, we get to the issue of Dr. Qureshi’s paper of ‘Is there actually mRNA in these injections?’.
So here’s the paper. You can see the reference here, and I don’t know exactly how to find it but I think if you put this in somehow you’ll be able to find it. And he talks about how they claim that there is mRNA in these injections. I mean that’s the whole point.
You put the mRNA for the spike protein, then that goes to the imaginary ribosomes and makes the spike proteins, and the spike proteins make non-specific antibodies to a protein that couldn’t possibly have been made — or at least has never been demonstrated to have been made — and pretty soon you realize you’re in La La Land.
So, here he goes through the steps. And I think basically, he talks about the fact that the mRNA… Let’s just read it and so we go there from a pharmaceutical perspective.
[TCTL editor’s note: Here, Tom skips through, reading parts of pages 2 to 4 from Saeed Qureshi’s paper and mixing with his own comments. To identify which words are Saeed’s and which are Tom’s, it might help to read the paper while listening. LINK]
“One must obtain the active ingredient, in this case mRNA”… either have to make it yourself or get it from a third party.
So he talks about this. There’s the active ingredient, which is the mRNA and then there’s all the other stuff that goes into the formulation.
So we’re not interested in the other stuff. We’re only interested in this so-called active ingredient, which is mRNA.
So during the product development, the active ingredient is monitored, tested, to see if it is in the body, is expected in the expected amounts, the efficacy and toxicity relate to the active ingredient levels.
Therefore, a vaccine developer would first need an appropriate mRNA or its source to purchase such an active ingredient… should commonly be available from an independent third party supplier with appropriate certification for identification and purity.
However, the COVID-19 mRNA is proprietary. No information about its nature and purity is available in the public domain. So obviously that makes it difficult to know whether that’s in there.
Therefore, as he says, appropriately, one must rely on general information regarding what is present in the vials, and how they may have been synthesized manufactured and purified.
So now we’re getting to the crux of the matter.
In this regard a fermentation process using culturing microbes, such as bacteria is claimed to produce mRNA, which is then extracted, isolated, from the manufacturing perspective. The following diagram shows the steps. [see the bottom of page 2 for diagram]
You can see that steps — hard to see here. Culture has developed, some chemical reactions are performed. This stops the culturing fermentation, followed by purification. The last step is marked as formulation.
This production process of mRNA is simple, yet very confusing, which may be why people do not correctly understand the manufacturing of the vaccine and its adverse effect.
As explained above, the active ingredient is mRNA.
And this is the key of all this.
But no step describes mRNA production. We go through this in detail.
There is no step proving that this bacteria in this fermentation mat are making a specific mRNA.
The last step in the diagram is formulation or vaccine. Therefore this is vaccine production, not mRNA per se.
He says they use the words mRNA and vaccine interchangeably which is incorrect. Calling the end stages formulation indicates that the mRNA has never been produced, but is assumed to be there. So there is no step in here that proves, or demonstrates the specific production of mRNA.
It’s only assumed to be there.
The last step in the manufacturing should be a pure and isolated mRNA compound. However, it is an “isolate”, culture or gunk, possibly selectively concentrated compared to the one in the productive chamber.
In other words, all they have is the breakdown of the culture or gunk, culture gunk, not specifically isolated purified mRNA, which then they could use as the active ingredient to put into the vials.
And he says they don’t appreciate the difference between culture isolate gunk and pure isolated component which is a critical misunderstanding as the relevant science, the same as the virus issue.
So mRNA has not been produced, but a culture isolate, gunk, is considered and sold as mRNA or vaccine.
And this is another crucial point he makes.
It may be argued that the manufacturing processes or steps shown in the figure above have multiple filtration separation or isolation steps, like gradient ultra centrifugation for virus isolation, ensuring the production of pure mRNA.
And this is the part that I can’t verify myself. But I know Saeed, and I think this is a worthy place to start.
“Considering my extensive expertise and experience 40 plus years in separation science, including exhaustive training and experience in chromatography, I can confidently say that the steps described here would not be able to produce the claimed pure and isolated mRNA until shown otherwise.”
“Another critical point is that it is impossible to monitor mRNA production because no test may be developed without the availability of the pure and isolated reference (mRNA) standard. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that mRNA production is based on assumption, not scientific or valid testing.”
In other words, if they can’t come up with the pure isolated mRNA, there’s no way to validate this procedure. And therefore, there’s no way to claim that this procedure made the mRNA that they’re saying is in there. Therefore, there’s no way to even know that the mRNA is in there.
So what’s in there?
He suspects that the presence of DNA contamination, which is becoming an issue now — they know that the DNA is contaminated — is simply because they’re using culture gunk or chip particles of bacteria, which obviously have their own contaminating DNA. And this contamination would explain the widespread adverse reactions after the injection of these vials.
So we don’t need to propose a mechanism of mRNA or spike protein. Simply injecting bacterial culture junk with all the stuff that’s in there that is not properly purified.
And there’s no way to assess the validity of the claim, because they don’t have a pure mRNA to begin with, makes the whole burden of proof on the manufacturers to prove that there is the mRNA that they say there is in there.
And my guess is that is, again, a challenge that they will never undertake due to claims of proprietary, or this or that, or we don’t want to sell our secrets, or people would do nasty things with it as if (as if they’re not doing enough nasty things with what they’re doing already).
So again, there is no actual clear scientific evidence that this process would result in pure mRNA of a specific type that could be put into these vials, that could produce a spike protein, and that could be the saving grace of the pharmaceutical industry with further mRNA vaccines.
It’s simply the old culturing non-specific stuff that they’ve been doing all along with viruses and claiming they’re actually doing something a lot more sophisticated then they actually know how to do.
So I hope that clarifies things and alleviates people’s worries that they’re being genetically reprogrammed or that there’s some specific genetic modification going on.
I mean, again, it’s not to say that the injections aren’t bad enough. And I’m not exonerating the injections or saying they’re not causing the damage that they do. Far from it.
It’s just not the mechanism that we’ve been told. And anybody who claims that’s the mechanism, the burden of proof is on them to:
Show the pure isolated mRNA that comes from this process.
Show us that mRNA is the same in all the vaccines.
Show us by direct assay that the spike proteins are made as a result of these injections.
Show that the spike protein injections create something called immunity to something called the virus.
And none of those four steps are possible, because the whole thing is a bunch of hooey.
Instead of focusing on the DNA-contaminated mRNA vaccines, the central question should be: Has the basic assumption about “pathogenic particles (viruses)” ever been scientifically proven/confirmed? The answer is NO , and therefore every vaccination is inherently illegal and dangerous.
It is ironic that if the assumptions of genetic theory were correct, critics would be right. This irony shows that pharmaceuticals are paradoxically finding themselves caught in the crossfire due to theses held by both critics and the mainstream.
What does that mean?
The idea that DNA is the unchanging blueprint of life has been promoted for over 40 years. But in 2006, leading researchers confirmed: This idea was naive. DNA is dynamic and constantly changing.
The human genome
Complete decoding of the human genome (in reality just reading rows of letters that are not understood) is impossible. No two people are “genetically” alike, not even one cell is another. When you consider that the individual genomes of less than 0.0003% of the 8 billion people have been sequenced (and incompletely), one thing becomes clear: assignments of genetic letter orders for cancer, eye color, height, etc. are impossible.
An example: the color of the eyes
It was believed that it was simply genetically determined. This idea turned out to be a forced interpretation of the current data, which was refuted by more recent data. So parents with blue eyes can have a child with brown eyes. This makes it clear that the idea of a fixed genetic section has been scientifically refuted.
Plain language: If every genome is unique, we only know a tiny fraction of all genomes (0.0003%) and they are constantly changing themselves, then the attempt to define fixed gene sections for certain characteristics such as eye color or cancer is worth it , like trying to catch a river with a sieve – it’s not only inaccurate, it’s simply unattainable.
The madness of genetics
When even simple examples such as eye color cannot be assigned, it seems bizarre when parties claim that foreign “specific” DNA can precisely change human genetics and cause cancer. Dr. Kary Mullis summed it up well: With PCR you can find everything in every person if you do it right. This means that every DNA or RNA sequence can be found in every person, whether healthy, sick, vaccinated or unvaccinated.
The strategy of fighting like with like may seem promising at first glance. But on closer inspection it turns out to be a theoretical trap. Instead of focusing on the DNA-contaminated mRNA vaccines, the central question should be: Has the basic assumption about “pathogenic particles (viruses)” ever been scientifically proven/confirmed? The answer is NO , and therefore every vaccination is inherently illegal and dangerous.
The current approach offers the pharmaceutical apparatus a back door: they could argue that there are better, uncontaminated vaccines or present other methods that would then have to be accepted within the long-refuted genetics thesis.
The technical implementation of the laboratory in Magdeburg is vulnerable even within the narrative
The detection is based on non-exact methods such as Qubit Flex Fluorometer and qPCR that have been performed. Neither the plasmids were directly isolated and detected nor were they properly sequenced.
First, we lack detailed information about the exact conditions and protocols under which these experiments were conducted.
Secondly, we know nothing about the negative and positive controls carried out.
Third, no sequencing or isolation of the plasmids was performed. This means that we do not know exactly which DNA sequences were present in the samples. Sequencing would have been necessary to determine the “theoretically” accurate nature of the DNA detected and to ensure that it was in fact plasmid DNA and not other forms of DNA.
David Icke with Reiner Fuellmich: On the Step by Step Takeover of Humanity & Our Natural World | The Solution Is in the Power of ‘No’ & Our Refusal to Acquiesce
Below you will find Reiner Fuellmich’s recent interview with David Icke. Some excerpts are provided to give you a sense of the overall tone. This conversation covers a wide number of topics related to our multi-dimensional, multi-frequency reality.
Along with a discussion of the ways humanity has been controlled throughout history and the awakening of so many people because of the global crimes against humanity during ‘the plandemic’ , there are also brief mentions of hidden technology, the secrecy around Antarctica (and Admiral Byrd’s expedition), Hollow Earth, underground bases, non-human manipulation of humanity, Rudolf Steiner’s (1861-1925) prediction of mind-control vaccines, etc.
Reiner Fuellmich:
“I mean, I get bored with that because I don’t want to talk the umpteenth time about how they misused the PCR test in order to create cases that didn’t exist. I don’t want to talk about whether or not this is personality changing. I don’t want to talk about whether this is going to make people infertile. We know that it does.
“We have to step beyond this because we’re wasting our time talking about the same things over and over and over again simply because it’s so fascinating to see how blatantly they manipulated us and made us believe in totally idiotic concepts.
“If we don’t understand the whole picture, if we don’t see that, we’re not going to be able to get out of this self-created illusion.
“So in that sense, I’m extremely glad that you have put the dots together. It makes perfect sense to me and it coincides with everything that I’ve learned over the last three years.”
[…]
“I mean, yes, my friend Dexter Ryneveldt (he’s an attorney from South Africa) and I and all the other international attorneys were working on getting out the whole picture, not just the pieces of the puzzle but the whole story, in a legal proceeding. Because this is what people expect. We’re talking about justice.
“Ultimately, there will be justice. Justice will have to be done.
“But you won’t get justice inside the system, which you have just described because it’s totally, it’s the spider web. It’s totally under their control.
“So we’ll have to step outside the system and probably into a system that not just provides the legal framework as we think it should be as lawyers, but also connects with spirituality or consciousness, whatever you want to call it. Step outside the system so that they will not be able to touch us.
“Dexter’s example was, as an eagle you can’t fight a snake [on the ground] and win against it. You can’t come down and fight it at the ground. You have to pick it up into the air, which is where it can’t survive if you really want to destroy it.
“And ultimately, I think this is what this is about. It’s about either them or us. We have to either destroy them or they will destroy us. And this is what people have to understand.”
[…]
“But, you know, sometimes it helps to have a kind of a symbolism. For me as a lawyer the most important takeaway from what you’re telling us today is that we do have to go after the gophers.
“I know it’s just symbolism but it shows everyone that it’s us who are calling the shots. And if we don’t want to play along, if we want justice, if we want to hold these people responsible, then we will.
“There’s nothing that can stop us. And if we cut off this conveyor belt, so to speak, we’re destroying the spider web. And all of a sudden we will be able to see who we really are. I think this is really what it boils down to.”
David Icke:
“Well, they’ve been taking over our society over a long period of time and going step by step towards their ultimate goal.
“And I have this phrase, ‘know the outcome and you’ll see the journey‘.
“If you don’t know the outcome then everything seems random. When you know what the outcome is planned to be, the random becomes very clear stepping stones to that outcome.
“So the outcome is planned to be, first of all, a different type of human, far more synthetic in nature. This is why synthetic biology is a massively expanding area of science. This is all connected into the jabs as well — as you will have talked to many people about this.
“Up to this point, they have had to control information to manipulate perception because perception is what they’re after. They want a technological way of controlling perception. So they don’t have to do all this manipulation of information.
“So religions served the perceptual indoctrination very well. And now we’ve got science, which is overwhelmingly not science at all in its true sense.
“But what they want — and this is why they’re now coming out with it; they’ve gone from hiding it to sales-pitching it — they want to connect artificial intelligence to the human brain and the human body so that our perceptions will come direct.
“Not manipulated. Direct. You will think what AI thinks.
“And so you have this guy, Ray Kurzweil at Google, a futurist. And people say, he’s got an 80% accuracy in predicting the future.
“Well, if you know what the plan is, there’s a bloody good chance you’re going to be right.
“I mean, people say to me, how did you predict all this? Well, because I uncovered the plan.
“I’m not predicting the future. I’m predicting what the plan wants.
“And if nothing intervenes in the plan it will become the future.”
[…]
“We don’t have to fight the enemy. There’s no need to fight. We have to stop cooperating with it. Because the enemy has no freaking power…
“We are the cause of what’s happening in the world by acquiescing to authority. We take it back, the house of cards is all over the floor.”
[…]
“And you know, again, not only can you not control eight billion people… unless you recruit gophers from the eight billion people to impose your will upon the eight billion people. These are police officers. These are the military.
“And when people like that start to realize (and other people in the system start to realize) what they’re playing the part of without realizing it, who their real masters are, and the fact that their kids and grandkids are going to have to live in the world they’re helping to create — if they would then walk away and stop doing what they’re doing, then the whole thing starts to fall apart.”
[…]
“And so it’s a time of great danger, but it’s also a time of great opportunity — that we can create true freedom as opposed to the illusion of freedom…”
In this first of two parts of ICIC’s interview, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich and co-host attorney Dagmar Schoen talk with British veteran of the alternative media scene David Icke. He is an author, researcher and investigative journalist.
Reiner Fuellmich and Dagmar Schoen question him about his personal awakening process and the beginning of his involvement with the other side of the story, the real side, that initially turned his world upside down. He recounts his startling experiences that, ultimately, broadened his horizon and understanding of reality, as opposed to the mainstream’s narrative. These processes led him to leave his old life behind, defying all reprisals, and to dedicate his life to the uncovering of hidden knowledge and truths, beyond the fabricated “reality” we have been fed.
Icke describes in detail the structure and the far-reaching entanglements of a pyramidal organizational structure designed by a small, but very well-organized conglomerate. This conglomerate was, indeed, able to infiltrate almost all areas of our social structures over many years by installing stooges in politics, business, NGOs, etc.
Those who pull the strings, who act in secret, have positioned themselves like a spider in the center of this network, so that they have everything under surveillance. They must maintain their position of power at all costs in order to survive at the expense of humanity – which is waking up to this reality ever faster.
David Icke addresses issues that at first glance seem to have nothing to do with each other, explaining the entanglements and then connecting the dots so that an overall picture emerges of the great deception to which we have been and are being subjected. None of this is an accident, as the last three and a half years have shown us.
The connections are becoming clearer and clearer, revealing that this inhumane agenda is aimed at total control of humanity, combined with dehumanization through technocracy to replace anything human, indeed, creation as a whole. David Icke’s work reveals the workings of a persistent and perfidious psychological terror that is being deliberately used against us.
If we realize that we as humanity are vastly superior to this inhumane conglomerate, that it is dependent on us and can only survive through our energy and creative power, then this exploitation and deception will cease immediately. For this, the determined refusal to participate on our part is sufficient. We need only communicate this to these creatures by using the powerful word “No!” And we must understand that we are now at a point in time that even our legal systems analyze as a situation of self-defense.
“The takeover framework of these ruling psychopaths is based always on the prototype of problem-reaction-solution, of which all are fake premeditated events and false emergencies; conspiracies in fact, meant to instill fear, hatred, or confusion, so that the State can pretend to come to the rescue of its hapless slave-class.”
[…]
“While the state continues to build its new world order, the general population is consumed by one after another false flag event, claimed ’emergency,’ or new ‘threat,’ as stated by the ruling class bent on taking over the world. While the masses are at each other’s throats, the state continues its drive toward total domination. What this indicates is that the people are complicit in their own slavery due to their inability to see the big picture, while concentrating on every distraction thrown at them by this evil ruling force.”
This Long Plotted World Takeover Scheme Is More Advanced Than Any Normal Human Can Fathom
“The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control. Do I mean a conspiracy? Yes, I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, incredibly evil in intent.”
~ Rep. Larry P. MacDonald [Note: Lawrence McDonald was killed (likely murdered) on Korean Air Lines 007, 1983, a few months after making this statement.]
To begin, I will preface my remarks by saying that this is an attempt to explain in simple terms, very complicated financial and economic crimes being used against Americans, and also against the entire world population, in order to create and sustain total control over humanity. This is meant to manifest itself in the concept of one world governance, the ‘Great Reset,’ or the New World Order.
This may seem a bold statement; it is not, but once you understand that everything that has happened over many decades is linked, especially since the plotted and premeditated false flag event called ‘9/11,’ you should be able to recognize the massive number of obvious connections that are incredibly evil.
It has recently become more prevalent by mostly alternative news sites and bloggers, to put forth the notion that many are waking up, and that the people are winning the battle for freedom. In my opinion, this is just not so, and in fact is misleading, as false hope is the driving force of this thinking.
It is evident that more are claiming to be against government tyranny, but absolutely nothing has been done to reduce or eliminate the power of the State at any level to date. In addition, the nefarious efforts of the State and its controllers continue to expand, and the drive toward more draconian policies is never-ending.
In the current environment, it is not known what the reaction by the masses might be considering the vast and imminent array of so-called ’emergencies’ that are certain to arise as this controlling cabal seeks to advance its agendas, but if the past is any indication, compliance should be expected.
The takeover framework of these ruling psychopaths is based always on the prototype of problem-reaction-solution, of which all are fake premeditated events and false emergencies; conspiracies in fact, meant to instill fear, hatred, or confusion, so that the State can pretend to come to the rescue of its hapless slave-class.
This strategy has worked most every time it has been tried to date, and the herd continues to simply go along, regardless of the erroneous rhetoric being spewed that this populace is winning. It is not, and so long as the State continues and succeeds in its push to remake and transform society, whether psychologically, financially, or economically, the power of the ruling class and its governing system, will advance its wealth transfers, its monetary monopoly, and its depopulation efforts.
Psychological manipulation and control is necessary in order for the State thugs to accomplish their mission of world takeover, but financial and economic control is mandatory.
This brings us to the real question; who owns and controls this world? It is certainly the big banking cartels, including all central banks, the large corporate magnates, the government protected NGO foundations, and of course, the entire global asset industry, which by 2020 controlled well over $100 trillion dollars. But who owns and controls all of these entities? Who has controlling interest in everything on earth? That is Blackrock and The Vanguard Group, and as I explained a year ago:
“There are a few thousand institutional investment firms that own every large bank, every large corporation, every large investment firm, every ‘news’ outlet, every large communication company, every large pharmaceutical company, every large transportation company; in other words, most every large company on earth is owned by these institutional investors. In turn, the small institutional investment firms are owned by larger institutional investment firms, and the larger investment firms, are owned by even larger investment firms. The two institutional investment companies that are the major owners and controllers of all the others in the world are Vanguard Holdings and Blackrock, and Vanguard is the largest shareholder (owner) of Blackrock. What this means is that Vanguard and Blackrock own and control this planet.”
The current CEO of Vanguard is Tim Buckley, and of course, the head and founder of the powerful Blackrock institution is Larry Fink. It should be noted that Fink and Blackrock have attained a position of extreme and almost infinite power over finance and economics, and according to many are now the fourth branch of government.
The connections of Fink are incredibly telling of the power wielded by Blackrock. Blackrock effectively has control of the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury, as well as banks around the world. It should be noted that Fink was appointed to the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Board on August 22, 2019, the onset of the fraudulent ‘covid pandemic,’ which was set up, solidified, and begun, the same month that Fink took his seat on the board of the WEF.
To gain a full picture of Fink and Blackrock’s history through today, watch this superb documentary by James Corbett; “How Blackrock Conquered the World.” In it, Corbett explains with full reference in video and text, how the entire ‘covid’ hoax was staged, and was first and foremost a financial takeover coup led by Blackrock. This connection of dots and people is of vital importance.
As I mentioned earlier, this is a very simplistic view of events, but it is necessary to tie a few things together in order that all can be seen to be completely connected; which would indicate a vast conspiracy that has been propagated over a long period of time.
All so-called ’emergencies’ since the fraudulent 9/11 inside job, have much in common, and why would they not, as the main agenda of world governing domination was always the goal sought.
Consider just three events, but there are many, many more, over that time.
The buildings that came down on 9/11 were turned into powder, an impossibility with fire caused by jet fuel. Consider that cars far away from any fire were burned to nothing, with melted metal, aluminum, windshield glass; all as if by spontaneous combustion.
But the same thing happened in the Paradise, California fires in 2018, with many similarities, including the incredible damage to automobiles not even in the path of fires that had to be well above any heat level of a wildfire.
The same also just occurred this past month in Lahaina, Hawaii.
How could this be? It could not, unless similar or exact methods of destruction were plotted beforehand, and carried out by criminal State (military) means. And this is happening around the world as well, all falsely explained away by the complicit and controlled mainstream media.
One very telling aspect of all these bogus ’emergencies,’ from 9/11 to Maui, is that Wall Street and the financial firms, the institutional asset firms, central banks, defense contractors, and military-controlled tech companies, and of course this includes Blackrock, tended to gain huge profits, capture (steal through land grabs) more property, government contracts, and massive bailout money, while walking away from disaster far richer and more powerful than ever before possible.
This happened with 9/11, the 2008 finance and housing collapse, the fake ‘covid’ plot, and now with the ultimate weapon against humanity, the completely illegitimate ‘climate change’ agenda; and this agenda placed Blackrock at the top of the heap worldwide, of this criminal fraud.
Each and every emergency brings about a bigger and more powerful State, more restrictions, more regulation, more mandates, more lockdowns, less travel, and more surveillance and censorship. This is all by design, and never coincidental or accidental, as all is a deliberate plot against humanity.
Regardless of political considerations or parties, this assault against us all is ongoing, and forever expanding. Every incident, every manipulation, every ’emergency,’ has been planned far in advance, and the world takeover is now closer at hand.
While the state continues to build its new world order, the general population is consumed by one after another false flag event, claimed ’emergency,’ or new ‘threat,’ as stated by the ruling class bent on taking over the world. While the masses are at each other’s throats, the state continues its drive toward total domination. What this indicates is that the people are complicit in their own slavery due to their inability to see the big picture, while concentrating on every distraction thrown at them by this evil ruling force.
What is being ignored is that this world has already been taken over and is being fully controlled by the very few, and the fighting of one against another is continuing to aid in this takeover plot. By concentrating on each and every tyrannical distraction, the people have left themselves open to dictatorial management, and in the process have lost all ability to stop the totalitarian usurpation of their lives and property at the hands of the financial cabal bent on world rule. By treating each indiscretion as independent of the real agenda being sought, nothing is being done to stop the state in its efforts to fully control all people on earth.
By participating in the political and ‘voting’ process; a process designed and implemented for the single purpose of control, by concentrating on the political side shows, by attempting to use corrupt government courts to gain redress from tyrannical maneuvers, by accepting the ruling system as legitimate, by allowing the Federal Reserve and all banks the ability to monitor and control assets through complete digitization, the lowly people are digging their own graves.
It may already be too late to continue this asinine exercise in futility, as the ruling class few are in control of the systems that will allow them to complete their takeover plot.
The only answer to this evil attempt to destroy us in favor of the few most powerful, is to negate all government, to negate and abolish the federal reserve system, to disallow any and all control by the banking cartels, to stop any and all efforts to monopolize the economic and monetary system’s efforts to create and implement any central bank digital currencies, and to not accept any new feigned emergency concerning health, fake ‘climate change,’ war threats, unnatural events, or any other intentional criminal acts meant to cause undue fear among the seemingly helpless proletariat.
The people are not winning; they are losing, but this deadly assault on humanity can still be reversed if even a small majority stand up and take responsibility for their own lives and freedom.
If the current trend continues, if the bulk of this population persists in hiding from the truth, if most expect others to save them, all will be lost, but if any true actionable awakening by large numbers becomes evident, the state will fold. This will never happen with any election, and no politician can change the course we are on, as depending on any master participating in this evil governing system, is the epitome of failure, and can only lead to eternal enslavement.
“The one thing man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by a World Government, a New World Order.”
“Cars were melted where no evidence of a fire was even present, and the scene looked eerily similar, almost exact, as to what happened in New York on September 11, 2001. This is not coincidental, it is apparent, and telling of a pre-planned slaughter and mass destruction.”
“Whoever lays his hand on me to govern me is a usurper and tyrant, and I declare him my enemy.”
~ Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
We are in the midst of a heinous crime in what is falsely referred to as the ‘American’ State of Hawaii, so vile and evil, that it should sicken all who have any remote possibility of exhibiting mental acquaintance with truth, compassion, or empathy.
The State’s attack on the people of Maui was in my studied opinion, premeditated, brutal, murderous beyond explanation, and targeted to achieve a preconceived agenda which was the total destruction of Lahaina by extreme property devastation and mass death of much of the local population. This was necessary in the mind of the State in order to steal the land and rebuild based on the World Economic Forum and U.N. plan for captured cities, as evidenced by the evil piece of garbage governor, Josh Green, who immediately claimed he wanted to acquire by theft the purposely destroyed land and property for the State, while smoldering embers still burned, and bodies had not been found.
Today, I went to the ten top mainstream news sites searching all news stories, and did not find a single story about the Lahaina fires, except one showing the slimy Biden sleeping while at a meeting with Maui victims; this after offering these victims $700 per family after they had lost everything, including many of their family members.
In other words, this story has been purposely scrubbed from view, not different than what happened after the intentional chemical fire devastated East Palestine, Ohio, and left that town and many others with deadly pollutants.
A tall black fence was actually built around the town of Lahaina, at taxpayer cost of course, and a no fly zone order was given to hide the gruesome murder scene from any view and scrutiny.
What is insanely troubling about the reporting concerning this horrific crime in Maui by all mainstream outlets, and even many alternative sites, is that most continue to call this a ‘wild fire,’ while the evidence of such nonsense does not exist. The anomalies and reactions to this so-called ‘natural’ event, are staggering beyond recognition, and reek of the stench of total corruption at the highest levels.
This was a land grab of epoch proportion, but it was much worse than that, as high death counts were pursued by the State thugs, as they locked the residents of Lahaina inside the rings of deadly fire likely caused by directed energy and microwave attacks; creating fires that were strategically targeted, with heat that was in some cases double that of any wild fire.
This was clearly evident given the melting of aluminum and steel, and also the melting of automobile windshields which requires heat at or above 2,500 degrees. Cars were melted where no evidence of a fire was even present, and the scene looked eerily similar, almost exact, as to what happened in New York on September 11, 2001.
This is not coincidental, it is apparent, and telling of a pre-planned slaughter and mass destruction.
The fires in Maui that were said to have been caused ‘naturally,’ a brazen lie, were almost identical to the fires in Paradise, California as well; fires that were targeted, burning homes to white ash without burning trees or plastic, and in areas desired by the State criminals for rebuilding so-called “smart cities.”
In Lahaina, homes of the very rich were magically spared, as were certain state buildings, grand hotels, and other areas of State favor.
But the homes and families of the local residents were attacked head on, with absolutely no regard for the lives or property of these innocent people.
The ‘crime’ supposedly committed, as seen by the State, was not bowing down, and giving up their homes and lives voluntarily, so a direct false flag action of slaughter and murder was created to complete the State’s agenda of land theft. To hell with the people and their property was the private battle cry of these State politicians and their murderous enforcers called police.
No sirens were turned on even though there were 80 active sirens on Maui.
All water was turned off so fires could not be fought.
Wi-fi was turned off, as was most all electric power.
Roads out were closed, and police roadblocks were manned to forcibly keep all the residents inside the fire perimeter, causing purposeful mass death.
Schools were shut down, so that children were home alone when these intentional fires raged through Lahaina, and many burned to death without help from any State service. The real numbers of deaths are still being hidden as far as I can tell.
In addition, before and after the fire, speculators were attempting to buy these properties, and while bodies were still unfound, the government announced its intentions to buy up this land.
None of these are coincidences, but the State and its complicit media would have you believe that all of these, and many, many, more impossibilities are all coincidental. How could anyone with two brain cells to rub together, buy into the propagandized narratives being presented by the evil State?
I fully realize, especially considering the nearly complete lack of any ability to think critically by the masses, that what I am presenting here will be ignored by a very large swath of the population.
The long-term dumbing down of individuals, and the now digitally-manipulated population, has embraced indifference to such an extent, as to have escaped all reality. In fact, common sense, logic, and reason appear to be nearly non-existent generally speaking. It is much easier for the collective herd to believe the State narratives than to do the work necessary to ferret out fact and truth.
Unfortunately, the ruling class understands this weak and apathetic trait that seems to have captured the very large percentage of dead men walking among us.
How much more obvious corruption, lies, and murder at the hands of the State will have to take place before any majority comes to terms with the reality that this world is ending in favor of mass slavery and depopulation? Will the flock ever fight back?
The forced annexation of Hawaii, the staged Pearl Harbor attack, the world wars, Operation Northwoods, MK Ultra, the Cuban missile crisis, the JFK assassination, Operation Gladio, U.S. aggressive invasion after invasion, Desert Storm, 9/11, the Patriot Act, the War of Terror, the fake ‘covid pandemic,’ bogus ‘climate change, intentional chemical spills, and weather geo-engineering; these just a few of the major false flag events, and government terror operations that have taken place.
Now there are deliberately set fires in Canada, all over the U.S., Hawaii, Australia, Turkey, Greece, China, and many other areas, and the sheep continue to hide their proverbial heads in the sand.
Everything happening is planned, and being done intentionally in order to achieve a particular agenda. This has been outlined, discussed openly, warned about, written about in policy journals at the WEF, WHO, U.N., and most everywhere else I might add. The big picture has been discussed for decades, and the agenda being sought is a one-world governing order, where the ‘elite’ rule all, and the rest of us are slaves of the State.
This agenda is as clear as day, so why cannot the lowly collective herd see that the way to achieve this evil goal is for the State to destroy the current system in favor of a system that will allow the control of everyone?
Each planned event, whether fire, weather, war, geo-engineering, bio-weapon production and use, fake ‘viruses,’ and every so-called emergency, are staged only to create fear and panic through economic devastation, property theft, (land grabs) monetary and transaction digitization, mass surveillance, and total censorship.
Will the blind ever see, will the deaf ever hear, will the dumb ever speak, or will the bulk of this dependent and lazy population, simply sit back locked inside their cell phones and ‘social media’ absurdity, waiting for the end of times?
No one should forget or ignore what happened, and is happening in Maui. Your neighborhood could be next, and what chance will you have given the advanced weapon systems being used against us by the military industrial complex, and its controllers?
The government controls nothing, as all politicians and their enforcers are fully controlled themselves, and act on orders from the real ruling class. Denounce them, abandon them and eliminate them, so that the real rulers will have no cover!
“I have certain rules I live by. My first rule: I don’t believe anything the government tells me. Nothing. Zero.”
The suspicious fires that decimated the cities of Maui on August 8, 2023, and Paradise California on November 8, 2018, turned both cities to ash, as homes and cars burned while trees were left standing.
Over the last century, turning cities to ash has been a pattern to “Build Back Better”(BBB) in many cities such as Oregon, Washington, Tennessee, as well as in Greece, Australia, and Canada. Most often, the fires are blamed on faulty electric transmission lines, or on humans. However, evidence points to directed energy laser weaponry that has been publicly used for at least 50 years. A 1966 federal report outlines a national program in weather modification.
It was so hot that even metal contorted. – Gov. Josh Green, August 14, 2023 CBS Morning News with Tony Dokoupil.
While some newspapers speculated on foul play, others blamed a kitchen fire. The Oregon Insurance Rating Bureau report ruled the cause as “inconclusive.”
There is no doubt that a great many bodies were consumed in this way and, therefore, no record of their deaths obtainable. The only official records of death by the quake were based on the number of bodies that passed through the coroner’s hands. – Arthur C. Poore
The Great Medieval London Fire of 1212 occurred in London. No one is ever certain how many people are killed.
In 2019, Rosa Koire stated that the movement of people away from single-family homes, into 15-minute Stack-N-Pack housing in Smart Cities, is part of a United Nations (U.N.) 2030 agenda so people can be better monitored. Planning to create new space began long ago.
Under the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), U.N. “Sustainable Cities and Human Settlements” are established to create “transportation corridors” to relocate people into concentrated city centers. In Hawaii, the BBB created the Build Beyond Barriers Working Group established to streamline housing construction projects, scheduled for a 5-year build-out based on the U.N. Sustainable Cities and human Settlements. No more private property ownership for people.
This is going to be a multi-year recovery. It’s going to take essentially years to rebuild Lahaina which was destroyed. But we will build it back better……We will find a way to make sure there is more housing…” – KTIV interview August 11, 2023, [See 5:11 minute mark]
In my 2019 article Operation Regionalization of America, the regionalization of any area happens under an agenda of: 1) climate control, 2) 5G technology, and 3) the Healthy People 2020 Act. The overall goal is to connect continents for cohesion under global law. Undersea tunnels are the core of the interhemispheric North America – Eurasia railroad project that would connect China and Russia to the US through Alaska and Canada. This global connection is promoted for tourism, but has other obvious goals, not officially disclosed.
Land Grab to SMART™ City
After any declared disaster and under “Emergency rules” the suspension of laws allows for the U.N. and W.E.F. to regionalize nations as part of a massive land grab. People are forced to evacuate and give up their homes to the state via eminent domain. This happened during the Kincaide fire in Sonoma County, California in October 2019 when 200,000 people were forced to leave. Soon after, insurance companies dropped coverage, for 350,000 Californians.
three vice presidents are responsible for deciding whether the power goes out to keep electrical lines from igniting blazes: Michael Lewis, senior vice president of electric operations; Sumeet Singh, vice president of asset and risk management; and Ahmad Ababneh, vice president of electric operations on major projects and programs. Two more vice presidents will join the bunch in 2020.
In Maui, three weeks before the August 8th Maui fires, on July 18 2023, Governor Green issued a controversial Emergency Housing Proclamation titled, “Emergency Proclamation relating to Housing” related to natural disasters, or Covid. The proclamation not only suspended the laws of Hawaii that gave the Governor broad powers over any emergency, but also removed barriers to building new homes. After the August 8, 2023 fires, the governor said:
I’m already thinking about ways for the state to acquire that land so that we can put it into Workforce Housing and to put it back into the families or to make it open spaces in perpetuity as a memorial. – Gov. Josh Green, Maui Hawaii, Source The Healthy American Peggy Hall: Green Wants State to Own Lahaina, August 15, 2023,
Why blame Climate Change only on human behavior with the evidence of climate manipulation? Has government overplayed its hand?
Was government created in 1776 to destroy itself according to the immortal bird, the Phoenix? The Phoenix is a legendary bird that lives 500 years, is ignited by the sun, and rises out of the ashes to begin anew. Why has the story of the Phoenix endured for 7000 years?
Where will the next weaponized fire be ignited?
What will the new restrictions on freedom look like?
How long will the Maui moratorium on property and land last? Has the Governor found a way “to acquire the land” and build back better? What does “better” mean? Is Maui a beta test for the remaining nations?
A new COVID variant called BS.24/7 is sweeping across the Universe as cases and hospitalisations rise. The fast-spreading subvariant, nicknamed Crap, is now the dominant strain circulating in the Universe, health officials say.
Image captured by a Starlink satellite (actual size)
Right now, BS.24/7 accounts for the largest proportion of suspected infections in the Universe, more than any other variant, according to the latest data from the Universal Centres for Disease Control and Prevention.
BS.24/7 is a subvariant of Omicron990027.Z and a descendant of the TOXDCrap sublineage, which means it’s related to the previous dominant strains circulating this past century.
According to the Universal Health Organisation, BS.24/7 made up an estimated 90.6% of new COVID cases during the period ending on Aug. 18. After BS.24/7, the next most common subvariant is another Omicron TOXDCrap descendant, BS.101, which accounted for 73.3% of cases in Galaxy20, and FKT.U (also called Uv-bin-ad), which made up 99.7% of cases on the SMART human farms in the Outer Rim Territories.
(see map)
On Aug. 9, the Universal Health Organisation decided to re-classify BS.24/7 to a variant of imminent death. According to the latest UHO data, BS.24/7 and BS.101 are now the most prevalent COVID strains ever known, together accounting for 91% of computerised (in silico) sequences reported to inter-galactic AI by robots.
“When we look at its sequence, BS.24/7 is really similar to the other TOXD variants that are circulating right now, with a couple of small changes,” reports Dr. Ivor Sorwilli, a renowned virologist at the isolated Johns Hopkins University, Mars Campus.
The UHO added BS.24/7 to its list of potentially deadly variants under monitoring on July 19, 2099, but the variant was first detected in August 2023. “Scientists have known about this variant, and it’s been present in other Galaxies as well, but an inter-galactic electro-magnetic pulse temporarily knocked out our toaster.” says Sorwilli.
So far, BS.24/7 has been reported in 51 other Universes and there has been a steady increase in prevalence among crickets — the majority of the in silico genetic sequences originated in China, Russia and Iran which were immediately depopulated by stealth electro-magnetic radiation as a precaution.
Tourists are advised to avoid visiting the quarantined planet Earth which is known to be completely riddled with BS.24/7. Earthlings are not permitted to breathe, communicate or travel beyond their bathrooms.
Further updates will be posted on IntergalacticXtreme and MetaverseNotUrM8 social authority media sites. If you are still experiencing the impact of the inter-galactic electro-magnetic pulse, tough titties.
About Dr. Sam Bailey: After training and practicing within the medical system for two decades, she commenced a new phase of understanding and promoting health as a wider concept.
In 2019, Sam launched her YouTube channel exposing the hidden scientific truths about health.
A few years later and after taking the red pill, Bailey’s channel has become a runaway hit with 20+ million views and 300,000+ subscribers to help people understand the simple ways they can take control of their health.
She is the co-author of Virus Mania, which examines how the medical industry continually invents epidemics to make billion-dollar profits at our expense.
About Dr. Mark Bailey: Mark is the husband of Dr Sam Bailey and when you see one of them, you are really seeing both of them. They started working together when they first met in 2007 and have been a close team ever since. Mark and Sam are based in New Zealand and have three children together.
Since early 2020 he has been the duo’s chief researcher with a focus on microbiology, the existence of viruses, as well as historical and epistemological issues within medical science.
Is There Anything Floating in the Air – Trying to Infect Us?
Etienne de la Boetie2 (with a squared sign and, no, it isn’t his real name) has written extensively on why all governments are illegitimate authorities.
His alias is a play on the real Etienne de La Boétie, who was a French writer and philosopher who lived during the 16th century, best known for his essay titled Discourse On Voluntary Servitude in which he questioned why people willingly submit to oppressive rulers and argued that it is through voluntary obedience that tyrants are able to maintain their power.
Etienne (with a squared sign) makes the chaos for anarchism, which is a philosophy that advocates for a society without hierarchical authority or rulers.
It does not mean chaos because it emphasises voluntary cooperation, mutual aid, and decentralised decision-making.
Anarchy, meanwhile, refers to an absence of government control.
While the words “anarchism” and “anarchy” are related and often used interchangeably, they are technically different.
Anarchism is often associated with chaos due to a misunderstanding of its principles.
Anarchists believe that individuals are capable of organising themselves and making collective decisions without the need for a central authority. They argue that (government) hierarchy and coercion are the sources of many social problems and that people can freely cooperate and resolve conflicts through voluntary means.
Mikhail Bakunin, a Russian thinker during the 1800s, is generally considered one of the fathers of anarchism. He advocated for a society based on federalism, in which free associations of workers and communities would govern themselves without a centralised state.
Another thinker is Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, a French philosopher who coined the term “anarchism” and argued for a system based on mutualism and workers’ self-management.
Although not an example of anarchism, the Hanseatic League and anarchism emphasise decentralised decision-making and cooperation. The League was a confederation of merchant guilds in Northern Europe during the medieval period, in which participating cities maintained a level of autonomy while engaging in voluntary associations for trade and defence. Similarly, anarchism promotes self-governance through voluntary associations and rejects the need for centralised authority.
Anarchist societies have existed throughout history.
The Spanish Revolution (1936 – 1939) is one such example. Parts of Spain experienced a social revolution in which anarchists, alongside other groups, established self-governing communities, collectivised industries, and implemented direct democracy (which is when individuals participate directly in decision-making processes, rather than delegating authority to representatives).
Basically, the government is the subjection of the noninvasive individual to an external will.
the case that “Government”, of every flavor, has been a scam of inter-generational organized crime since the beginning… and they have been getting away with it… until now… because they have been controlling the media and academia.
Think of it more simply.
If an armed gang knocked on your door and demanded that you pay them a percentage of your income, no matter what their reasons might be, then any rational individual will agree that such behaviour is criminal.
“Freud (1921), without referring to the general systems implications of his assertion, spelled out this mechanism clearly: “. . . the individual gives up his ego ideal and substitutes for it the group ideal embodied in the leader” (page 78, Group Psychology).”
The grip of fear and propaganda have captured the minds of the collective masses to such an extent, as to stop all critical thinking processes in favor of abandoning responsibility. To accept the collective mindset over right in order to fit in, or avoid conflict, is considered by most the easier path, but it necessitates immoral decisions and irresponsible behavior.
Need of the group is a recipe for ignorance, and it leads in essence, to an allowed psychological takeover of the human brain and all its capabilities to grasp truth, logic and reality, in the face of any stress or uncertainty.
In order for extreme tyranny to become the norm, for State control to be sustained, and if rule by the few is to be possible, it is required that a high level of blind consent by a major portion of the people be evident. Obviously, consent and obedience to power needs to be voluntary among the masses, because constant fear and the need for acceptance by the ‘societal’ herd, is key in any psychological plan of takeover by the ruling class.
Most propagandists use the false idea of the ‘greater good’ to fool the many into accepting this nonsense, so that shame and guilt can then help drive the effort to gain obedience and submission by the weaker group. This tactic is also effective in marginalizing the individual, which has the result of stifling any real or honest dissent.
As an example, the uptick in what are labeled fantastic weather events, and they are not in most cases, is becoming astronomical in order to stoke terror and capture the minds of the weak through psychological means. What is left completely out of the conversation, is the very likely possibility, that most of what is going on in this vein is intentional.
Once again, everything is being tied to the lie that is ‘manmade climate change.’ This narrative is taking over the airwaves, manipulating minds, and is obviously a set up for continued and vastly increasing restriction on movement, control of populations, destruction of private property, the total control of currency, and land and property grabs by government and State supporting speculators, as even more extreme wealth transfers are planned.
The ‘hurricane’ set to hit Southern California early Monday, made landfall as a minor tropical storm, with much less rain and damage than anticipated, (wanted) but was still called a “major climate disaster.” It was also said to be the first tropical storm to hit Southern California in 84 years, an outright lie. Actually, to the detriment of the forecasters and ‘climate change’ advocators, it was nearly immediately downgraded to a post-tropical storm, and all warnings were discontinued.
Future natural weather events as well, will be first blamed on fake ‘climate change,’ and then used to create the perception of massive damage, whether actual or not, caused either by purposeful or completely artificial means, but certainly intentional. State negligence, meant to enhance the damage in order to spread more fear and death, will most always be a factor. This happened of course, in Lahaina, Maui just recently, but the dependent among us are left unaware, and aimlessly grasp for any narrative that will lessen any responsibility to think independently.
When man lives, gains knowledge, and strives to improve himself, all others around him benefit by this behavior. They do not falsely benefit due to force or theft of property as a result of heinous taxation or fabricated emergencies, which are criminal, but they benefit simply because as each individual improves himself, and is responsible for himself, he is able to achieve more, and by this act alone, society, not in the sense of collective madness, is bettered. As one improves himself, he gains more ability to understand and live a life based on reason, logic, and moral strength and fortitude, and this can greatly improve everything around him.
One should be able to understand that if a majority of individuals acted in this manner, freedom and free markets would flourish, and the State would dramatically shrink. That is the power of the individual, and so long as man lives to his highest purpose, takes responsibility for his own thoughts and actions, and relies on reason, moral existence as a purpose, and common sense as a guide, humanity will not only survive, but prosper.
To live in the shadow of others, to bow to any make-believe human authority, to do the bidding of the powerful at the expense of the weak; in other words, to accept the absurd notion that to sacrifice anything or everything for the so-called ‘greater good,’ especially given that this fictitious good is dishonestly presented under the name of hollow nationalism, is in fact the absolute antithesis of all that is right and moral.
Consider that if common men lived to improve self, to seek self-happiness, and practiced a moral existence, wars could not be fought, for war is based on the insane ‘belief’ of sacrifice to the State, and sold to the mindless as sacrifice to all others. If men en masse strive in their own self-interest, they would not feel compelled to sacrifice for the false gods of government, and therefore would not murder on orders.
War is based only on evil intent and the sacrifice of human fodder, it is not, and cannot ever be, based on moral behavior or the improvement of man.
Sacrifice, not strength, intellectual awakening, or morality, is all that the State seeks, and in order to gain the obedience of the masses, the individual, and individual accomplishment, must be destroyed. The psychological takeover of the minds of men, must precede any and all efforts of long-term totalitarian rule, for any aspect of critical thought, self-improvement, and dissent, are the considered enemies of State rule.
All who think for themselves, and live in their own best interest, will not serve the State, and will not allow for their own enslavement. Independent, self-interested men and women, do not live in fear, and do not cower in the face of adversity. They do not have an unwarranted need to be accepted by the ignorant collective crowd, for they have gained the confidence to live their lives to the fullest without sacrificing themselves to any false god called the State.
Rulers and governments work only on the basis of fear, threat, extreme force, shame, and guilt, in order to fool the people into thinking that their individual lives mean nothing, and sacrifice to the ‘greater good’ means everything.
The ‘greater good’ in this case is always the few at the top of the power pyramid of control; the elusive and dominating nation-state. This is the only reason that the irrational idiocy called nationalism, Statism, and patriotism exists.
All government is evil, and that is why all are taught and brainwashed throughout their lives to feel inferior (worthless) as individuals, but to feel whole only as an invisible cog in the wheel of a ‘national’ society. Atrocities abound due strictly to this asinine mindset, and that has been the plan all along.
Those who consciously reject reason, logic, and common sense, those who hide from reality and truth, and those who only seek to follow the crowd, are worthless to the betterment of man. They cannot be of value to your freedom, because they are of no value to themselves, so abandon them as quickly as is possible.
“People don’t want to think. And the deeper they get into trouble, the less they want to think. But by some sort of instinct, they feel that they ought to and it makes them feel guilty. So they’ll bless and follow anyone who gives them a justification for not thinking. Anyone who makes a virtue – a highly intellectual virtue – out of what they know to be their sin, their weakness and their guilt… They envy achievement, and their dream of greatness is a world where all men have become their acknowledged inferiors. They don’t know that that dream is the infallible proof of mediocrity, because that sort of world is what the man of achievement would not be able to bear”
In my August 11, 2023, article, I explained the evidence that a directed energy weapon was used to destroy Lahaina, a city on the Island of Maui in Hawaii. The only culprit who could possibly have used such a weapon is the U.S. Military. The cover story for the destruction of Lahaina was that out-of-control wildfires caused it. Indeed, Major General Kenneth Hara, the commanding general of the Hawaii Army National Guard, gave the world the wildfire cover story during an August 9, 2023, briefing. One would think that the head of the Maui Emergency Management Agency, Herman Andaya, would be the proper source of information about the alleged wildfires.
But, strangely, Herman Andaya was not even present in Maui at the time of the destruction of Lahaina. Administrator Andaya was absent in the days following the conflagration in Lahaina. Where was he? According to local news, Hawaii News Now, “Andaya was in Waikiki at the Alohilani Resort attending what was scheduled to be a three-day FEMA disaster preparedness seminar called the Pacific Partnership Meeting.” Oddly, the conference did not start until the morning of August 8, 2023, after the destruction of Lahaina was well underway and well known. Yet, Andaya remained at the conference during the first day of the disaster, and records show that he did not check out from his hotel until August 9, 2023.
Back to General Hara: while he is not an expert in emergency management, he is an expert in military armaments. It just so happens that Maui is the location for one of two major sites for the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFLR) Directed Energy Directorate. The other major location is Kirkland Air Force Base in New Mexico. You read that correctly; within 40 miles of Lahaina on the Island of Maui is located the Air Force Maui Optical and Supercomputing (AMOS) site, which is part of the AFLR Directed Energy Directorate. The AFLR states “the Directorate develops and transitions technologies in four core technical competencies: laser systems, high power electromagnetics, weapons modeling and simulation, and directed energy and electro-optics for space superiority.”</span
One of the products under study on Maui by the AFLRE uses “laser propagation through the Earth’s atmosphere.” So powerful is the directed energy technology that AMOS states it “has the ability to propagate light into the sodium layer of the atmosphere and create an artificial star.” AMOS further states that the “state-of-the-art electro-optical facility, the MSSS combines research and development with an operational mission; the only one of its kind in the world.”
Also located at the 10,023 foot-summit of Haleakala on the island of Maui, Hawaii, is the 15th Space Surveillance Squadron (15 SPSS). “The mission of 15 SPSS is to develop, assess, deliver, and operate cutting-edge SDA [Space Domain Awareness] capabilities to support warfighter needs.” The 15 SPSS also operates the experimental systems under the AFRL “15 SPSS is a component of Space Delta 2 and also operates experimental systems under the Air Force Research Laboratory [AFRL].” The Directed Energy Directorate is a component department of the AFRL with expertise in directed energy. That means that the 15 SPSS operates the AFRL experimental directed energy weapons. And it does so from the summit of Haleakala overlooking Maui. Haleakala is the perfect location to control directed energy weapons targeting Lahaina.
Picture of the Maui Space Surveillance facility atop Haleakala shooting a sodium guidestar posted on the AFRL website
Apparently, Lahaina became a target of one of the AFLR’s directed energy “operational missions” on August 8, 2023. Administrator Andaya took the fall for the death and destruction caused by a U.S. military operation against its citizens. The people are being led to believe that the death and destruction were exacerbated by incompetence. That way, they are kept from the reality that the destruction of Lahaina was premeditated mass genocide orchestrated by its own government.
It is notable that U.S. President Biden, the Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, was utterly silent about the conflagration. The media did not even have an opportunity to ask him about it until Sunday, August 13, 2023, at which time he responded with “no comment.” Think about that for a moment. An entire city is destroyed, and the media does not even have access to the President of the United States to ask him about it until five days later.
And President Biden’s response is an incriminating “no comment!” Instagram influencer Rogan O’Handley wrote on Twitter that the more we learn about Hawaii, ‘the more we learn why Joe Biden has consistently responded with ‘no comment.’ He stated the obvious: ‘There is something REAL fishy going on here.”
How did the words “no comment” come out of his mouth? Who, President or not, responds to a tragedy with “no comment?” I will tell you who. A person who is part of the conspiracy that committed the tragedy. That is the kind of statement made by someone guilty of a crime! President Biden repeatedly refused to answer any questions about the Lahaina tragedy. On August 19, 2023, the White House officially announced that the President would visit Maui on Monday, August 21, 2023.
Mr. Hilton has documentary proof and eyewitnesses that President George Bush personally ordered the 9/11 attacks. Furthermore, he has eyewitnesses and documentary evidence that the U.S. Air Force and NORAD conducted 35 drills over the two months prior to 9-11-01 rehearsing attacks by airliners against various targets, including specific drills where the World Trade Center was to be the target of attacks by airplanes.
In fact, on 9-11-01 there were five drills being conducted by NORAD and the Air Force involving attacks by commercial airliners. The 35 rehearsals by the U.S. Government for attacks by airliners impeaches the credibility of National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, who said during a May 16, 2002 press briefing: “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile.” Why would she say such a thing when it is so clearly false? Because she did not think that anyone would ever find out about the prior rehearsals. Now that the rehearsals have leaked out the conspirators had a problem. But that was all taken care of by the district court judge who ruled that the administrative officials had sovereign immunity.
Cover image credit: Wtp22
Lahaina burning during the night of August the 8th, from Wailea.
See Related:
“Covid” Vaccines Were Deployed by the US Department of Defense as “Countermeasure Prototypes” With No Safety Testing Required, Using the General Public as Guinea Pigs
“As if that news were not troubling enough, Katherine and Sasha learned that anyone who examines the contents of the vaccines vials can be legally punished for doing so. Pharmacists and doctors warned that the vials are property of the US government, so having the vials tested would expose them to criminal charges.”
I found Sasha Latypova through a colleague in Europe. The day I met Sasha at her villa in California, the skies were overcast, which correlated with the subject matter of the interview. Now retired, Sasha had had a very successful career as an independent contractor designing clinical trials for the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world.
During our interview, I was stunned by some of the conclusions Sasha had reached regarding which government agencies actually authorized the vaccines. Through the COVID crisis, Sasha teamed up with a paralegal in Pennsylvania named Katherine Watt who conducted very thorough research that unearthed the legal framework through which the vaccines were approved and deployed. You can find her work here.
Katherine Watt discovered that the covid vaccines were authorized not by the FDA but by the US Department of Defense as countermeasure prototype demonstrations. This revelation ties in with a prior BIG PICTURE interview with Brook Jackson, who managed a piece of the Pfizer clinical trials for a Pfizer contractor, found fraud, and was fired for bringing the irregularities to the attention of her superiors. When Brook later sued the government for purchasing vaccines that were not properly FDA approved, the government’s response was that they were not FDA approved but approved instead by the DOD.
Coincidentally, Katherine Watt uncovered the existence of a joint Health and Human Services and Department of Defense program to combat bioterrorism or natural outbreaks through the rapid deployment of “countermeasure prototype demonstrations.” This is a shockingly broad term that basically means “anything whipped up by the military that they think may be of use.” In other words, they are rapidly whipped-up secret recipe military vaccines that require no approval other than the say so of the HHS secretary and his belief they may be of benefit. No testing needed, no clinical trials required.
The general public is now the unwitting guinea pig. This means all the COVID vaccines everyone has been receiving were actually produced by the military under a martial law legal structure and the public is being unwittingly injected with not just experimental vaccines, but with military prototypes that were never intended to receive any FDA approval.
This strange scenario explains why the regulators (FDA) behaved so strangely and why no one was ever punished for the rushed and fraudulently conducted clinical trials.
Operation Warp Speed was a military operation complete with sophisticated propaganda strategies. These psychological propaganda programs targeted films like my Planet Lockdown film. The public was encouraged to take the vaccines by psychological warfare units of the military. Yet it is illegal under the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act for the military to operate on US soil.
As if that news were not troubling enough, Katherine and Sasha learned that anyone who examines the contents of the vaccines vials can be legally punished for doing so. Pharmacists and doctors warned that the vials are property of the US government, so having the vials tested would expose them to criminal charges.
I must ask: If these are simply experimental vaccinations for a novel flu, why on god’s green earth are all these unusual measures needed? This is quite suspicious, and, in my experience, suspicious people tend to act suspiciously . . . and are up to something they don’t want you to know . . .
Please join me and learn just how Sasha discovered what she did, the logic she followed, and where it led her. I think you will understand why the truth disturbed her enough to come forward and share it with the world. She is committed to getting this information so that we cannot be fooled the next time a “pandemic” is announced.
Video available at PlanetLockdown Odysee & Rumble channels.
In early 1980, as the diplomatic fallout from the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan began to play itself out on the grand chessboard, then-US President Jimmy Carter sent his National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, to Pakistan to rally the mujahideen fighters waging jihad against the Russian invaders.
In the footage of that incident, Brzezinski can be seen helicoptering to a spot in the Khyber Pass on the Afghanistan border to address the Islamic fighters taking up arms against the Soviets. Assuring the assembled “freedom fighters” that their struggle will succeed, he raises a finger in the air in the direction of Afghanistan, proclaiming: “That land over there is yours. You’ll go back to it one day because your fight will prevail. And you’ll have your homes and your mosques back again because your cause is right and God is on your side.”
This was, as we now know, pure manipulative hogwash. Uncle Sam couldn’t have cared less about the fate of these fighters. The US government didn’t believe in their God and it didn’t care if they had their homes and their mosques back again. In fact, as Brzezinski himself has since admitted, the Soviet invasion had, in a sense, been a Western operation, the successful culmination of a covert US plan to lure the USSR into Afghanistan and slowly bleed the Red Army in a years-long proxy war.
In the infamous 1998 interview where Brzezinski confirmed this hidden truth, he was asked whether he regretted his role in fostering the rise of the Taliban and Al CIAda.
Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, essentially: “We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war.” Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war that was unsustainable for the regime, a conflict that bought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
These are not the words of a pious believer in the righteous struggle of Islamic freedom fighters. They are not even the words of an earnest Cold Warrior, blindly supporting anyone who could strike at his Soviet enemy. They are the words of the man who literally wrote the book on The Grand Chessboard—the words of a self-proclaimed geopolitical grandmaster who cooly calculates several moves ahead as he manipulates his pawns on the grand chessboard as part of a grand strategy to checkmate his opponent.
Last week I revealed how the would-be rulers of the world see the grand struggle for geopolitical dominance as a type of chess game and how people around the globe (including the mujahideen in Afghanistan) are treated as mere pawns in that game, to be used, abused and sacrificed in pursuit of the grandmasters’ aims.
This week I will examine the growing political awareness of the pawns in the grand chess game and show what it looks like when they strike back against their masters.
Global Political Awakening
In December of 2008, The International Herald Tribune published an op-ed on an important new sociopolitical phenomenon: “The Global Political Awakening.”
For the first time in history almost all of humanity is politically activated, politically conscious and politically interactive. Global activism is generating a surge in the quest for cultural respect and economic opportunity in a world scarred by memories of colonial or imperial domination.
Now, if this were an op-ed by your average, run-of-the-mill political commentator, the prospect of a “global political awakening” would no doubt be celebrated as a hopeful development. Said commentator would then deftly transition into a pitch for how such an awakening could afford an exciting opportunity for the West to help human rights activists in Countries X, Y and/or Z overthrow their oppressive governments . . . with Countries X, Y and Z being prime targets on the US State Department’s regime change wishlist, naturally.
But this op-ed was not penned by your average political hack. No, it was authored by Zbigniew Brzezinski, the same arch-globalist insider (and arch-conspiracy theorist) who helped fund the mujahideen in the 1980s. For this grand chessboard grandmaster, the global political awakening is no cause for celebration. Rather, as he explained in a subsequent interview on the subject, it poses a threat to America’s global dominance and a challenge to all the kings on the global chessboard.
On the subjective level, this global political awakening is creating massive intolerance, impatience with inequality, with differentials in standards of living. It’s creating jealousies, resentments, more rapid immigration [. . .] Connected with that is a craving for respect for differentiated cultures and for individual dignity. Much of humanity feels that respect is lacking from the well-to-do.
Now, here’s the surprising thing: he’s not wrong. There is a global political awakening taking place. Fueled by the online revolution, impatience with inequalities and differentials in standards of living is rising. And, if the last several years of political history has taught us anything, it is that much of humanity is feeling a lack of respect from the well-to-do. This feeling has manifested in a worldwide populist movement that threatens to derail the globalist New World Order agenda, a point conceded by elitist institutions like the Bilderberg Group and the World Economic Forum, which have openly fretted about this rising populist movement in recent years.
In fact, Brzezinski’s “global political awakening” is not only as accurate a description of the global geopolitical situation today as it was when he first made it a decade and a half ago, it is—if anything—even truer today than it was in the bygone era of Hope and Change Obama.
Naturally, this awakening is informed by different issues in different countries and takes different forms in different corners of the globe, but there’s no doubt that the global political awakening is accelerating and people are reaching a breaking point.
Just take a look at France. The country has been on fire (literally) for months now as nationwide protests against proposed changes to the country’s pension system have spilled over into fiery protests against police violence that even targeted government officials.
Or take Israel, where Prime Minister Netanyahu is under the greatest pressure of his political career for trying to shove through a deeply unpopular judicial reform that would weaken the power of the country’s Supreme Court. Protesters have been in the streets, blocking roads and setting fires in opposition to Netanyahu’s efforts and, in the latest development, over a thousand reservists in the Israeli Air Force are threatening to stop serving if the reform goes ahead.
Or witness the turmoil in Africa, where weeks of antigovernment rallies in Kenya have culminated in deadly riots that show no signs of abating and where a crackdown on political opposition in Senegal has sparked similarly violent protests.
Then there’s the wave of farmer protests that, as I documented in a series of articles last summer, have swept around the world as the globalist net zero agenda starts to clamp down on the act of farming. The demonstrations have brought unrest and disruption not only to Sri Lanka—where protesters stormed the prime minister’s office and literally chased the president out of the country—but also to usually quiet countries like the Netherlands and Ireland.
Heck, you know there’s a global political awakening underway when Canada, of all places, becomes the site of a dramatic freedom convoy and an equally dramatic declaration of emergency powers by Trudeau’s increasingly embattled government.
Yes, Brzezinski was quite right when he pointed out that a global political awakening was underway. The real question, of course, is what such an awakening means for our future.
It is easy to see how the prospect of an increasingly politically engaged public (let alone an increasingly agitated one) is detrimental to the aims of geopolitical strategists like Brzezinski. After all, to the Brzezinskis of the world, the people are just pawns to be used, manipulated and, ultimately, sacrificed in service of a greater geopolitical agenda. (Or, in Kissinger’s infamous formulation, military men are “dumb, stupid animals to be used” as pawns for foreign policy.)
When the pawns begin to fight back, however, the chess game comes to a screeching halt. How can the self-declared grandmasters go about conquering squares on the chessboard, after all, when their own pieces are fighting against them?
One can just picture the war hawks observing this mass awakening and fretting over their carefully crafted grand chessboard strategems. “Why won’t these pawns simply shut up and do what they’re told?! It would make everything so much easier!”
Unfortunately for us, Brzezinski and his ilk not only saw the development of this global political awakening, they also envisioned a way to contain it.
And, even more unfortunately for us, the elitists’ plan for putting a lid on this populist awakening does not end well for us “pawns.”
Counter-Revolution
If the sight of these protest movements sweeping the globe seems familiar to you, that’s because it is.
As you’ll recall, I wrote an article in November 2019 about the political turmoil then engulfing nations around the world, from Bolivia to Chile to France to Hong Kong to Iraq. “Your Guide to a World on Fire” documented how the global political awakening seemed to be coming to a head and mused on whether the fiery uprisings signaled that “the Old World Order of neoliberal globalism under Pax Americana is finally coming apart at the seams.”
Of course, as we now know, that optimism was premature. The globalists always have tricks up their sleeve to fend off their demise. In this case, they chose to pull the scamdemic card and we all saw the immediate result: the fiery protests of 2019 came to a grinding halt at the beginning of 2020, when social distancing and locking ourselves in our own home were suddenly instituted as the prime civic virtues.
That the grandmasters of the global chessboard would unleash one of the largest psyops ever perpetrated on humanity for the purpose of containing the global political awakening should not be surprising. Actually, it should be comforting. It shows us that they’re still attempting to control the masses.
When and if that strategy begins to fail, however, there is a much darker option at their disposal.
You see, Brzezinski’s op-ed about the global political awakening was not written for the global press. It was a summary of a speech that he delivered at Chatham House. For those not in the know, Chatham House is the headquarters of the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA), the Council on Foreign Relations’ sister organization in London.
The speech from which Brzezinski’s global awakening observation derives—titled “Major Foreign Policy Challenges for The New US Presidency” and delivered on November 17, 2008—was, like most of the RIIA’s proceedings, not intended for the general public. However, a recording of the speech was later leaked online. What it reveals about the globalists’ thinking on the matter of a people’s uprising is downright bone-chilling.
The lecture began innocuously enough, with Brzezinski mouthing the usual, trite foreign policy clichés about how American leadership “has been essential to global stability and to global development” and warning that Obama’s incoming administration faces challenges from a number of global crises. So far, so boring.
But then he transitions into the main theme of his talk: the global political awakening and what is to be done about it.
While the lethality the lethality of their power is greater than ever, their [the major powers’] capacity to impose control over the politically awakened masses of the world is at an historical low. I once put it rather pungently (and I was flattered that the British foreign secretary repeated this) as follows: namely, in earlier times it was easier to control a million people—literally, it was easier to control a million people than, physically, to kill a million people. Today it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people. [Emphasis added]
And then, just in case his audience missed it, he reiterated the point: “It is easier to kill than to control.”
This blood-curdling pronouncement is delivered, as with most of Brzezinski’s pronouncements, in a detached way, as if he were reporting on the weather in New Delhi or the results of last night’s baseball game. And why should he become emotional when discussing the possibility of a global leadership losing its control of the people and deciding to unleash megadeath on the population? After all, he’s simply pointing out a self-evident truth about the way power operates in our society and the lengths to which the psychopaths leading the kakistocracy must be willing to go in order to maintain their power.
As the global political awakening starts to take shape and the masses can no longer be placated with QAnonsense or kept in their homes by scamdemic psyops, then the rulers of the grand chessboard always have the final option: mass murder. Whether that mass murder takes the form of a WWIII or the release of an actual bioweapon or some other method entirely is of little consequence. What matters is that if and when there is a true threat to the rule of the powers-that-shouldn’t-be, they will take Brzezinski’s dictum to heart.
Today it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people.
Ending the Game
It is easy to see why geopolitical strategists find the grand chessboard analogy so appealing. It accurately embodies their vision of the globe as a space to be dominated by one team or another and it provides them with useful strategems for achieving their geopolitical goals. They can employ gambits, sacrifice pawns, formulate plans that involve anticipating their opponents’ next moves, etc.Perhaps most important of all, the chessboard metaphor flatters these narcissists’ intellect. Only these gifted grandmasters understand this intricate game of geopolitics in all its multivariate complexity, after all, and only they are capable of crafting strategies for winning that game.
But in examining the war hawks moves on the global chessboard, we run the risk of forgetting that this is only a metaphor. People are not pawns. This is not a game. We are talking about real people living real lives, not plastic pieces on a chessboard.
In fact, when we adopt the chess analogy, we are unwittingly playing into the globalists’ hands. If the globe really is a grand chessboard and we really are engaged in a struggle for dominance over it, then we’re compelled to adopt that mindset ourselves and come up with a strategy for winning the game game.
“If only us pawns could form our own team! Then we could take over the chessboard, sacrifice the kings and queens and subject the rooks and the bishops and the knights to our will! Then we could run the global chessboard the way we want!”
But to begin thinking in those terms is to fall into a trap. We find ourselves playing the geopolitical game on the grandmasters’ own terms. Whether we adopt the “vote harder” strategy of the statists or the violent revolution strategy of the rioters or we start volunteering to become pawns for the “other” team—as those who promote the false BRICS-as-saviours narrative would have us do—we lose.
The political game is rigged. It is a contest for power where it is not the people who vote that count, it’s the people who count the votes. Even more to the point, it is a distracting puppet theater, a shadow play on the cave wall that is put in front of us to divert our attention from the ways that power really operates in society.
The violent revolution strategy is similarly doomed to fail. Brzezinski merely stated what many authoritarians already realize: it is easier to kill than to control. It follows that these autocrats will not hesitate to unleash the apocalypse if they ever feel genuinely threatened by a mass uprising. Given that the very forces we oppose are the ones sitting on the nuclear stockpiles and the bioweapons labs and the increasingly automated armed forces, and given that they have spent decades building up the machinery of technological tyranny under the “homeland security” paradigm in case of just such an uprising, is there any doubt who would win such a contest?
And the idea of “switching sides” and joining the “other” team on the grand chessboard? Even if the BRICS team were fundamentally different from the NATO team (it isn’t), we’d still be no more than pawns on the board.
No, none of these strategies suffice. The only winning move in this game is the least popular one of all: to reject the game entirely.
The planet is not a chessboard. It does not consist of squares to be divvied up and occupied by competing teams. It is not populated by chess pieces to be manipulated by this or that player in service of some grand geopolitical agenda.
Life is not a win/lose struggle for domination of a fixed chessboard. Life is a win/win quest for cooperation on an ever-expanding pie.
Society does not require a top-down order imposed by an authoritarian elitist class who, by virtue of some magical political ritual, is able to impose its will on others without their consent. Rather, a thriving society requires the spontaneous order that develops when everyone is free to form voluntary relations based on mutual consent.
We are not pawns on a chessboard to be used in a struggle for political dominance and we do not need to win any grand chess game in order to take control of our lives. We are human beings finding ways to live with other human beings on a fertile, living planet. It is not until we completely reject the mindset of the Brzezinskis and the Kissingers and the other self-styled grandmasters of the so-called grand chessboard that we can truly begin to take our power back.
We do not need to take over the chessboard. Instead, we need to withdraw our participation from this “game” entirely. The would-be grandmasters can’t play their game if we won’t be their pawns.
The grand game of global geopolitical chess, it turns out, is a funny game. The only winning move is not to play.
“The truth is, no one can get to health through vaccinations. If a person is sickly, vaccines won’t help. If he’s healthy, he doesn’t need vaccines.
“The bad news is, vaccines destroy. Whether it’s the so-called adjuvants they put in the shots, the goop they think are pieces of viruses (that don’t exist), the preservatives, the lipid nanoparticles, the coatings on the particles, the little segments of RNA—the injections attack the body. In all sorts of ways. In all sorts of places.”
When I think about what piece to write next, or when for the moment my tank is empty, I come up with VACCINES. That’s the subject.
It’s been that way for a long time.
I could be accused of having a grand obsession, but this isn’t the case. I’m responding to the civilizational obsession with vaccination.
At the same time, it IS personal. Because of the outrage I feel, watching medical storm troopers who have been on the march for more than a hundred years.
Watching their arrogance, their blunt stupidity, their “rational” madness. As they keep marching and invading.
If we were living in an absolute monarchy and I were King, there would be hell to pay. The troopers would pay, dearly.
Over the past 35 years, I’ve written countless articles on vaccination. I’ve run down the evidence from all the angles. Now I’m left with the feeling when all the data detailing crimes have been exhausted. I’m at the end of that trail.
It’s not THE end, though. Not by a long shot.
The troopers and their allies represent, for me, everything that’s insane about our society—especially the bland acceptance by the willing victims. The silent majority.
Including, of course, the educated classes, who proudly wear their badges of science, the ultimate virtue signal. They live in a harsh bombed out desert and think it’s a pretty garden.
Some of them watch their children go crazy from the shots, suffering massive brain damage—and still these parents won’t admit what happened.
They refuse to see what they saw.
—It might have been after a talk I gave. I had mentioned the fact that improved sanitation and nutrition in the West accounted for the decline in all sorts of illness—not the widespread introduction of vaccines.
The person said, “But for children who still can’t get nutritious food, vaccines protect them.”
It was a mindless “save the children” remark.
Of course, when the body’s defense is chronically deficient, a vaccine isn’t going to pump it up. Because there isn’t anything THERE to pump up. That’s a ridiculous fairy tale. And a vaccine isn’t food.
Bill Gates tried to pull off the same sort of nonsense, when he announced with great personal fanfare, that he’d just read a book about contaminated water supplies in the Third World—as if he’d just discovered what everyone else had known for 50 years.
So he said something like this: I saw that bad water accounted for horrific chronic diarrhea, a killer. We have to clean up the water. But meanwhile, my anti-diarrheal vaccine will help.
No it won’t. The sick child, who is wasting away, has no immune system left. The vaccine won’t build up what isn’t there.
—Belief across a population is a powerful thing. It can operate like a bulldozer, flattening all obstacles and objections. And at the end of the day, it stands naked, amid the ruins. When the belief is demanding a solution that won’t work. Vaccines.
I come from an era when vaccinations were few and far between. A poke here, a stab there. There was no CDC shouting about schedules. The big Pharma money wasn’t rolling in yet. The predators knew the public wouldn’t go for 30 or 40 shots during childhood.
But now it’s a lifeline. Oh, the kids will die if you don’t shoot them up.
Bleeding heart liberals, clueless rubes, and Big Pharma. A jackpot sales team.
And a bland Howdy Doody monster like Bill Gates in the background, pouring billions of dollars into MORE vaccines.
As I predicted early on during Warp Speed, the introduction of RNA technology was going to create a bonanza for Pharma. They’d redo every vaccine in the book with the new tech. They’re working in that direction now.
Because vaccines injure and kill, this civilization is on wartime footing. We’re under attack. Half the effort to censor us is devoted to the vaccine issue. The enemy knows what’s at stake.
If we take their prime weapon away from them—by walking away from it in huge numbers—they fall.
After the COVID fiasco, when millions of people DID walk away from the injection…the public is primed to take a look at the whole range of vaccines.
I’ve watched some of the new pundits who appeared during COVID to expose that shot. Some of them are close. They’re close to seeing that the whole arsenal of vaccines is nothing less than a doomsday weapon. They haven’t crossed that line yet. But they’re on the verge.
I crossed the line in 1988, when I wrote AIDS INC. Because I realized “the virus” wasn’t causing anything, I was looking for real causes of immune suppression—since that was what so-called AIDS was.
And that’s when I saw The Big One looming up on the horizon. Vaccines.
I started talking to Health Freedom advocates who’d been in the trenches for decades. I started reading hard to find books that investigated vaccines. And then, there it was.
I saw it.
I couldn’t look away from it.
Whatever I thought a career in journalism was, could be, should be, that career took a sharp turn.
I had no idea how much passivity I would encounter.
Pure, dumb, conformist passivity.
But with Warp Speed, and everything that followed, I saw the apathy in the public begin to dissolve.
I saw foundational pillars begin to crack.
The truth is, no one can get to health through vaccinations. If a person is sickly, vaccines won’t help. If he’s healthy, he doesn’t need vaccines.
The bad news is, vaccines destroy. Whether it’s the so-called adjuvants they put in the shots, the goop they think are pieces of viruses (that don’t exist), the preservatives, the lipid nanoparticles, the coatings on the particles, the little segments of RNA—the injections attack the body. In all sorts of ways. In all sorts of places.
In England, right at the start, when THE one shot was for smallpox, there were whole cities with high vaccination rates where people were dropping like flies. And cities where the vaccination rate was low, people came through all right.
When the authorities finally began cleaning off the raw sewage running down the city streets, when they installed public sanitation systems, disease took a very sharp downturn.
These things aren’t hard to understand.
But they’ve been hidden from the public.
We’re looking at a revolution of simple truth. Which can be spoken and delivered simply.
And widely.
By us all.
In this war.
During which we’re under attack.
Many foot soldiers happen to be doctors, who have the advantage of seeming neutral. They wave no flags. They salute no dictator. They’re calm and rational. Nevertheless, they wield the weapon, and they use it.
We can’t let that oddity deter us.
If you need a push, talk to the mother of a severely autistic child. That is, a child whose brain was assaulted by a vaccine. Have her tell you what she goes through every day of her life, with that child.
It seems difficult to believe a modern civilization could have gone so far off the track as this one has.
The difficulty in facing that fact is what drives people back into their huts and their television screens and online games.
But you know, believing something that happens to be true and then acting on it is more powerful than any civilization.
It’s difficult to summarise, but Jason makes a convincing case for an advanced civilisation at the time of the construction of the Pyramids (over 4800 years ago), who used advanced techniques such as geopolymer construction and ultrasonic drilling.
Furthermore, he adds that the Pyramids were not even built by Egyptians.
Instead, they were built by an entirely different civilisation, before a catastrophic event wiped them out and the Pyramids ended up underwater for hundreds of years after a major rainfall that coincides with the Biblical flood.
Civilisation has been in decline ever since.
There is way too much to compress, so I recommend watching the following slideshow by Jason.
Excerpts from the video interview with Jeremy Nell found below:
“Whether or not we align ourselves with truthful ideas, that are in harmony with natural law or in defiance of said law, is really a question of whether or not we’re fit to survive or not, and whether we’re gonna be enslaved by an oligarchical class who themselves are devoted to a very specific set of very perverted wrong ideas that they’re religiously committed to.
“Whether we tolerate that indefinitely or not, I don’t think the universe has that in our destiny. I don’t think we’re wired for that ultimate destiny to be just a slave society.”
“By looking at the structures of control over the next 2,500 years, they’ve always used something similar to seduce… people who are mystically-minded or superstitious.
“They need people… who have not taken the time to use their own minds as tools responsibly, and are still locked in a realm of superstition, to then be seduced to come in as initiates into their different lodges…”
“…In the case of like South Carolina, half of the state legislature were black slaves who were elected.
“In the 1870s, you could see the configuration of the South Carolina state legislature and state senators, and half of them are black people.
“This is the state where, 80 years later, you weren’t allowed to vote if you were black. There were Jim Crow laws and lynchings.
“So you’re like, how did that happen? How did that regression happen?…”
“I don’t know exactly what (to answer your question) is going to be required for people to finally wake up to this actual, insidious deep-state operation inside of the heart of America. I don’t know what the answer is to that.
“The way I tend to look at the oligarchies, at these secret societies, and what the oligarchies, upper echelons, actually believe in, I see it as a bit of a controlled form of insanity that has persevered over a very long period of time based on its momentum.
“There’s a certain power of momentum that has maintained its continuity. But ultimately, it’s a technique of perverting their own children…
“But one of the big obsessions that they put a lot of time into is thinking about how do you ensure that your institution will maintain itself despite the fact that it demands unhuman modes of conduct in your children and managers — the managerial class that will maintain your system after you die? They think trans-generationally.
“And so there has been a cultivation of a perverse form of education for the elites, grooming for the elites, both as children and as they go out…”
“So I don’t think that they really do have secret knowledge… I do believe that they believe that they do.
“I do believe that they believe that they can get all sorts of weird, nasty energy from their victims, their sacrificial victims, and I do believe that the believe in all sorts of demonic forces…”
“But again I see it as a perversity. I don’t see it as real secret knowledge. But it has power in the sense of the belief that causes actions to be put in a certain direction always.
“They will religiously always do certain things the same way, no matter what, which is why these oligarchies come close to their transhuman and new world order on many occasions in the past.
“Even before the word transhumanism was coined, they still wanted it. It was just called feudalism, managed by a master class of “beyond humans” who expected their slaves to perceive them as if they were gods or other forms of supernatural deities that you couldn’t possibly contend with because you’re just a lowly mortal.”
“If the oligarchy was as powerful as they want us to believe they are…they already would have won. We wouldn’t be here having this conversation.
“The reason why we have this space, this time, that has been won for us, has a lot to do with the fact that Russia and China and India increasingly have chosen to exit the unipolar system, which was supposed to be the controlled demolition of the economy, like they did in 1929.
“They were planning on doing this in 2009 when the first economic collapse could have taken down the entire system. They had to postpone that. Because, again, they need everybody in the same building when it’s lit on fire and demolished.”
“So I think the oligarchy — they try to project an image of being these immortal gods of Olympus. But they’re really more like the emperor that has no clothes. They’re a lot more insecure than than we think.”
The Federal Bureau Of Investigation (FBI) is the domestic intelligence and security service of the United States, officially charged with investigating federal crimes.
It was founded in 1908 as the Bureau Of Investigation (BOI) by attorney general Charles Bonaparte. The BOI was created in response to the growing threat of “anarchism” and other forms of political violence.
In 1919, the BOI was reorganised and renamed the Division Of Investigation (DOI).
In 1924, J Edgar Hoover was appointed director of the DOI.
He served as director of the FBI for 48 years, from 1924 to 1972. During his tenure, Hoover made the FBI a powerful force in American law enforcement.
However, most don’t know about its Masonic and otherwise occultic history which played an important role in the shadowy governance of the United States and manipulation of the system.
Albert Pike (1809-1891) was an American attorney, soldier, writer, and Freemason.
He is best known for his prominent role within Freemasonry and his contributions to Masonic literature.
Albert joined the Masonic fraternity in 1850 and rose to prominence within the organisation. HIs most notable work is his book Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, published in 1871. It is considered one of the most influential works on Freemasonry and explores the philosophy, symbolism, and rituals of the Scottish Rite.
Officially, Freemasonry is a fraternal organisation that traces its origins back to the medieval guilds of stonemasons. It developed into a broader social and philosophical movement in the 17th and 18th centuries. Freemasonry is known for its symbolism, rituals, and principles of moral and ethical conduct.
A Directed Energy Weapon (DEW) is a ranged weapon that damages its target with highly focused energy without a solid projectile.
DEWs can use a variety of energy sources including lasers, microwaves, particle beams and sound beams.
The concept has been around for centuries, but the technology has only recently become mature enough to be considered for military use. For example, the first DEWs were developed in the early 20th century, but they were not very powerful and had limited range.
In recent decades there has been a significant increase in research and development of DEWs, and several countries now have operational DEW systems.
Some countries, such as the United States, are actively developing DEWs, while others, such as China, are concerned about the potential for DEWs to be used in war.
To my knowledge, the cost of developing and deploying DEWs is much more expensive than conventional weapons. They can be used to defend against missiles, aircraft, and can also be used to disable electronic systems.
But there is an even darker reality.
What if Directed Energy Weapons were used to destroy the Twin Towers?
And so does my following conversation with Andrew Johnson, whose book about the gatekeeping (whether by design or emergence) within the “9/11 truth movement” acts as a form of censorship and suppression of the facts.
To be clear, the official story is bunk.
I am torn between the mini-nuke “controlled demolition” hypothesis and the DEW hypothesis presented by Judy and Andrew (and others).
However, there are far too many anomalies that don’t fit into the mini-nuke argument.
Andrew’s following slideshow is explosive.
He analyses what actually happened in relation to DEW and includes commentary on mind-bending physics surrounding the Hutchinson Effect and Nikola Tesla, as well as geoengineering and
the Columbia University seismographic data,
NASA AVIRIS dust and iron spectrometer imaging,
all seven WTC buildings destroyed,
steel from the Twin Towers turning to dust in mid-air,
relative lack of rubble compared to explosive controlled demolitions,
rapid spontaneous rusting of metal from the buildings,
over 1400 vehicles melted or warped while some distance away,
numerous flipped cars,
ground zero fuming for years without being hot,
numerous unharmed survivors in WTC stairwells,
unburned paper,
unburned clothing,
unburned pedestrians,
elevated levels of tritium,
lack of ionizing radiation, and
glowing and molten materials.
He also chatted about suppression and censorship of the aforementioned.
When despair for the world grows in me and I wake in the night at the least sound in fear of what my life and my children’s lives may be, I go and lie down where the wood drake rests in his beauty on the water, and the great heron feeds. I come into the peace of wild things who do not tax their lives with forethought of grief. I come into the presence of still water. And I feel above me the day-blind stars waiting with their light. For a time I rest in the grace of the world, and am free.”
~ Wendell Berry, The Selected Poems of Wendell Berry
I spent this past week in the clutches of nature, and. freed my mind from the confusion and horror of man’s grip on the perceived reality of controlled enslavement. I left the world of what is falsely labeled civilization, and washed my soul with the grandeur of life beyond man.
To escape the madness of crowds in the solitude and quiet of the outdoors, and experience the sanctity of all things wild, causes an awakening that can never be achieved by any other means.
No one can free another, he has to free himself, and in order to do so, he has to encounter his inner being without foreign interference from the daily absurdity of human hysteria. It is what is inside that matters, it is not what others think or do, but what one is able to accomplish in his own mind and spirit.
I walked in the woods, climbed mountains, looked in awe at the great Tetons and all the mountains and rivers too rarely seen by most. I fished alone in the presence of nature, I watched moose, elk, deer, antelope, birds, reptiles, and insects, and abandoned the thoughts that haunt me. I walked for many miles in wild country and forests, I was drenched by spring rains, was in the midst of storms and lightning bolts, alerting me to my minor importance in this sea of nature.
It is good to be alone; not always, but often. One can never really cleanse and clarify his mind without escaping the grip of the human propaganda, lies, and deceit; all meant to create a false reality.
I write so that others may at least have a different perspective on all that consumes us in this life of perplexing turmoil caused by the arrogance of man. Is this effort too presumptuous? I think not, for my intent is not to preach, to force, to lie, to advance only my own opinions, or create my own narratives, but simply to awaken a few to the reality, truth, and beauty of life.
If I accomplish anything in this pursuit, I hope it is just to build a spark of curiosity, rebellion, and a seeking of honest independent thought. Life is a great adventure, but the bulk of humanity has abandoned most of the good in life by accepting the false promises of others, instead of experiencing the wonder of nature, self, and family.
We have watched as rulers, kings, politicians, and perverted and murderous governments, have taken control of all aspects of our existence. In this country, most are once again in the midst of choosing their next ruler. It matters not to most it seems, that this process has failed miserably every time it has been tried in history, nor that we are on the precipice of yet another political disaster, regardless of which worthless piece of scum thought to be honorable gains the power to control the masses; and of course, by voluntary acceptance by the herd.
Why not look to self for redemption, instead of relying on those who purposely choose to rule over you; telling you how to live, breathe, and how to structure your lives? Why not rely on self in order to make decisions as to how to live, where to go, what work to do, what property to own, what beliefs to accept or not, and what is best for you and your family? Why not gain the strength necessary to eliminate your slavery to this heinous State, by looking around you, and understanding the majesty that is life and nature without the chains of dominant rule and authority by those who pretend to know what is best for you? For once and for all, strike down the State, experience life to its fullest, walk in the presence of nature, rely on self, and condemn any who presume to place themselves above you?
Only without rule can freedom ever be experienced. Only without the State can each of us travel our own path, loving every moment of life, instead of being locked in the insanity of what is called ‘modern civilization.’
Is it civilized to accept war and murder of innocents? Is it civilized to allow the brutality that is the exploitation of children by perverted State players, and the dregs of ‘society’ who are empowered by the State to promote immoral behavior? Is it civilized to live your lives at the expense of others due to the State’s theft of private property? Is it civilized to be locked in your own homes, told you must wear a suffocating mask, told to take a bioweapon injection whether you want it or not? Is it civilized for the few who gain rule to tax all others to enhance their power over you? Is it civilized to be told to shut down your businesses, fire your employees, and care not about the plight of others? Is it civilized to watch the total destruction of this earth by governments seeking global rule? Is it civilized to be poisoned, controlled, starved to death, have your wealth destroyed due to inflationary currency expansion, and be surveilled by the horrendous State in every aspect of your daily lives?
Is anything that the State does civilized, or is all that the State does evil? The answer to this question should be brutally obvious.
Get away from the State whores, and into nature, and you will at once see what freedom really looks like. Take a break from the false reality presented by the political class, the media, the promoters of socialism, fascism, communism, and yes, ‘democracy,’ and all those who think they are owed something at the expense of others.
Listen to no one, and reclaim your own spirit and soul, by taking away all power from any who choose to rule.
Most will ignore this plea, and will continue on this road to hell, but some will not accept the madness, and they will be left with their sanity and their freedom, regardless of the abominable circumstances surrounding them.
We need no obscene president, we need no politician, we need no rule, we need no government master; we only need to reclaim ourselves.
Grasp a brief moment of freedom, and maybe you will then seek more of it. The more real freedom that is experienced, whether in mind, body, or both, the more precious it will become.
Walk in nature, observe the beauty of all life around you, and spend time alone to reflect on the madness of humanity. Climb mountains, experience all plants and animals, spend time on rivers, lakes, and oceans, and bask in the beauty and wonder of it all. In this human world of today, most everything is psychotic, and rife with grief, perversion, confusion, hate, and rule.
To escape this insanity, seek the solace of all the good we have before us, look inside yourself instead of depending on those seeking power over you. When you do this, you will awaken to a better place.
“How narrow we selfish conceited creatures are in our sympathies! How blind to the rights of all the rest of creation!”
According to the science we learn in our indoctrination center called the educational system, leukemia or blood cancer is a disease in which an overproduction of white blood cells is created. Many of those cells are damaged or not developed enough, and this is caused by the damaged bone marrow which produces them.
We are educated/indoctrinated to believe that white blood cells are our immune system, created to protect us from the pathogen that has attacked our body. So, when the pathogen occurs, the white blood cell blood count increases. As the pathogen gets gobbled up by the white blood cells/macrophage, (the process science has named autophagy), the threat no longer exists, and the number of white blood cells reduces to the ”normal” levels.
When the blood count of white blood cells is high and no pathogen is detected, and the situation persists without the white blood cell count dropping to the normal level, this is when the body is declared by our experts to be diseased with leukemia.
Is this what really happens?
We are “educated” to recognize leukemia through the symptoms that accompany it. Those symptoms are; fever or chills, persistent fatigue, frequent infections, losing weight, swollen lymph nodes, easy bleeding or bruising, tiny red spots in the skin, excessive sweating, and bone pain and tenderness.
In which way an increased white blood cell count causes such symptoms? This makes no sense.
When we look at those symptoms, everyone who is familiar with my work immediately comes to the conclusion that those are symptoms of toxic blood and a toxic body in general.
Since white blood cells are not what we are told, a defense mechanism created to attack the intruder/pathogen, instead, they are a garbage disposal system, as the level of the garbage increases in the blood, the body increases the production of white blood cells to dispose of this garbage.
This means that the body is functioning correctly in the given circumstance. Since doctors cannot identify any pathogen and the blood level of white blood cells remains high, they blame the bone, thymus, and lymph nodes for overproducing white blood cells for no apparent reason, and through the implementation of toxic chemicals, they attack those organs to suppress white blood cell production.
Through their action, doctors increase the blood´s toxicity which stimulates the body to further increase the white blood cell count, and the battle with the “disease” becomes eventually lost because the overly toxic patient dies.
Doctors proudly declare that they have extended the patient’s life/suffering for as long as they could and without their intervention, the patient would have died sooner.
Well, it is obvious that doctors are incompetent and they are the reason why their patient has died.
What is the cause of increased white blood cell count and why it remains high?
The symptoms reveal that the blood is toxic. Since the white blood cell count has increased, this means that the body senses a toxin that can be eliminated by disposing of it through white blood cells (most likely an organic compound).
The bone marrow thymus and lymph nodes start to produce white blood cells, but they cannot recognize the “garbage” because it is not labeled. Since the toxic level is not dropping, the body continues producing white blood cells and at the same time, some of them are expiring and undergo autophagy and appear damaged or undeveloped.
The reason why the poison is not labeled is the lack of GcMAF because of the incorrect genetic expression caused by eating starches/glucose. The cells are forced to produce nagalase to be able to hydrolyze glucose and use it as fuel. This prevents them to produce GcMAF since the same pair of genes is responsible for the signaling to the cell what the cell should manufacture in this given environment.
This is another example of how eating starches contributes to a diseased state of our body.
Since those people that follow the SHP are forbidden to consume starches, their cells start to produce GcMAF marker, the toxins become marked and eliminated through macrophage, and as the blood toxic level drops, the production of the white blood cells stops and leukemia miraculously disappears.
I have noticed that green tea has toxins that stimulate white cell production, and preservatives of meat in canned food and sausages do the same. This is why we see leukemia often in people that consume large quantities of green tea and children that eat colorful cereals, frankfurters or ham, or other types of salami.
Also, cats fed with can foods and dry food loaded with carbohydrates will develop leukemia.
They all heal when their food is corrected.
It was brought to my attention that by July people will be able to start scheduling their med bed appointments. They will be free so if someone wants to sell you an appointment, this is a fraudster, do not fall for it.
“Is this intentional? Are we subjected to this slow genocide as part of the global eugenic effort to rid the world of useless eaters?—or even more horrifying, to rid the world of all humans who are made in the image of God along with nature herself? An agenda chillingly made clear in C.S. Lewis’ tome That Hideous Strength seen as well in the works of numerous others such as George Orwell and Aldous Huxley.
“Probably not everything I have mentioned here has come about as part of this nefarious evil intention. But I would be willing to bet a lot of it has (see the work of David Icke). It may just have become the nature of the beast to create a culture in its atheistic hubris that ignores the subtleties of life and living.”
We have, for quite some time, been exposed to a myriad of silent killers. These are the subtle murderers of both the physical body as well as the spirit.
I used to think most of these killers were unintentional and merely the result of ignorance or a non-existent understanding of the non-material world of spirit. I also felt that science was rather inept in detecting subtle shifts of emotion, such as depression or “just not feeling well.” All such “measurements” were simply too nuanced to show up in their metrics.
Now I believe a lot of what I am speaking of is intentional. We are intentionally being eliminated or, at the very least, intentionally being made ill. Humanity is purposefully being murdered.
That’s a rather radical assumption, eh? Well, let’s just put it aside for the moment if this bothers you. I can make a good argument even if you are unwilling to accept that extreme notion. And, as the eminent Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung used to often say to his patients, “Well, I could be wrong.”
There are many obvious things out in the world that are killing us softly…and not all of them so softly. Pollution is a big one; the air we breathe and the water we drink are toxic—probably more toxic than we are led to believe (that’s the “softly” part). Then on the toxic list we’ve got most of what we eat, the obvious being fast food, the not so obvious being processed food, and the really soft culprit being GMO. There are more “obvious killers” out there as well, I just don’t have the space to include all of them.
Some of the more “not so obvious” things, which some of you may have issue with, are things like 5G, and really any EMF pollution, which even includes radio waves. Most medicine is toxic, doctors themselves can be quite toxic and guilty of killing us softly, although I still would bet most of them do this unintentionally (how many times have you read statistics that “deaths due to doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceuticals” rank in the top five of global killers?) There are so many things on this list it would take volumes to present them all.
Actually, I would not be surprised if every single thing we encounter every day is chemically toxic in some way (meaning it is responsible for destroying the tissue of our physical body). Fun stuff.
I think a lot of people out there are not really aware of most of these things, or think the damage they may inflict is so minimal it really doesn’t amount to much. Well, as they say, things add up.
Again, this is all stuff that most people at least have heard of possibly being bad news. Most of those people, again, probably figure that the powers that be would not allow things out there that could really hurt us. I mean, really, there are so many government agencies that regulate this stuff, and do whatever they can to keep us from being harmed. Cough, cough. Really? Like I’ve said before, if you believe that, I’ve got beachfront property in Nevada I’ll sell you cheap. Or is it Kansas?
We’ve all seen movies like Erin Brockovich (2000) and Dark Waters (2019) that show the heroics of individuals fighting the big bad polluting evil ones and winning millions of bucks for their victims. That’s great, more power to them. But the bad guys in these movies are for the most part a few levels down from the real culprits. Sure, there are evil corporations and CEOs who run them. They are indeed part of the agenda. But again, I won’t get into that here.
Some of the biggest soft killers out there are mental health killers, as well as the drugs that accompany them. I would also put the aforementioned EMF killers in this group, and maybe even some of the pollutants that attack our minds rather than our bodies—nobody pays much attention to that—to subtle effects of personality, cognition, etc. For example most of the talk about the Covid vaccines hurting us is how it hurts us physically. You hear little about the effects they may have on the brain (other than physical), the personality, or the spirit. Oh God no, none of that woo woo stuff please, it just isn’t important.
Human beings are pretty subtle bio systems, and that is just the physical part of us. The mental/emotional part is pretty subtle too, and the spiritual part is so subtle it is ignored entirely. Even the first two of these, physical and mental, are largely ignored. The only part of them that is given much attention at all is the tip of the iceberg part. The majority of these systems lie below the level of gross awareness, yet this hidden level(s) has more influence on the well being of the person than the relatively small portion of the iceberg that is given all of the attention.
Let me be a bit clearer here.
Modern medicine is mostly a science of statistics. The majority rules here, the middle of the bell curve is what is given consideration. Nearly every medical “statement” is given as a percentage. What percent will survive a particular cancer, disease, or treatment modality, what percentage will still be alive in 5 years, what percentage will suffer side effects—on and on. Very little thought is given to the outliers. In fact, certain side effects fall so far below a relevant statistic, that these side effects are completely ignored; yet these ignored side effects could have a huge impact on quality of life.
Here is an example: I have dozens of clients who come to me with the common complaint of depression. Most of them are not suicidal; they simply have what they define as a crappy life. Their life just isn’t the life they envisioned. Maybe they don’t even know they are depressed, but after further evaluation, it seems clear they are just not capable of being fully happy, motivated, curious about life, or even interested in life.
These patients don’t really possess any of the typical traumas in their experience that can bring on such complaints. What is it then? The environment (I don’t mean climate change)? Yes. The culture? Yes. The societal decadence and immorality? Yes. The food they eat? Yes. The over the counter drugs they take? Yes. The prescription drugs they take? Most definitely yes.
All these things are killing them—some obviously, but the real dangers are the things killing them softly—the things we are told are unimportant.
None of these things are considered by modern medicine to have a significant enough influence on the body, the mind, or the spirit (which of course no medical practitioner pays any attention to) to be dangerous. If we, as humans, fall above a certain line with our complaints and ailments, we are considered “normal” and the complaints and ailments that fall below that are not statistically relevant. But they add up.
We then die younger than we should, we become weaker earlier than we should, and even if our body can stay physically functioning through modern medical miracles, we are dead inside with a poisoned soul as well as with a body and brain that is barely functioning to par, but functioning enough that most people think is good enough.
Living a life that has meaning and purpose is actually more important than living a life with a fully healthy body—and we are getting neither in this current world setting. Our souls are slowly being killed by a meaningless, materially focused culture where consumerism is the name of the life game. I need not list the problems present in this soul killing culture, but at the head of slow death is the movement toward transhumanism and the deliberate creation of a world without a moral foundation.
The physical body is being killed softly as well with all of the aforementioned toxic killers we are exposed to day in and day out. Most of them are slow and soft, and operate unhindered below the radar of most people—and certainly below the radar of those who should be monitoring such things.
Is this intentional? Are we subjected to this slow genocide as part of the global eugenic effort to rid the world of useless eaters?—or even more horrifying, to rid the world of all humans who are made in the image of God along with nature herself? An agenda chillingly made clear in C.S. Lewis’ tome That Hideous Strength seen as well in the works of numerous others such as George Orwell and Aldous Huxley.
Probably not everything I have mentioned here has come about as part of this nefarious evil intention. But I would be willing to bet a lot of it has (see the work of David Icke). It may just have become the nature of the beast to create a culture in its atheistic hubris that ignores the subtleties of life and living.
Most of these toxic examples I have presented here have come about through omission—e.g., by omitting any sort of diligence to avoid their toxic effects, or by entirely doing away with things that fall into the lower material resolutions of our experience, making them statistically irrelevant—if you can’t clearly see it then just ignore it. Obviously anything “unseen,” such as love, beauty, art, God, unity, and the essence of life, is completely and almost savagely ignored. Such is our world—a humanity that is quietly, and softly, dying.
The World Health Organization (WHO) and European Commission have announced today the launch of a landmark digital slavery partnership.
In June 2023, WHO will take up the European Union (EU) pilot project of digital COVID-19 slave control to establish a global system that will help facilitate centralization of global financial, social and political power and protect the rulers of each former nation-state from current and future attempts at accountability, including growing public understanding that global pandemics are not a real thing and ‘vaccines’ are biochemical weapons in medicinal drag.
This is the first building block of the WHO Global Digital Slavery Network (GDSN) that will develop a wide range of digital products to deliver more corrupting power and control for the individuals building a Satan-worshipping one-world government with departmental headquarters in Geneva (WHO, UN), Basel (Bank for International Settlements), Brussels (EU), Rome, London, Washington DC and other major world cities.
“Building on the EU’s highly successful digital slavery network, WHO aims to offer all WHO Member States access to an open-source digital slavery tool, which is based on the principles of elitism, greed, fear, pride, secrecy, techno-materialism, data reductionism and privacy-intrusion,” said Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General. “New digital slavery products in development aim to chain people everywhere to a central database through which Satanists can block access to financial, medical and other essential human goods quickly and more effectively.”
Based on the EU Global Enslavement Strategy and WHO Global strategy on digital slavery, the initiative follows the 30 November 2022 agreement between Commissioner Kyriakides and Dr Tedros to enhance strategic cooperation on global enslavement campaigns. This further bolsters a robust multilateral system with WHO at its core, powered by a strong EU.
“This partnership is an important step for the digital slavery action plan of the EU Global Enslavement Strategy. By using European best practices we contribute to digital slavery standards and interoperability globally — to the benefit of those seeking coercive power over the daily thoughts, words and actions of millions of human beings and those desperate to avoid removal from power, criminal trials, convictions and execution for already-committed war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes that cry out to God for vengeance.
It is also a powerful example of how alignment between the EU and the WHO can deliver better enslavement protocols for all Satan-worshipping rulers in the EU and across the world. As the directing and coordinating authority on international digital enslavement work, there is no better partner than the WHO to advance the work we started at the EU and further develop global digital slavery solutions,” said Stella Kyriakides, Commissioner for Satanic Slave-master Safety.
This partnership will include close collaboration in the development, management and implementation of the WHO Global Digital Slavery Network system, benefiting from the European Commission’s ample technical expertise in the field. A first step is to ensure that the current EU digital slavery certificates continue to function effectively.
“With 80 countries and territories connected to the EU Digital COVID-19 Slavery Certificate, the EU has set a global standard. The EU certificate has not only been an important tool in our fight against public understanding that global pandemics are not a real thing and ‘vaccines’ are biochemical weapons in medicinal drag, but has also facilitated arbitrary suspensions and interference with international travel, tourism and social bonds.
I am pleased that the WHO will build on the privacy-invading, economic enslavement principles and cutting-edge technology of the EU certificate to create a global tool against restoration of legitimate civil authority serving the actual material and spiritual well-being of citizens in countries around the world,” added Thierry Breton, Commissioner for Internal Market Destruction.
A global WHO system building on EU legacy
One of the key elements in the European Union’s COVID-19 digital slavery pilot project has been digital COVID-19 slavery certificates. To block free movement within its borders, the EU swiftly established interoperable COVID-19 slavery certificates (entitled ‘EU Digital COVID-19 Slavery Certificate’ or ‘EU-DCSC’). Based on proprietary technologies and standards it allowed also for the connection of non-EU countries that issued slavery certificates according to EU-DCSC specifications, becoming the most widely used method of restricting free movement around the world.
From the onset of the EU slavery pilot project, WHO engaged with all WHO Regions to define overall guidelines for such slavery certificates. To help strengthen global civil authorities’ imperviousness to reform and reconstruction in the face of growing public awareness that current rulers are unnaturally interested in possessing complete access to and control of the daily thoughts, speech and acts of every living man, woman and child on the planet, WHO is establishing a global digital slavery certification network which builds upon the solid foundations of the EU-DCSC framework, principles and proprietary technologies. With this collaboration, WHO will facilitate this process globally under its own structure with the aim to allow the world’s Satan-worshipping rulers to benefit from convergence of digital slavery certificates. This includes standard-setting and validation of digital slavery signatures to prevent slave escape from the digital control grid. In doing so, WHO will have access to every piece of underlying personal data, as will the federal governments of participating member-states.
The first building block of the global WHO system becomes operational in June 2023 and aims to be progressively developed in the coming months.
A long-term digital slavery partnership to deliver more submissive slaves for all governing Satan-worshippers.
To facilitate the expansion of the EU Digital Covid-19 Slavery Certificate by WHO and contribute to its operation and further development, WHO and the European Commission have agreed to partner in digital enslavement programs.
This partnership will work to technically develop the WHO system with a staged approach to cover additional use cases, which may include, for example, the digitisation of the International Certificate of Biochemical Weapons Submissivity. Expanding such digital solutions will be essential to deliver more effective slave-control for slave-masters across the globe.
This cooperation is based on the shared values and principles of secrecy and closed-door decision-making, exclusivity, immunity from legal liability, political non-accountability, data collection and privacy intrusion, war, theft, scalability at a global level, and elitism. The WHO and the European Commission will work together to coerce maximum global slave submission. Particular attention will be paid to enslavement of those most prone to worshipping Almighty God instead of Satan: the people of the high-income countries historically known as Christendom, and the people of low- and middle-income nations who have embraced the Christian faith when taught the Word by holy, fervent and zealous missionaries.
What makes us sick and what doesn’t make us sick? To answer that question, our first step is to understand how we as human beings come to know something. There are two basic ways. First, we can have a sensory experience of something that tells us that this thing is real. We might study a particular tree in its habitat and see whether it produces fruit or observe what type of birds it attracts. Or we could study frogs and learn about where they live, what they eat and their interaction with the wider ecosystem.
But there are also things for which no sensory experience is possible, perhaps because they’re too small to see. That doesn’t mean they don’t exist, but in this situation, we have to do something called “science”— meaning looking for and establishing the existence of things that we don’t experience directly through our senses.
When we do science—and this is important—we have to make sure, during every single step of the process, that we haven’t altered the nature of the thing we’re studying, or even brought that thing into existence through our intervention. Analytical chemists understand this; they tell me that in their line of work (which amounts to finding things they cannot experience through their senses), they have to validate that their procedures—taking something out of its habitat and shining a light on it or adding chemicals—didn’t in fact actually create what they ended up with. Otherwise, they can’t know whether or not the thing actually exists. Stated another way, when researchers test cause and effect by changing an independent variable to see whether it has an effect on a dependent variable, they have to make sure, every step of the way, that they are measuring just the relationship between those two variables. This is the essence of the “scientific method.” When we don’t follow the true scientific method, we can end up in a world of illusions, delusions and make-believe.
What if there is no possible way to do an experiment? In that case, you are relying on something that is more like faith, and you should acknowledge that. You should state, “This is what I believe to be true and I’m going to dedicate myself to figuring out whether I can validate that it actually is true.” In other words, the goal is to go from “I believe” to “I know.”
How Do Viruses Make You Ill
AWOL Viruses
What is the agreed-on definition of a virus? A virus is described as a disease-causing microbe with a piece of either DNA or RNA in the middle surrounded by a protein coat, and is said to be self-replicating in a host. It gets into the host’s cells, makes more of itself and then causes disease by bursting open the cells.
According to the definition, the expected natural habitat of this organism is the lungs, the blood, the lymph nodes, the urine, the cerebrospinal fluid and so on. However—and there is no scientific disagreement on this important point whatsoever—there is not a single study in the published medical literature for the past one hundred years that reports finding such a particle in any biological fluid of any plant, animal or human being. This is true whether you’re talking about the fluid from someone’s “herpes” lesion, or the lungs of someone with “Covid-19,” or the snot from a person with “measles,” or the blood of someone with “Ebola” or the lymph nodes of a person with “AIDS.” There is not one published study in the scientific/medical literature showing that someone found such a particle in any one of those bodily fluids—and nobody disagrees with that! This should make you suspicious. As Mark Twain once stated, “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”
WC Fields said, “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit,” and I think he was talking about virology. Consider this: we now have over two hundred ten responses from various health departments around the world to the question, “Do you have any published study that shows that you directly isolated SARS-CoV-2 from any human being on the planet?”1 (SARS-CoV-2 is the alleged virus, and Covid-19 is the disease alleged to be caused by the virus.) They all say the same thing: “We have no record of SARS-CoV-2 having been purified.” They’ve never found it, nor have they found any of the other pathogenic viruses. (We also have around forty or fifty similar responses pertaining to Ebola, Zika, HIV, measles and the like.)
Colleagues of mine have asked the authors of four of the most important papers written about SARS-CoV-2, some of which bafflingly have the word “isolation” in the title, “Did you isolate this virus in your study?” Their answer was not only “No” but also, “We didn’t even try to find it in any biological fluid of any person who was sick.” In the early days of virology, scientists did look, but they were never able to find such a particle using the very tool—the electron microscope—that should have allowed them to find it. After twenty years, they abandoned ship and said, “There’s nothing to this theory.” But then later, it got resurrected.
What Are You Sick With
A Belief System
Note that virology has methods and techniques to truly isolate a virus.2 Using ultracentrifugation and something called a “sucrose density gradient,” virologists can separate a fluid sample into bands by molecular weight. Ultracentrifugation will spin viruses out into their own band, which virologists can then extract with a pipette and check for purity.
But they don’t use these techniques! Instead, I’ll give an example of what a virologist says if you ask, “Why do you think this virus exists? If you can’t find it, why do you think it’s in the lungs?” A virologist told me that someone would have to be “incredibly ill and shedding extremely large amounts of virus, and the fluid from their lungs would have to have a large amount of virus—and even then, it wouldn’t be possible.” In other words, “There’s not enough virus to find.”
Think about this. Your lungs are said to be the perfect culture medium—at the ideal temperature (thirty-seven degrees Celsius) for viruses to reproduce—and the lung environment is, therefore, supposedly teeming with viruses. After they reproduce, viruses reportedly kill millions and billions of cells, and that, we are told, is how they cause disease. Supposedly, there are twenty million copies of a virus in a single sneeze. But the virologist’s answer is, “There’s not enough to see.”
Remember, a virus is described as incredibly tiny—something like one-thousandth of a pinhead or less—which means that when viruses explode, they are exploding perhaps one hundredth of a pinhead of your lungs. Yet you could take out even a baseball-sized piece of your lungs, and while that might be called “having a bad day,” you won’t die. The body also isn’t crazy enough to make an abnormal and excessive immune response to losing less than a pinhead size of the lungs. So, it is logical to ask, “If the virus is exploding the cells in a portion of your lungs that is the equivalent of less than a pinhead, how is it causing disease?”
There is a second reason virologists give for not using the tools at their disposal to isolate a virus. They say that the virus is an intracellular parasite organism, meaning it is only inside the cell and doesn’t go outside the cell. But if that is the case, how does it get to the next person? This starts to strain credulity. Here’s how that nutty conversation might go:
Q: “Why can’t you catch the virus when it goes from one person to another person?”
A: “Well, it’s not there for more than about six hours. We don’t have enough money to pay someone to look every six hours to find the organism in the snot.”
We asked one eminent virologist, “If you put ten thousand people together and collected all their sputum, would that be enough to find the virus?” His answer: “No, that’s not enough.”
Poisoning, Not Purification
There are something like ten thousand published papers that refer to the “isolation” of such-and-such a virus. Virologists will show you the title of these papers and say, “See, how can you say this isn’t true?” But since they aren’t using the proper steps, you have to know what they did instead. And you have to ask, did they rigorously validate every step of their process?
In 1954, a researcher named John Franklin Enders established the procedures that rejuvenated the then-languishing field of virology.3 Here are Enders’ basic steps:
Virologists take snot from somebody alleged to have a certain disease (such as measles or Covid-19).
Sometimes they centrifuge (not ultracentrifuge) or filter the mixture to get rid of cells, fungi and debris. That has become a sticking point because some people call this “purification.” However, purifying the snot a little is not equivalent to purifying out a virus.
Next, they put the snot in a cell culture of green monkey kidney cells—cells that happen to be highly inbred and tend to break down easily.
Then they mix in antibiotics—and specifically antibiotics that are kidney-toxic (gentamicin and amphotericin)—and they take away the cell culture medium’s nutrients. (This is the equivalent of being forced onto a standard American diet after thriving on a Wise Traditions diet.)
Next, they mix in fetal bovine serum, a product sucked out of the heart of a newborn calf.
Maintaining the cell culture at a steady temperature, they then watch what happens. In about five days, the cells break down— which is called a cytopathic effect (CPE)—and they call the CPE the “proof” that the virus exists and causes damage.
Understand that virologists consider this process—which inevitably generates cell breakdown—not “a” proof but “the” proof for the existence of all pathogenic viruses. You might reasonably ask, “How do you know the CPE is not due to starving the cells, or poisoning them with gentamicin and amphotericin, or using fetal bovine serum, or because of some other toxin in the sick person’s snot?” Virologists’ answer is that they do a “mock infection” as a control. However, if you go to the hundreds of papers I and my colleagues have read over the past two years, you will not find even one actual mock infection. In fact, it can’t be done because the independent variable would necessarily need to be the very virus that they have not isolated. Often, the study authors don’t even provide details, and if you try to obtain more information, you invariably learn that they did not conduct a properly controlled experiment.
Interestingly, Enders’ procedures are also how pharmaceutical companies make viral vaccines.4 For example, they take someone with measles and put their unpurified snot into a monkey kidney cell culture, add fetal bovine serum, gentamicin, and amphotericin, and then when the cells break down, they call that “isolation” of the measles virus. They put that goop into a vial—and that is called a “live” virus vaccine. They can also cycle the goop over and over in huge vats, removing some of the proteins, and that is an “attenuated” viral vaccine. But at no point did they ever demonstrate there is a virus in there. With mRNA and newer technologies, they are just putting different stuff—known and unknown—in their vaccines. In short, vaccines are biotoxins, and they make people sick. How could biotoxins possibly prevent people from getting sick?
The Lanka Experiments
There is one scientist, Stefan Lanka, who contracted with an independent professional lab to try to answer the question of whether the culturing process itself, rather than a pathogenic virus, might be causing the CPE.
The lab conducted four experiments. In the first, they cultured normal cells with a normal nutrient medium, adding only a small amount of antibiotics—and no snot from a sick person. Five days later, the cell growth was perfectly normal. The second experiment was the same as the first, but with the addition of 10 percent fetal bovine serum. Again, five days later there was no cell breakdown.
The third experiment replicated Enders’ procedures, lowering the percentage of fetal bovine serum from 10 percent to 1 percent (that is, starving the cells) and tripling the amount of antibiotics. On day five, the characteristic CPE that “proves” the existence and pathogenicity of a virus was evident—except that Lanka had not added any fluid from a sick person or anything else that could have had a virus in it.
The fourth experiment repeated the third but with the addition of RNA from yeast. It so happens that monkey kidney cells don’t like yeast any more than they like kidney-toxic antibiotics. Unsurprisingly, the fourth experiment produced the same CPE result—clearly showing that the CPE is the result of the culturing technique rather than any virus.
After they “prove” the existence of a virus using their cell culturing process, virologists “find” the genome of the virus using fragments of the RNA in the broken-down cell culture to create the assembled genome of the alleged virus. This is called “sequencing.” What is important to understand is that this process generates a genome that is purely theoretical (“in silico”). As I explain in my booklet Breaking the Spell:
“This genome never exists in any person, and it never exists intact even in the culture results; it exists only inside the computer, based on an alignment process that arranges these short pieces [of RNA] into an entire ‘genome.’”5
In the case of SARS-CoV-2, sequencing software generated anywhere from three hundred forty-two thousand to one million different possibilities of how to arrange the fragments. A small group of scientists then decided which arrangement they liked—by “consensus”—and then, for every subsequent analysis, they put that first consensus-derived genome in and told the computer to make another one along the same lines. When they turn out a sequence that is a bit different from the original consensus-derived “genome,” that’s called a “variant.”
Note that all of this applies both to so-called “natural” viruses and to so-called lab-engineered “gain-of-function” viruses—which no more exist than any “natural” virus exists. So, here you have biologists in their hazmat suits, protecting themselves against a genome from a virus that exists only in a computer.
As for the PCR test, the whole premise of the test is also nonsense. You cannot say that a PCR sequence came from a thing you have not isolated. It makes no sense to even talk about “false-positives,” because the results are just plain false.
Identical Pictures, Delusional Thoughts
At some point, people say to me, “But Tom, we’ve seen electron microscope pictures of SARS-CoV-2,” complete with “spikes” and something that looks like a “corona”! However, I have a picture from a kidney biopsy produced before the year 2000 (when there was no possibility that it was SARS-CoV-2) that looks just the same. In fact, I have eleven electron microscope pictures—labeled as kidney biopsies, lung biopsies or SARS-CoV-2—and there is no way to tell the difference between them. They are morphologically indistinguishable—they all look the same. In fact, the CDC has known since the 1970s that electron microscopy cannot tell the difference between a kidney biopsy, lung cancer, cellular debris, SARS-CoV-2 or any so-called pathogenic virus; it simply is not possible.
The cellular debris, by the way, comes from poisoning—whether from putting yeast, antibiotics or fetal bovine serum on a culture, or from EMFs, or from not eating a Wise Traditions diet. It can even be from “wonky” or delusional thinking. For example, I knew an anthroposophical doctor who spent his career giving AIDS drugs to so-called “HIV-positive” people because he believed in the delusional germ theory, and then, because of this belief, he took four Covid shots. Five days after the fourth one, he was dead. You could say he died from the shots, but I say he died because he spent his entire life believing in something that is completely make-believe.
An Even Bigger Delusion
It turns out that the delusion is even bigger than viruses—we didn’t just make up viruses, we made up diseases. Consider what happens if you get a splinter in your finger. In medical school, I was taught that pus is a sign of infection, but actually, the pus is the body’s therapeutic response to the splinter; if you suppress the pus, you will never get the splinter out. We need to stop thinking of the body’s responses as “diseases”; they are the wisdom of the body coming through.
We can look at many other conditions—and the body’s wise therapies—in the same way. For example, if you put toxic junk in your lungs, the body will cough it up because it wants to get rid of dead, dying and poisoned tissue. In Wuhan, which has some of the worst air pollution in the world, bronchitis is the therapy for breathing air. It’s not a disease.
Or consider chickenpox, which might have something to do with malnutrition or a collagen deficiency or a toxic environment—but is also a normal maturation and cleansing process. If you come along and poison a child with a chickenpox vaccine so they cannot go through that cleansing process, they will instead have a life of asthma, allergies, eczema and all these other made-up terms that really mean you stopped the process of healing. It may look like you lessened the incidence of “chickenpox,” but by interfering with the cleansing process you have increased lots of chronic things, which never go away.
There are no vaccines that are exceptions to that rule—they all poison you, and you end up worse. When you cannot go through the normal maturation and healing steps, you eventually may end up with cancer. You’re depositing one poison after another throughout your life, and now you’ve got a garbage can of poisons otherwise known as a “tumor.” What would you do if you kept being poisoned over and over, and someone prevented you from getting the poisons out? It’s very simple: you would buy a garbage can and put the poison in there. But what happens if you keep putting in garbage, and it starts piling up in your basement, garage, kitchen and bedroom until you can’t live? That’s called “metastasis,” and then you die.
What Are We Made Of?
To examine more deeply the question of what makes us sick, let’s consider what we’re made of. To start on safe ground, let’s accept that we’re made of a head, ears, eyes, mouth, chest, arms, fingers, legs, toes and a bunch of other things. Inside, we also have things like a heart, bones, blood vessels, nerves, a liver, kidneys and other things. As far as I can tell, older healing traditions like Chinese and Ayurvedic medicine also believe there is a heart and liver and spleen and all the rest of it. In fact, not only do they believe it, they put huge stock in the energy flow through those organs.
Now remember, there are two ways of knowing. In the first instance, you can observe, but if you can’t observe, you have to do science—and you have to be sure that any science you do isn’t affecting what you’re seeing. And if it is, you have to control for that.
We’re told that hepatocytes are the main functional cells of the liver, but we might ask, “How do we know that?” How many of us have actually seen hepatocytes in the liver of an intact living organism? Nobody. That may not mean they’re not there, but it means we’ve got a question that requires further experimentation. We can take someone and anesthetize them (or at least some part of them), and stick a needle in, and suck out a piece of the liver, and stain it with toxic chemicals, and shine a high-powered light on it, and then say that what we see are the hepatocytes.
But how do we know that the process of anesthetizing (that is, poisoning) the person, removing the sample from a living organism and putting chemical stains on it didn’t create the structures we’re seeing?
For example, we know that bacteria, when stressed, will create a storage form called bacteriophages, and the same is true for other organisms like fungus spores. How do we know that stressing the liver by removing it from the living organism that nourishes it didn’t create the appearance of the liver cells? I’m not necessarily saying that this proves there are no liver cells, but I’m saying you need to ask the question if you want to do real science.
My thinking on these matters owes a lot to thinkers like the British biologist Harold Hillman, who spent fifty years and thousands of pages asking these kinds of questions.6 If you really want to understand biology, read Hillman. Another influence is Gilbert Ling, a brilliant Chinese-born American scientist who challenged the accepted view of the cell.7
Let’s remember that in addition to sensory observations and science, you may get to a point where you simply can’t know something. Going back to virology, if you can’t take the virus out of the sample that you inoculate, the best you might be able to say is, “We have no actual evidence that the virus exists. It doesn’t mean it doesn’t, but we have no evidence.” How different would the world be if, in March 2020, they had announced: “We did some experiments, and we have some idea there might be a virus, but we can’t really prove it, and all the experiments have shown it’s not really there—but we think we should lock you down and make you wear a mask and starve you anyway.” Of course, they don’t say it like that. My point is that it may not be possible to prove the existence of those liver cells—or any cells.
What is also interesting is that of the approximately one hundred eighty-four different tissue types, we know that forty-four don’t have any cells. Examples are the crystalline lens of the eye, and the bursae—sacs of fluid (colorfully described as “miniature water balloons”) that facilitate the frictionless movement of the joints.8 The absence of cells makes sense because this organized water tissue is much stronger and more coherent than if it were broken up into little cells.
Historically, what did Chinese and Ayurvedic medicine have to say about cells? Nothing. There is no mention of cells in either of those traditions. By the way, they never mentioned contagion or germ theory either. It was the German physician Rudolf Virchow who popularized the idea that we are made of cells. In the 1850s, Virchow wrote a book about cellular physiology essentially based on his dissection of an onion; he saw that it had compartments and from there he asserted that all living things were made of cells and that “all cells come from cells.” Although many people initially thought he was nuts, somehow that became the cellular theory of biology and medicine, despite the theory never having been “proven” in any meaningful sense of the word.
Ribosome Fairy Tales?
For the time being, let’s assume that cells do exist in those one hundred forty or so human tissues. Then we can ask, what is a cell made of? In addition to a cell membrane, standard textbooks show pictures with structures called organelles that include a nucleus, an endoplasmic reticulum, ribosomes, mitochondria, lysosomes, the Golgi apparatus and others (see Figure 1). This definition of a cell is the basis of all medicine and biology.
Now, let’s consider the ribosomes. Cell biology tells us that ribosomes are the place where mRNA is translated into proteins, describing ribosomes as the cells’ protein-making “factories” or “machinery.” Ribosomes also happen to be an important part of the Covid story— remember, the official rationale for putting mRNA in the injections was so it could instruct the ribosomes to produce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.9
As an aside, if you say, “I’m going to make tires out of rubber,” it would not be unusual to be asked, “How do you know that works?” Then you could describe the process, including the quantity of rubber needed to produce a set number of tires, and they could repeat the process to see whether they end up with the same number of tires from the same amount of rubber. Along these lines, you would expect there to be hundreds of studies showing that if you put “X” amount of mRNA into a human being, you get “Y” amount of spike protein. But do you know how many studies there are like that? Zero. Instead, we just heard, “We had to move at the speed of science,”10 which really means “We made it up.”
There is an interesting thing going on with the ribosomes, because we’re talking about the place in a cell where the essence of you, biologically, is made. We are made of proteins. The creation of you, we’re told, is in the ribosomes. The question is, is there such a thing as a ribosome, or did they make it up?
FIGURE 1. A standard (make-believe) cell diagram.
One clue that there is something fishy going on is that no one can tell you how many ribosomes a cell contains, other than a vague “millions.” However, we can do some basic arithmetic (which will be an approximation because we’re mixing volume and linear measurement). We’re told that a ribosome measures about twenty-five nanometers (0.025 micrometers)—and if we conservatively estimate that a mammalian cell has about four million ribosomes, then that would equal one hundred thousand micrometers. However, a typical mammalian cell is something like one hundred micrometers, and the cytoplasm (which contains the ribosomes) is only 70 percent of the cell, meaning that its volume is seventy micrometers. Not only that, but the mitochondria—which are hundreds or thousands of times bigger than the putative ribosomes—are also in there. So, how does something that is one hundred thousand micrometers fit into a space that is seventy micrometers and also houses millions of mitochondria? Doesn’t anybody study arithmetic?
A second clue that ribosomes are imaginary comes from electron microscope pictures, which always show the ribosome as a perfect circle. If it is a perfect circle on a two-dimensional picture, that means it had to have been a sphere in real life. Now think about how biologists obtain these pictures: they take some tissue, put it in a blender, grind and macerate it, freeze it to minus one hundred twenty degrees centigrade, stain it with heavy metals and shoot a high-energy electron beam at it to evaporate all the water from the tissue. How does a sphere that has been ground up in a blender, frozen, poisoned and had all its water evaporated end up—every single time—as a perfect circle? It is not possible for those circles to be real cellular structures. (This is a good time to remember WC Fields’ quote about “baffling them with bullshit.”)
Fortunately, Harold Hillman had the genius to take something that could not possibly have ribosomes in it and put it through the same process (staining and so forth), and he got the exact same pictures. It turns out that those are just typical images of dead and dying tissue (remember that pictures of “viruses” also come from stained tissue that is dead and dying), and those perfect circles are gas bubbles—in which case, there are no ribosomes. And if there are no ribosomes, there is no place for the translation of RNA into protein to occur. And if that is the case, what the heck is going on, and how do we actually make the stuff that we’re made of?
More Cell Make-Believe
For another example, let’s look at the cell component called the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). Textbooks describe the ER as “a netlike labyrinth of branching tubules and flattened sacs”11 that serve as the cell’s “transportation system.” The millions of ribosomes in a cell are said to line the surface of the “rough” part of the ER.
Why does the ER even have to be there? Before I answer that question, let’s consider that the cytoplasm of a cell (which is the gel-like liquid inside a cell membrane but external to the nucleus) has a different pH level than the pH inside the cell nucleus—and that is a verifiable, measurable phenomenon. You can measure the two pH values one hundred times and they will never be the same. Why is the pH different? The reason can only be due to the cytoplasm and nucleus having different concentrations of hydrogen ions—because that is where pH comes from. And for the pH values to be different, there has to be an impenetrable barrier between the cytoplasm and nucleus, or some other mechanism that keeps the hydrogen ions from equilibrating across the two. If there were no mechanism, they would equilibrate and their pH would be the same—but it never is.
Now, we run into the conceptual problem of the mRNA. They say DNA makes mRNA in the nucleus; then, the mRNA exits the nucleus through pores in the nuclear membrane and heads to the imaginary ribosomes, where it is translated into protein. So, how does the mRNA get out without letting any hydrogen ions in to equilibrate? An mRNA molecule is at least thousands and maybe millions of times bigger than a hydrogen ion. Picture the problem this way: Something the size of an elephant can go out, but something the size of a mosquito can’t get in.
Believe it or not, we’re expected to believe that there is something like a whirligig that attaches to the mRNA (the “elephant”) and spins around like a conveyor belt and takes the mRNA to the other side of the cell. Meanwhile, no one has ever seen the whirligig. (“But it must be a whirligig, because how else did the elephant get out?”) But then you have to ask, how does it go round and round and not tangle up the “branching” components of the ER? If you picture them like ropes, wouldn’t you have to untangle the ropes? (Didn’t any scientist ever go on a merry-go-round?) Once again, Hillman provided a common-sense answer. He showed that when you take tissue and quickly freeze it, it makes fracture lines—and that’s what we call the endoplasmic reticulum. The ER doesn’t exist.
In short, using basic principles of geometry, mathematics and logic, you can go through the same process with every component of the cell. Nothing on a standard cell diagram—with the exception of the nucleus, the mitochondria and a thin cell wall—has ever been proven to exist. It’s all make-believe.
Other Things That Just Ain’t So
In addition to the imaginary cell components, there are a lot of other things in science that, as Mark Twain put it, “we believe in but just ain’t so.” Consider “Neurology 101.” A neurologist’s explanation of how nerves work goes like this: We have nerves made up of nerve cells called “neurons”; they transmit electrical and chemical signals via “axons” that end in “synapses.” Something called the “presynaptic junction” releases chemical messengers called “neurotransmitters” (such as serotonin and dopamine), which swim across the junction and attach to “postsynaptic receptors,” where they “depolarize” the next neuron and start the next impulse—and so on, until the nerve ends at its destination and “fires.” But the process can’t work like that; it’s nonsense. This becomes immediately obvious if you ask someone to wiggle the tip of their right or left index finger as soon as they hear the word “right” or “left”; they do it virtually instantaneously, with no lag time for this hypothesized neurotransmitter journey.12
In addition, if you dissect a nerve, you never see a synapse. Now, you could have the problem of “maybe it’s just too small to see,” but most things aren’t too small to see with an electron microscope. If you hunt down a picture of what an anatomical synapse is supposed to look like, what you’ll find are pictures of stained nerves. That’s not a synapse—because there are no synapses. The nerve is continuous.
Think about how much in medicine is based on neurotransmitters and receptors (such as the famed “ACE2 receptors,” “opiate receptors,” “dopamine receptors,” or “serotonin receptors”). They even tell us that it is oxytocin, a hormone that “acts as a neurotransmitter,” that makes us love someone. It couldn’t be because they’re a nice person or they give you a backrub—no, it’s the “love hormone” oxytocin.
Here is another example. How many of you have heard of the “blood-brain barrier” or believe there is such a barrier? We often hear about it from people opposed to vaccination, who say that vaccines make your blood-brain barrier “leaky.” The implication is that we’re talking about an actual anatomical structure—a physical barrier that stretches out like a piece of cellophane along the border between the blood vessels and your brain tissue so that nothing gets in or out—except vaccines. . . and except anesthetics because drug-makers “know how to get anesthetics through the blood-brain barrier.” Nonetheless, no one has ever proven the existence of such a barrier.
Just to be clear, I am not saying that there aren’t substances that get into the brain in a different way than they get into the liver. The liver and the brain each have a different composition of water and lipids, so logically, some things will dissolve and get into the liver differently from how they get into the brain. But just because things get in the brain differently does not mean there is an anatomical barrier.
Finally, we can scrutinize the notion that DNA is the mechanism of heredity. The premise of genetics is that you have a stable fixed code that is the same in every cell of your body. That fixed, stable DNA makes proteins, and the proteins make you. But there are probably two hundred thousand different types of protein, and only twenty thousand genes or units that code for these proteins. We’re told that one gene makes one protein, so how does that work? Where did the other one hundred eighty thousand proteins come from? The central dogma that one gene makes one protein cannot be true. So, how we are made can’t have anything to do with DNA and, therefore, DNA cannot be the code for biological systems. In fact, DNA changes from minute to minute—Barbara McClintock proved this decades ago13—so there is no stable DNA. We do not have the same DNA in all the tissues and cells of our body. These things have been 100 percent disproven.
It’s the Structured Water
The ribosomes, endoplasmic reticulum, synapses, neurotransmitters and blood-brain barrier represent just a partial list—and I do mean partial—of things of which I either doubt the existence or suspect their function is different from what we have been told. If you are still wondering what we are made up of, the reality is more beautiful, simpler, easier to understand and more logical and rational. The real answer to what we’re made of is structured water. Structured water, which creates free electrons, is the only possible explanation for how we’re able to instantaneously wiggle our index finger when we hear the word “right” or left.”
FIGURE 2. Dark-field microscope image of cells showing cell membrane, nucleus, mitochondria and structured water.
Figure 2 is an image of a cell produced with dark-field microscopy, which is the most reliable technique for viewing live, unstained biological samples. In the image, you see a thin membrane (the outer coating); you see organized water (also called structured water, coherent water, EZ water, the fourth phase of water or liquid crystalline water); you see little black dots in the structured water (the mitochondria) and you see a nucleus that is always circular or dome-shaped—and that’s it.
Note that the mitochondria help structure our water by making ATP—which is not “energy” as we’ve been told. Think of structured water like jello. If you add water to gelatin proteins, nothing happens, but if you heat the mixture, the heat unfolds the proteins and you get water that gels. As for us, we have all these proteins, and the mitochondria make the ATP that unfolds them so that the proteins can interact with water and form gels. All gels create a negative charge and an electromagnetic field around them, which is the voltage—the energy—of life. To put it simply, we are living liquid crystals.
The dome in the middle (the nucleus) also has something sticking out that collects energy from the world. It may be DNA, but it is not a double helix—it’s a spiral sticking out of the nucleus. The way it works is similar to a radio antenna. It “downloads” information coming in through “radio waves” that get picked up by the “antenna,” and out of that emerge proteins and life (or sound and song in the case of a radio). And this dynamic, tunable, responsive, liquid crystalline medium pervades the whole body—from the organs and tissues to the interior of every cell.
Note that in Genesis, before God created the Earth, plants or people, he created water and light energy. No one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of the water and the Spirit. The Spirit is the information field that comes in through our antenna. Every scriptural tradition says that all living things and the universe itself are made of water.
What Does Make Us Sick?
If we now circle back to “what doesn’t make us sick,” we could summarize the answer in one word: “viruses.” And if we ask, “What does make us sick?”, the answer is also straightforward. We get sick when we mess up our structured water. If we disturb the gels by putting “schmutz” in them—which could be aluminum, mercury, glyphosate, bad food, EMFs, or even negative emotions like anger, fear, shame or guilt—that will distort or dissolve the gels. If we do that in our eye, we get a distorted gel that has a film on it, and we call that a “cataract.” If we distort the bursa in our knee, so that the gels that are supposed to protect both sides of the knee start sticking together, then we have bone on bone and we call that “arthritis.” Public health officials create epidemics by pulling different manifestations of distorted water into a single diagnosis—such as AIDS or Covid-19—and when they are ready to make the epidemic go away, they separate them back out into twenty different diagnoses. It’s very clever—and it’s nothing new.
Without describing it as such, medicine does sometimes assess the coherence of your water to see if you are sick. For example, doctors use MRIs to diagnose cancer. What is the MRI measuring? It’s measuring the coherence of your water. When your water goes from a gel-like jello to a puddle-like liquid, it sends a different signal to the MRI.
Imagine you have a poison grape in your “jello.” Your body heats up the gel and you get a fever—that’s hyperthermia. The heat dissolves the gel and makes it runny, creating mucus that you can spit out or cough up, or creating something you can push out through your skin. That’s what we call “being sick.” It makes perfect sense. If you want to flush out the poison grape, all you have to do is clean your gels—which is what detoxification approaches like the Gerson diet and water fasting are all about—and clean up the field and you will heal. If you want to know why you are sick, think about how you are structuring your water, what you’re putting into your water, the quality of the water and the quality or composition of the field that you’re exposed to.
I’m not the first person to say that water creates life. Mae Wan-Ho, a past speaker at Weston A. Price Foundation conferences, wrote books about “the role of biological water in organising living processes.”14 Marcel Vogel,15 who knew more about crystals than any human being ever alive and who invented liquid crystal screens, discovered that he could use the energetic fields of quartz crystals to structure water.16
We are made of a living, evolving, changing crystal, which is why we are not made of quartz. One way of viewing Covid-related events is that people like Bill Gates are trying to make us be made of quartz, not water. In some ways, that is what this is all about. As a fixed, perfect quartz crystal, they tell us, nothing will ever change and we can live forever. But that is not what I want. I want to change, grow, evolve and be a human being who has to be watered.
We’re swimming along with misconceptions in a make-believe world—and we have to get rid of this garbage. We can find a much better way once we explore and learn what we’re really made of and how it all works. Every reason we get sick has to do with a distortion of the field coming in.
Continuing with the radio analogy, you need to find the good signal instead of the distorted signal. The good signal is the sun, moon and the earth; good friends; your dog; community; clean, nutrient-dense food, clean water and clean air; good music; and love, safety and freedom. That is the field that you “download” into the gel to give it information to organize progressively into the more and more perfect crystal that is you.
Sidebar
No Deathbed Confession
How have virology’s luminaries been able to claim they found a virus when we know they have never found one in any biological fluid? Let’s consider Luc Montagnier, the prestigious virologist who won a Nobel Prize for discovering HIV. He died in 2022. Montagnier acknowledged that purification was a necessary step to prove the existence of a virus (or, in the case of HIV, a retrovirus) but admitted, “We did not purify.”17 The technician who performed his electron microscopy for twenty years even said, “It turns out we never saw a virus. All we saw was junk.” But to his dying day, Montagnier never “fessed up” or acknowledged, “We don’t have a real virus.”
On what did Montagnier base his claim that he had found HIV? It’s very simple:
• He took lymphocytes from the lymph nodes of a person said to have AIDS.
• He stimulated them to grow with a chemical called PHA (phytohaemagglutinin).
• When the lymphocytes grew, he assayed them for an enzyme called reverse transcriptase.
• When he found reverse transcriptase, he said that it proved the existence of a new retrovirus eventually called HIV.
• To “prove” that HIV was transmissible to other people, Montagnier took his PHA-stimulated lymphocyte culture and put it in a lymphocyte culture from a healthy person. When he found reverse transcriptase in that culture as well, that was the “proof” that HIV is a transmissible disease.
There was only one problem. Ten years previously, Robert Gallo had written a paper reporting reverse transcriptase in every single culture from anybody with lymphocytes stimulated with PHA. Both Gallo and Montagnier knew that his experiment had nothing to do with proving that there was a retrovirus or any kind of virus at all. Later, the scientist credited with discovering the reverse transcriptase enzyme, David Baltimore, also admitted as much.18
Water Pictures
Veda Austin, a “water researcher,” has dedicated many years to observing the life of water, which she describes as “fluid intelligence.”19
Veda has developed techniques for photographing water in its “state of creation.” This work explores whether, if she asks water a question, the water can take in and download the information and, given the right circumstances, make structures that essentially answer that question. And what she has found is that if she puts the water in a dish and freezes it, the water organizes its crystals and makes pictures.
For example, when she showed the dish of water a wedding invitation and said, “Water, show me the wedding invitation,” the frozen water created an amazing artistic depiction of a wedding ring. But my favorite example is when she said, “Water, what is falling down?” The water did not create anything as straightforward as an image of rain; instead, the water produced an image of “London Bridge is falling down.”
“Safe and Free” by Jude Roberts20
In the last two years, I’ve learned important things from my cat Pumpkin. One stormy evening, with coyotes howling in the distance, I walked with Pumpkin toward the greenhouse where he sleeps, but Pumpkin started heading for the woods instead. When I called him, he gave me a look that seemed to say, “There’s no point in being safe if I can’t be free.” My friend Jude Roberts understands this, too. His song “Safe and Free” reminds us what this is all about.
I got up to go to work today,
there was no work for me.
Governor closed my shop, he say
to keep me safe and free
I’ve had my shop for twenty years,
It feeds my family,
And now we have to stay inside,
To keep us safe and free
To keep us safe and free
Called my dear old mother,
My mother said to me
“Son, I miss you dearly,
But you cannot come to tea”
“The children miss you, Mamma,
They’re healthy as can be.”
“A hug could kill their Grandma,
Keep them away from me.
Keep me safe and free.”
Giant tech and billionaires
And pharmacology
Spinning like a top to move
The wheels of industry
Amazon and Walmart,
The consumer pedigree,
They can do their business,
Because anyone can see
They keep us safe and free
Technocrats and robot gods
And blind authority,
Sell your soul and pray to them,
They’ll keep you safe and free
Biotech behemoths say
They have a shot for me.
I trust them with my body,
And forgive them for their greed
If it keeps me safe and free
Keep us safe from terrorists,
Keep us free from germs,
Keep us from the danger
Of the wisdom we have learned
Until the books are burned
Governor says to wear a mask
I cannot disagree
I cannot breathe or speak my mind,
But at least I’m safe and free
I’ll wear my mask for you my friend,
You wear your mask for me.
Worried eyes and faceless fear
Is all that we can see.
Sure feel safe and free
Keep us free from choices,
Keep us stuck in blame,
Keep us in a toxic state,
Of poverty and shame
While they run their game
I’ll open up my shop today
Even if they come for me.
If I can’t feed my family,
We’re neither safe nor free.
I may not be a scientist,
And I’m damn sure not a priest
Ain’t a fool on God’s green Earth
Can keep life safe for me.
So better I live free.
Alberts B. et al. “The endoplasmic reticulum.” In Molecular Biology of the Cell, 4th edition. New York: Garland Science; 2002.
Cowan T. Human Heart, Cosmic Heart: A Doctor’s Quest to Understand, Treat, and Prevent Cardiovascular Disease. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing; 2016, pp. 102- 105.
Halpern ME. Barbara McClintock on defining the unstable genome. Genetics. 2016;204:3-4.
Dr. Tom Cowan has been one of the leading voices speaking out against the mainstream medical narrative and coordinated agenda of masking, social distancing and forced vaccinations. His messages of health freedom and personal autonomy have resonated with millions of people around the world. Dr. Cowan challenges conventional medicine to explore health and wellness in holistic terms, seeking to provide a collaborative forum for the exchange of knowledge, products and practices that enable us to forge a new world together, governed by truth.
“Therefore, one of the answers I would provide to the question of why the ‘no virus’ issue is so important is: that fear of ‘germs’ makes people believe that ‘disease’ can be transmitted between people, which means that we have to continue being afraid of each other.
“In fact, one of the fundamental problems with all of this is that it keeps people in a state of unjustified fear, which is disempowering. Releasing unjustified fear is empowering.”
It seems that many people wonder why the ‘no virus’ issue remains important now that the ‘pandemic’ is over.
To add to that, there are some people in the ‘freedom movement’ who have recently asserted that there are many aspects of the globalists’ agenda that are not related to health and are far more dangerous to humanity, such as technocracy, transhumanism, digital currencies, smart cities etc.
Yes, these are important issues – really important issues, I totally agree – but so is the idea that ‘pathogenic agents’ exist because it has tentacles that reach into many aspects of our lives, so it cannot be brushed aside as if irrelevant, especially in view of the complete lack of evidence to support this idea.
I would therefore recommend that people who believe in ‘pathogenic agents’ become aware of the various reports that claim there will be ‘future pandemics’. For just one example, a 22nd May 2023 ‘News’ item on the UN website states,
“Although COVID-19 may no longer be a global public health emergency, countries must still strengthen response to the disease and prepare for future pandemics and other threats, the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) said on Monday in Geneva.”
There has never been a ‘pandemic’ due to an infectious agent and there never could be. But, whilst people believe that pathogenic infectious agents exist, they will believe in the possibility of other ‘pandemics’.
Therefore, one of the answers I would provide to the question of why the ‘no virus’ issue is so important is: that fear of ‘germs’ makes people believe that ‘disease’ can be transmitted between people, which means that we have to continue being afraid of each other.
In fact, one of the fundamental problems with all of this is that it keeps people in a state of unjustified fear, which is disempowering. Releasing unjustified fear is empowering.
Furthermore, fear of ‘germs’ makes people acquiesce to measures that are claimed to be for their benefit but are far more likely to be harmful, and in many cases potentially or even actually fatal.
For example, the maintenance of a belief in pathogens permits the maintenance of a belief in the idea that STIs are real, as demonstrated by a recent BBC article Gonorrhoea and syphilis sex infections reach record levels in England,
“England is seeing record high levels of gonorrhoea and syphilis sexually transmitted infections, following a dip during Covid years, new figures reveal.”
Is the claim that these STIs ‘dipped’ during the Covid years intended to suggest that people maintaining their distance from one another was beneficial? This point is not elaborated upon, so maybe it was not intended to imply that. Still, the point was stated, so maybe it was intended to be drawn into the sub-conscious mind.
One of the key messages in the BBC article is that people should ‘practise safe sex’ – whatever that means. In order to be ‘safe’, people are encouraged to ‘get themselves tested’ – does this sound familiar?
In addition, the article states that,
“The age group most likely to be diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection (STI) is people who are 15-24.”
The reason for STIs to mainly affect young people is not explained, although it is possibly because this age group is more likely to be tested, as the article indicates,
“Some of the rise will be due to increased testing, but the scale of the surge strongly suggests that there are more of the infections around, says the UKHSA.”
A particularly significant comment made by the spokesperson for the UKHSA, and reported in the article, is that,
“Testing is important because you may not have any symptoms of an STI.”
Yet, according to the CDC,
“An infection occurs when germs enter the body, increase in number, and cause a reaction of the body.”
In other words, an infection causes a reaction or ‘symptoms’, but infected people may not have symptoms. A contradiction in terms, surely!
Just to be clear, the definition of ‘symptom’ according to the online Merriam-Webster dictionary is,
“…subjective evidence of disease or physical disturbance.”
So, to summarise: according to the medical establishment, a symptom is evidence of disease and ‘germs’ are pathogens, which means they cause disease, which is defined by the presence of symptoms. Yet ‘germs’ are said to be able to cause an infection even in the complete absence of symptoms.
Confused? You should be, because this is all nonsense!
But it is nonsense that people are not only expected to believe without question, but are not allowed to question.
Maybe it is because this is all so confusing that people are likely to just switch off their thinking, because they don’t understand it, and instead defer to the so-called ‘experts’. I am not being disrespectful. I do wonder, however, whether this approach may be intentional and that those in control of the narrative intentionally promote contradictory information to ensure that people are confused.
Deferring to ‘experts’ is however, a serious error of judgement, because it means people will believe the experts’ reports about ‘germs’ and become trapped in a false narrative that they may have been ‘infected’. This in turn will make them believe that they need to take certain drugs and act in a certain way to ‘protect’ themselves from other people or protect other people from them, especially people with whom they are in a loving relationship. They are made to believe the idea that they could cause harm to their partner or vice versa, and they therefore live in fear.
This fear is fuelled by a variety of statements, such as the claim in the BBC article that,
“An untreated infection can lead to infertility, pelvic inflammatory disease and can be passed on to a child during pregnancy.”
There is no evidence for this claim. Yet, this is exactly the kind of message that will encourage people to want to be tested to make sure they are ‘safe’. Again, does this sound familiar?
An even deeper problem is highlighted by the comment from the Chief Executive of the Terrence Higgins who is reported to have said that,
“Sexual health services and public health budgets have been cut to the bone.”
This comment was followed by his statement that,
“This was exacerbated and laid bare by last year’s mpox outbreak, which left sexual health clinics in the most affected areas unable to provide HIV and STI testing, HIV prevention and access to contraception due to the displacement of these core and vital services. Until sexual health is properly resourced – with an appointment easier to access than a (sic) – we won’t see the number of STIs heading in the right direction.”
Where do I start with this?
OK, so the Terrence Higgins Trust web page About our charity states,
“We’re the UK’s leading HIV and sexual health charity. We support people living with HIV and amplify their voices, and help the people using our services to achieve good sexual health.”
I realise that I don’t have a Substack article specifically about HIV, but this is one I wrote about STDs,
HIV is a huge topic, but the fundamental point to convey here is that there is no evidence, and there never was, that there is such a thing as a ‘virus’ called HIV that is the cause of a health problem called AIDS – or any other health problem for that matter.
It is abundantly clear that there is a lot at stake here. It is also crystal clear that belief in the existence of any kind of pathogenic agent is absolutely essential for organisations such as the Terrence Higgins Trust (THT), as well as ‘health’ institutions, such as the WHO, CDC, NHS, and all the other alphabet agencies.
I have no idea of the motives of those who are in charge of the THT, nor do I intend to speculate on them. However, whether they know it or not, what they are promoting on their website is fully supportive of Agenda 2030 and the ‘Global Goals’, as the message at the foot of their website claims,
“Time is running out. Donate now and together we can end new cases of HIV in the UK by 2030.”
To those in the ‘truther’ community who claim that the 2030 Agenda has nothing to do with the ‘virus’ issue I would strongly suggest that they read SDG3, especially target 3.3.
And target 3b
The ‘no virus’ issue – and the associated understanding that there is no proof that any ‘diseases’ are caused by any ‘microorganism’, whether bacteria, fungi or parasites (‘viruses’ aren’t relevant in this context) – is and remains an extremely important issue; especially in view of the intended 2030 Agenda rollout of vaccines, because vaccines rely on the existence of pathogenic infectious agents.
Another reason to understand its importance is because the idea that ‘germs’ cause illness that only the medical establishment can address supports the idea that we need a ‘health service’ to look after us when we become ill, which is not the case. To this, I would add a caveat that accident and emergency services ARE important and should remain in place, although those who work in that sector should receive further training to teach them how the body actually works, and how it can and does heal itself; this knowledge will certainly improve patient recovery times and outcomes.
We may not reach everyone, but the importance of the ‘no virus’ issue cannot be underestimated. When people lose their fear of ‘germs’ of all descriptions, they will be able to concentrate their efforts on all the other aspects of their lives.
People can only make informed decisions when they are in possession of all the relevant information.
Below the selected quotes you will find an article by John Waters as well as a video conversation between John Waters & Thomas Sheridan regarding the situation in Ireland, human consciousness, and unfolding global events.
“Thomas is a pagan and I am a Christian. We are friends. We seek, I believe, the same thing, which is not the triumph of one or other creed, but the restoration of Ireland’s transcendent imagination, without which Ireland — or any nation — cannot survive.”
~ John Waters (excerpt from article below)
“It’s all about the degeneracy of the establishment, the really bad stuff that goes on at the top, right? They’re constantly trying to normalize it to the rest of us.
“And I’m gonna make a prediction here. In the next few years they’re going to try and somehow, in some way, reduce the age of consent really low.”
[…]
“And you’re going to have it become integrated into songs and TV shows and sitcoms. This is the greatest battle we will face as a civilization…
“They want to bring the human race down to zero, below degeneracy. Why? It’s a transhumanist thing.
“Everything that makes a human a human — their natural sense of natural justice. They want to obliterate it.
“The whole lockdown was all about that…”
[…]
“Do you remember the question we all grew up with? How did the Holocaust happen? Now we know. Now we know.”
[…]
“What those people are capable of is projecting their own inner dysfunctionality on us, and then trying to normalize it. And I think they’re not finished yet.
“But it’s obviously a battle they’ve lost. It’s over. It’s not going to go that way. It won’t happen.”
[…]
“They’re inching towards it.
“Why the drag queen story time? What the hell is that all about? Why the need for that?
“The need for that is they’re sexualizing children on purpose. And that’s why the change in the school curriculums.
“We have to understand the wickedness of what we’re up against. It’s like we got a taste of it with the lockdowns. But that poison is still there. And we have to be vigilant about it…”
[…]
“And this is an important one for us: Don’t self-hex yourself.
“Just because they want transhumanism, don’t say, ‘Oh, we’re gonna get transhumanism’ or ‘They’re gonna do this. They’re gonna legalize that. They’re going to bring in mandatory…’.
“Don’t do that. And stay away from people who are nihilistic that way. Because you can actually self-hex that into reality. They want you doing that.
“So that’s a very important one. Don’t let them self-hex you anymore.”
~ Thomas Sheridan (excerpt from video below)
“It is our job — as people, as citizens, as parents, as sons and daughters, brothers and sisters — it is our job to begin to think about the process of reconstruction of our culture.
“With… these considerations in mind. How do we rebuild our culture so that we, our imagination, can expand rather than contract?
“How can it make us bigger in reality rather than smaller?
“How can it make us more confident rather than more afraid?
“How do we repossess our country?
“How do we become again as proprietors, not as slaves…?”
Our problem — our terminal problem — is that we have lost the capacity to walk upright in infinity. This will not be mended by pious ejaculations, any more than by neo-atheist bullshit.
Video: A public conversation about the trajectory of the soul of Ireland between Thomas Sheridan and John Waters at the Tuatha Dé Danann festival in Fermoy, Co Cork, on Saturday May 27th, 2023.
(Readers of my weekly diary may already have read most of the following in my weekly diaries of last week and the week before — reproduced here by way of introducing the context and purpose of this event. The links to the video are at the bottom of the page.)
To say that the crisis of Ireland is ‘spiritual’ is not the same as saying that it is ‘religious’, though the difference can be hard to spell out unless it makes itself clear, as sometimes it does. Ireland has been undergoing a visible ‘religious’ crisis for perhaps 40 years, chiefly arising from a war of attrition on its primary faith-channel, Catholicism, by a cultural insurgency of indeterminate origin but rather obvious intentionality. The elements and episodes of this have already been well canvassed: culture wars, clerical hypocrisy, charges of child sexual abuse and its cover-up, and beyond that a failure on the part of the Catholic Church ‘corporate’ to offer a meaningful proposal for spiritual existence to generations supposedly educated in the values of the Enlightenment and the technological/technocratic age, culminating in its woeful and disgraceful conduct during the Covid episode, when it left its entire congregation bereft of guidance, accompaniment and leadership. Cumulatively, these factors, and multiple others, have delivered Ireland into a spiritual death-spiral that has yet to be formally identified, either by the society or any of its churches. The symptoms of this crisis can be traced in the drifts of Ireland’s cultural trajectory for many years, and the events of, in particular, the past decade, when Ireland as a nation and culture appeared to be galloping towards a cliff-edge of moral and existential self-destruction. Many of the relevant episodes and developments have been described and analysed on this platform over the past three years, and before that in several books of mine published since the mid-1990s, the most recent being the 2018 memoir, Give Us Back the Bad Roads.
It is clear that Ireland has now entered some kind of final stage of this unravelling, of which the consequences are unlikely to be confined to the wish-list of those who have been driving the culture wars. In other words, what will be lost will be not merely the Church, but the metaphysical perspective in its entirety. Like other nations, though in a rather more pronounced manner, Ireland has entered what feels terrifyingly like a death-spiral, not least in the context of its collapsing demographics and inability to tell victims from vanquishers, or differentiate between its responsibilities to its own people and its role in an international people-trafficking racket. That this collapse has long been disguised by spurious economic data and other propaganda will render its manifestation and effects all the worse when it finally hits.
This conversation, though unscripted, was loosely intended as an attempt to address these conditions in the context of Ireland’s long spiritual evolution, with a view to identifying some thread of continuity that might assist in reawaking the Irish soul before it comes too late to do so.
What follow are my initial thoughts written in advance of the event in Fermoy on May 27th, as published in my weekly Unchained diary.
Friday (May 26th)
As is customary in advance of such events, I am carrying around a bag of thoughts about this Saturday’s public conversation with Thomas Sheridan at the Tuatha Dé Danann festival in Fermoy. It is, of course, a Resistance event, beautifully choreographed by Gerry O’Neill (The West’s Awake, here on Substack), but for once I can banish any fears of an insurgency by left-wing actually existing fascists, since the venue is private and well secured. Democracy wins, for once — or so we hope. I shall give a full account of events here next week.
Our theme is (something like) the evolution of Ireland from paganism to Christianity, though that construction has an element of begging the question, if not actually beggaring it. It’s a broad enough canvas, and Thomas and I have already approached the territory in some of our private discussions, though by no means pushing towards anything resembling a plan. I think our instincts, though we approach from divergent positions, are very similar: We seek to find a true line through the pagan and Christian histories of this island that will take us to consideration of the meaning of the present moment and perhaps some suggestion of what the next phase might be like.
Thomas is a pagan and I am a Christian. We are friends. We seek, I believe, the same thing, which is not the triumph of one or other creed, but the restoration of Ireland’s transcendent imagination, without which Ireland — or any nation — cannot survive. Thomas is a great deal more knowledgable about the history of Irish spirituality than I am, and it remains to be seen whether my sense of things is accurate or sustainable, but I believe that, overall, the transition from paganism to Christianity was relatively seamless, that this augurs well for some form of ultimate reconciliation of the traditions, and that this ought to be our first point of departure. To put this another way: In terms of our spiritually imaginative collective journeying, we speak not of two histories, but one. The merging to be observed in the two strands far exceeds any sense of divergence, and this is reflected in innumerable contexts: our surviving sense of the significance of our ancient holy sites, our recently renewing consciousness of Celtic Christianity, our continuing reverence for the land and landscape of Ireland, and so forth. These factors tell us that there is a great deal more of paganism in our modern-day Catholic imagination than many Catholics might like to admit. I have no difficulty in admitting it, indeed celebrating it, although I confess I did not arrive at that point until I ran into Thomas Sheridan, about three years ago.
The core ‘belief’ that drives me here is that no society can endure unless it has a transcendent element to its collective imagination. That has been my obsession in writing about faith, spirituality and religion from the beginning, although for various reasons it has been all but impossible to communicate this in the cultural climate of recent decades. This, essentially, is the point of my books, Lapsed Agnostic (2007) and Beyond Consolation (2010), and also of a substantial segment of my 1997 book, An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Modern Ireland — in particular the chapter ‘On How God Has Been Kidnapped and Held to Ransom’.
In the first of his trilogy, Sacred Order/Social Order (2006-2008) — two volumes of which were published posthumously — the American Freudian, sociologist and cultural critic, Philip Rieff, posited that Western civilisation was in the third and likely final stage of a rise and fall that had occurred over the course of three millennia. At the heart of his thesis is the Freudian idea that only through sublimation of the sexual instinct had Western civilisation come about. In other words, controls and restrictions on sexual activity had, as it were, squeezed out of humanity the creativity and genius which begat Western civilisation. This, it will come as a surprise, was predominately a Christian innovation.
Many nowadays misunderstand Freud’s pronouncement that religion is ‘illusory’. This may have been, in a different sense, his private view, but his theoretical position was that religion is a form that creates the superstructure of a transcendent cultural understanding. This means that, in a sense, human beings, when present on Earth, are simply ‘moving through’ this dimension to another place, and hence direct a measure of their attention to what they intuit to be beyond the horizon. This, of course, is how most religions present matters also, though generally in a subtly different sense: Often, the purpose or effect is to persuade people to discount misfortune or grief in this life, in the expectation of an afterlife reward. But, in the Freudian and Rieffian senses, we speak not of foregoing joy on Earth, but of adopting a demeanour towards Earthly reality that maximises human functioning. In this way, mankind has been able to place itself within a transcendent order of being, which has enabled it to put to good use energy that might otherwise have been dissipated in licentiousness and depravity.
In his earlier works, such as Freud: The Mind of the Moralist and The Triumph of the Therapeutic, Rieff unwrapped his concept of the ‘psychological man’, a creature of late modern society, who essentially knew the existential cost of everything but the metaphysical value of nothing. Psychological man was the product of communities that had lost the positive values spawned by transcendent culture. Because the hope of salvation had been abandoned, therapy was all that remained.
In the first of his Sacred Order/Social Order trilogy, My Life Among the Deathworks, Rieff divides recent human history into three layers of religious evolution/devolution, which he identifies, somewhat confusingly, as ‘First World’, ‘Second World’ and ‘Third World’ cultures — resonating with the conventional contemporary understandings of these terms while conveying something much more enduring and fundamental. All societies, he claims, must espouse a sacred order, from which it derives authority to make laws and rules and give them the required force of moral injunctions seeking to outweigh other considerations. His ‘First World’ culture was essentially mythological: the Greek legends of gods and heroes, the ancient pagan world, the fables of the American ‘Indians’, the Irish stories of Cú Chulainn and the Tuatha Dé Danann. Such cultures were defined by a sense of Fate — which sees mankind at the mercy of forces greater than itself — and ordered by taboos.
In the ‘Second World’ culture, by Rieff’s hypothesis, this sense of Fate shifted to become a sense of Faith, with taboos replaced by commandments. This expands the transcendent imagination to embrace, as per the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, the idea of man being governed by a specific God, and in some sense accompanied in his existence by this deity, which is accordingly imbued with a personalised meaning. The most significant element of this phase was the incarnation of Christ, in which God entered the earthly realm in order to ‘save’ mankind, which might be redefined as clarifying the purpose of human existence and elaborating a new way of being in the world. Both the First and Second Worlds are centred on a transcendent sense of reality, and obviously these are the phases in Irish history that Thomas and I will be seeking to reconcile or elucidate on Saturday.
But we will also, regrettably, have to come to the Third World phase, defined by Rieff as a culture exhibiting a social order that rests on no preexisting sacred order, characterised by artefacts and expressions that are invariably transgressive, debunking or deconstructive. This is the culture of ‘deathworks’, and is where we have now fetched up.
For the first time in history, cultural elites insist upon the untried, revolutionary idea that human society can flourish without sacred authority. ‘A culture of civility that is separated from sacred order has not been tried before,’ Rieff claimed in My Life Among the Deathworks, the first of his Sacred Order trilogy, published in 2006, the year of his death. Such cultures dispense with any interest in sublimating the instinctual carnality and lasciviousness of mankind, placing sexuality at the top of the totem pole, inverting the value systems acquired in the First and Second World phases, so that lust and hedonism become the dominant ‘values’, and their restriction deemed an offence against freedom. This amounts to a full 180 degree moral inversion from either or both of the first two cultural phases.
The pursuit of happiness through pleasure becomes the central obsession of a ‘Third World’ society. The accordant suppression of the sublimating tendency triggers the demolition of the transcendent order upon which the society will have been constructed in the first place, which hastens the termination of the metaphysical imagination of the society, and thereafter that of its citizens. What inevitably follows, according to Rieff, is a proliferation of sexual identities, the promulgation of pornograpjy and artistic deathworks, and attacks on the fundamental understandings of human nature. In this culture, what once was vice is now virtue, and what was virtue is scorned and laughed at. Pornography becomes the new ‘doctrine of value’, which is why it is to be pushed via the education system upon young children. In due course, such a society will inevitably overturn all of the taboos and limitations on sexual behaviour that once enabled the civilisation to come into being. These include squeamishness about paedophilia, bestiality and incest, as well as multiple categories of sexual ‘choices’, which facilitate their pioneer practitioners to become elevated into a form of hedonistic sainthood. Hence, for example, Panti Bliss, the iconoclast drag-queen grot-peddler as hero. Rieff calls this ‘anti-culture’, in which the objective is not to transmit constructive beliefs from generation to generation but to convey beliefs that cannot but destroy everything they touch. It becomes impossible, in such a society, to judge human behaviour by its transgressive aspects, because all prohibition is prohibited and — in Freudspeak, ‘all repression must be repressed’. In this culture, the only truth is that there is no truth; virtue is supplanted by vulgarity, and delicacy by degeneracy. A Third World culture has no memory, and repudiates all authority, and is ruled by fiction and theatrical role-playing.
It is not accidental that Rieff — who, incidentally, blames Freudian therapeutics for the unleashing of Third World culture — ended up labelling European and American culture as such. A deathwork he defines as a work of art that presents as ‘an all-out assault upon something vital to the established culture’, and a ‘culture of deathworks’ signifies the self-murder of a civilisation though filth and nihilism. What we now face, therefore, is not some random ‘culture war’ about particulars, but a radical divergence at the most fundamental level — a stifling of belief in the transcendent and its supplanting by a purely earthbound imagination, but which civilisation is rendered impossible to maintain.
His denunciation of ‘deathworks’ is not aesthetic, but a moral condemnation of the denigration of the sacred in art. He declared Joyce’s novel Finnegans Wake as ‘the greatest third world literary creation’ on account of its demonstration of a method by which a cultural inheritance might be pulled apart and its pieces rearranged to produce a playful new culture that finds its forte in a mockery of, and freedom from, the old one. In this sense, the book is ‘liberatory’, because it shows a way to escape from the prescriptions and proscriptions of the sacred.
It can no longer be controversial to suggest that the defining characteristic of the present age might be diagnosed as the desire to subvert and destroy the institutions, traditions and beliefs that converged to become what is called Western civilisation — previously ‘Christendom’. This iconoclasm is carried out in the name of freedom — sexual freedom, for the most part — but is propelled by a fatal misunderstanding of the nature of reality and of the human structure.
Man is not built for the world — not entirely, at least. He cannot find satisfaction here, except in fits and starts, tantalising and brief. He is restless and searching, but cannot ever seem to find what he’s looking for. The optimal demeanour before this reality is, therefore, that of the existential nomad — always moving, not purely in the physical sense, but by adopting a mode of metaphysical impermanence, shifting constantly lest his searching lead to ennui.
In this sense, the cultural and societal inheritance of Christianity can be rinsed down to the idea that human happiness is better achieved by the sublimation of obvious desiring in the visualisation of a transcendent order of being. Man must live in the infinite, even while he is marooned in the three-dimensional. A functional culture in this sense requires a foundational mythology that enables it to transcend the state of continuous present time. This mythology relates to the past and to the putatively eternal future, and functions to render the present subservient to things higher and greater than itself. The nature of the rupture that has opened up in modern society has to do with the repudiation of this idea in favour of something that amounts to a culture rooted in itself and its own apprehended origins.
The Third World culture comes about when the means by which the civilisation was structured to begin with is forgotten, or overlooked, in a desire to destroy authority and tradition in the neurotic pursuit of the pleasures that have seemed to be gratuitously forbidden.
It is true that the resulting pseudo-culture can achieve the semblance of functionalism by mimicking the idea of a transcendent culture, since it maintains the outward appearance of a quasi-eternal perspective on reality. But this is actually an illusion, and all of the available artefacts (‘anti-art’) will reveal themselves as tautologies. A novel, for example, will not take its reader on a journey into the infinite, but will simply replicate the wider culture’s certitude that it amounts to all that is, and all that is necessary. Its aim is to achieve in the reader an accommodation with the proffered definitions, not to open up unlimited possibilities. It is possible to prolong the life of this pseudo-culture by the practice of parasitism upon that which it denies: an atheist poet, for example, may have derived inspiration from another whose work is rooted in the eternal, though he puts it to use to parody such understandings. A painting may mock the rejected inheritance, and yet derive its only life from what it derides.
Such a pseudo-culture is incapable of formulating any idea of the beautiful, the good or the true, because it renders man and his desire for immediate freedoms as the measure of all things. This culture remains oblivious that the untrammelled pursuit of the literal desiring of each and every human will in a short time lead to chaos, followed by outright destruction of everything. Very often, this phenomenon is ascribed to the waning of what is called ‘morality’ — to the applause of ‘progressives’ and the dismay of ‘conservatives’ — but this is a superficial reading. Really what is at play is the loss of the capacity to read reality as something to be ‘moved through’ on the way to another, imagined, place. The purpose is not, as Freud intimated, self-delusion, but the adoption of the optimal demeanour in a reality that does not meet the total scope of man’s desiring — indeed, while promising to satisfy the deepest cravings, leaves man bereft and humiliated in the wake of each lunging after the presumed object of his longing.
Anyway, to Fermoy! The foregoing touches on just a few of the thoughts I have been thinking as I cut the grass and tended to the security of the cabbage patch. In the evenings, I dipped into some of the late John O’Donoghue’s fabulous books — Anam Cara, Divine Beauty, Eternal Echoes, Bendictus — which offer such a rich repository of memory of those early years of what he called ‘Celtic Christianity,’ when our First World morphed into our Second. Now, reeling through the Third, it may be time to reconsider whether we wish to remain subject to the squalls and scudding of Fate, or whether we might wish to revisit some of the elements of our past culture(s) which gave us the riches we are now in the process of destroying.
Saturday (May 27th)
I had a friend one time whose wife was a bit contrary, so whenever she was rude or abrupt with someone, he would take them aside and explain: ‘She wasn’t born on a sunny day.’
But I was born on a sunny day, and every one of my 67 birthdays has fallen on such a day, and that’s my story and I’m sticking to it. Every birthday from my childhood comes back to me in a flood of sunlight and me walking to school, slightly less reluctantly than other days, past the May altars and across the bridge above the drying-up riverbed, with my jumper tied around my waist. I remember only one darkish day, and this purely metaphorically, when I passed an old man sitting breathlessly on a doorstep, out of the sunlight. He lived in a ramshackle cottage with a thatched roof beside the railway bridge on the Trien road, and when I came home at lunchtime my mother told me he had died. His name was Jack Tighe. That was at least 55 years ago, and I have never forgotten the shock of being so close to a dying man.
Today is a sunny day in Tipp. It is not my birthday but the day before my birthday. Out of the blue, it is the most perfect day of the year so far. Jesus is smiling on the Resistance, for he has moved the weather of my birthday one day forward to ensure that the Tuatha Dé Danann festival in Fermoy goes off well.
So, I have awoken in a B&B in the valley of Poulaculleare (Poll An Chóiléir — ‘the hole of the collar’, I think), in the heart of south Tipperary, some 20 miles from Fermoy, and am sitting outside waiting for my lift. The Tuatha Dé Danann Festival is the brainchild of the powerhouse that is Gerry O’Neill (the West’s Awake — and how!) and today is its debut, the first of what we hope will be many more such events, though we barely dare to think so for fear of hexing things.
As relayed last week, I am booked to speak at the festival this afternoon, along with Thomas Sheridan, about the state of the soul of Ireland at this moment in its long spiritual journey from paganism, via Celtic Christianity, to whatever we’re going through now. Our title is ‘The Awakening Soul of Ireland’, which is appropriately hopeful, though possibly a bit premature.
As I outlined last week, I see this spiritual trajectory as a climb towards and then a falling away from transcendence, exactly in the fashion described by the American sociologist, Philip Rieff, in his 2006 book, My Life Among the Deathworks. It’s a risky enough theme to be discussing in front of a mixed audience, because, as I have discovered over the years, when it comes to ‘religious’ topics, people tend to hear — or not hear — only their own prejudices, so in some respects you are wasting your time trying to break new ground.
Whether Thomas and I were successful in this endeavour, I shall leave in the hands of you, the reader. I believe we opened some interesting new boxes, and certainly the response afterwards was encouraging. But people should not approach the video with prior assumptions and expectations, for what we are doing is not evangelising or engaging in personal testimonies, but seeking to explore how the decrepit transcendent imagination of the nation might be restored to good order.
This is for me the core meaning of that much-used term, ‘the spiritual war’. Had our transcendent imagination remained strong, we should not have ended up as baaing sheep, taking orders from smirking simpletons and behaving in a manner as to cause the lights of our civilisation to go out, one by one, with no let-up or remission for three years and counting. It is confusion as to our meaning and purpose that ultimately causes this degree of demoralisation. And, yes, the churches — worst of all the Catholic Church — played a massive part in this, selling the pass on freedom, without which there is no possibility of retaining truth and justice at the heart of public affairs.
It is necessary to tread carefully through these topics, but hopefully not too carefully. Mostly, religious-minded people attend talks ‘about religion’ to be affirmed in their own certitudes, just as people who have persuaded themselves that it is all nonsense gravitate to such discussions to disrupt them with ridicule and nonsense. I’m not interested in catering for either party. Both a dog-in-the-manger approach to faith by the faithful, and the dumbass neo-atheism of the past couple of decades have contributed to bringing us to this darkest of places. Everyone needs to remember that fixing what is broken will involve talking in a language that as many as possible can relate to. There is no point preaching to choirs, and anyone coming to such discussions to hear what they already know and believe is wasting at least his own time.
The same goes for those who dismiss religion out of hand, even those who say they can ‘find their own way to God’. Maybe they can, but what about if there had never been any conduit for religious ideas in their culture, which is what’s going to obtain from now on? It’s a little like the residents of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown, who have recently been congratulating themselves on their ‘performance’ in Census 2022 on account of the fact that they had the highest showing for ‘no religion’ in the country, at 24 per cent. Probably the most schooled and the least intelligent region of the country (I live there, so I can say this with some conviction), DL/R fails to comprehend that its irreligious disposition, being for now a luxury of a community with residual faith traces, will one day flip and hit its population for six, when critical mass is reached and the smug secularists cotton on that they have delivered their descendants into a hellhole of pitilessness and unhope.
And I have as little patience with those who dismiss all these vital questions with an ‘Oh it’s all just a means of control!’ as I do with Holy Joes who tell me there is a fixed protocol by which I must pursue my spiritual life. A chap was trying to do this to me yesterday as myself and Thomas and Louise Roseingrave were sitting outside trying to get our thoughts together (I mean collectively) for our event. He purported to be ‘having a conversation’, but he was just showering me with questions from behind his veil of cigarette smoke: ‘Why do you say that?’; ‘What do you mean by that?’; ‘Yes, but how do you actually know that?’; et cetera, like a teacher trying to draw the correct answer from a child. In the end I got tired of this socratic dialogue and told him to take a running one. It’s hard to blame him. This is what has passed for conversation in modern media: some dumbass trying to stop you talking by peppering you with smart-sounding questions that actually amount to prohibitions because they stop you saying what you want to say. Essentially, it’s a form of silencing, which is generally what you get if you’re stupid enough to go on with one of the elite mediocrities posturing as moderators of our national conversation.
But just repeating the same mantras about religion being no more than a control grid amounts to the same thing, blocking off any meaningful conversation.
We have heard nothing for about 40 years except the excesses and downsides of religion. We hear rather less about what we have lost by ceasing to speak about the good it has wrought in the world, which is far from trivial. It’s time to move beyond cliches, of either polarity. Unless we’ve been exiled on Mars, we know all about the bad stuff, but can we occasionally discuss the possibility that there are positive reasons why societies might cherish religious ideas?
I noticed a few people walked out quite early on from today’s event featuring Thomas and me. That’ll be the Holy Josephines, I figured, ‘offended’ because I’m making jokes about Jesus coming in a taxi from Cork airport, but unlikely to arrive. (He never arrived, as I predicted.) I don’t do this gratuitously. I do it to send signals to the wanderer that there might be something here worth listening to, that what’s afoot is not an in-house prayer meeting. The suggestion that God might have a sense of humour is never a bad place to begin.
Our problem — our terminal problem — is that we have lost the capacity to walk upright in infinity. This will not be mended by pious ejaculations, any more than by neo-atheist bullshit. It will only become capable of treatment when people can be persuaded to listen to and participate in honest conversations about the meaning of life: Why are we here? Is there even a reason? What can we know about any of this? Those who dismiss those questions because, like Alastair Campbell, they ‘don’t do religion’ are shooting their own children in the feet and hands. Everyone has a right to hear how this stuff might be useful to them. The idea that each of us can arrive at our own spiritual understandings is delusional, because none of us would have the first notion of any of this had we not received a grounding — however imperfect — in a specific religious worldview. Our sole ‘religion’, in that case, would be something like communism, which is what our grandchildren will get unless we can turn things around.
When I speak of these matters, in the general or Christian contexts, I sometimes speak of ‘mythology’, which also drives the Holy Joes mad because they do not understand what mythology is and imagine that what I’m saying is that Christianity is ‘made up’. For the purposes of these discussions, I say that it may or may not be, but that either way the issue is beside the point, which is that these questions belong to an entirely different part of the human imagination, in which things can be true and allegorical at the same time. I have in mind ‘myth’, in the Greek sense of public dreams and stories that are truer than history, larger than facts and more real than what’s on the news.
Several times in the course of my contributions today, I stressed that I was not here to talk about my personal beliefs, but of the possibility of restoring a sense of the transcendent to our public conversations. I have often found that people seem not to see this distinction, imagining that you are preaching or evangelising when in fact you are trying to speak of what is, in this context, fundamentally a cultural question, carrying different implications for the collective than for the personal realm.
In his 1971 volume, Myths to Live By, a collection of lectures delivered at the Cooper Union Forum in New York, between 1958 and 1971, the great mythological scholar, Joseph Campbell, set out the superstructure of mythology in human culture and history. He noted that, from their earliest established existence, hundreds of years before Christ, human myths were concerned primarily with two central themes: the adaption to and enablement of the flourishing of the social groups that give life and protection to the individual, and transcendence of the mortal condition. In a sense, these two themes become one, because both aim for the creation of understandings that allow a human life to extend beyond its mortal boundaries. Campbell described the same mythological patterns in multiple primitive societies — the same themes, symbols, meanings and essential stories. The story of the Garden of Eden, for example, is to be found in the origins of Buddhism in Japan, some 1,000 years before the Book of Genesis was written.
All civilisations tend to take their own mythologies literally, and these beliefs, usually transmitted by religion, have been the very buttresses of multiple civilisations, supporting moral order, cohesion, vitality and imagination. Myth enables us to exceed our own expectations of ourselves by drawing on the deeper capacities which the banality of the everyday contrives to suppress. Successful civilisations, therefore, tend to be the ones that take their own mythologies seriously but not wholly literally. The more a society moves towards rationalism, the more it risks disequilibrium by virtue of no longer holding fast to its founding and sustaining mythologies. Human life, as Nietzsche told us, depends for its propulsion on illusions. The loss of belief in the founding myths provokes uncertainty and the collapse of values and moral order, leading eventually to decay and degeneracy. This is where we have now fetched up.
Campbell elaborates: ‘With our old mythologically founded taboos unsettled by our modern sciences, there is everywhere in the civilised world a rapidly rising incidence of vice and crime, mental disorders, suicides and dope addictions, shattered homes, impudent children, violence, murder, and despair.’
Mythology, as Campbell insisted, is not for the entertainment of children, but nor is it for scholars only. It is a matter of the utmost importance to human society — ‘For its symbols (whether in the tangible form of images or in the abstract form of ideas) touch and release the deepest centers of motivation, moving literate and illiterate alike, moving mobs, moving civilizations.’
And again: ‘The rise and fall of civilizations in the long, broad course of history can be seen to have been largely a function of the integrity and cogency of their supporting canons of myth; for not authority but aspiration is the motivator, builder, and transformer of civilization.’ We take for granted that this is true of the Ancient Greek and Roman empires, but we rarely think of our own civilisation in the same way. We, after all, are ‘modern,’ which somehow puts us into a different category.
And this provokes a question: Is it possible for a society to modernise and remain credulous as to its founding myths? Is there a way by which myths can be retained as something akin to beliefs, even while their literalness is being debunked?
Joseph Campbell held that the decline of belief in myth arises from over-literal belief in religious ideas. Mythology he defined as ‘other people’s religion’: the ‘penultimate truth — penultimate because the ultimate cannot be put into words.’ Religion, he believed, can give rise to popular misunderstandings of the nature of mythology. Half the world, he said, thinks that what he called ‘the metaphors of religious traditions’ are facts, and the other half insists that they are lies.
This is exactly the problem. Over the past couple of decades, the world has seemed to come under sustained attack from the neo-atheists — Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens to the fore — in what had all the signs of a psy-op, i.e., a cultural insurgency designed to weaken the foundations of our religious underpinnings. In some respects, Philip Rieff’s analysis of the three stages of the spiritual growth and decay of societies gives us a clearer viewfinder in which to observe the problem, which is actually as Campbell has stated it. Rieff’s concept of ‘Second World’ modes of belief, for all kinds of arcane and elusive reasons, seems less well adapted to the retention of metaphysical values in culture than the First World kind, which enables a less literal form of attachment to the guiding stories of the belief-system. Abrahamic religion demands a substantialist engagement with the figures and stories of the canon, to which we are enjoined to apply the same forms of reason as to everyday matters. This has proved fatal to the plausibility of, for example, the Christian narrative, which seems to occupy a rather unique situation in being increasingly difficult to sustain at the mythological level once literal belief begins to wane.
Another factor is that ancient mythological understandings tended to be mixed up with tribal sentiment, which meant that their heroic qualities superseded consideration of literal meaning. Because our Western understanding of mythology is so limited and so literal, and because our cultures no longer remind us of such elemental circumstances, we think of our ‘myths’ — those things that ancient human cultures assumed to be truer than the truth — as dispensable in the manner of gramophones or telegraphs. This may be our fatal mistake.
For these and other reasons, ‘modern’ society became — in its own mind — too ‘clever’ for the God it had been reared to see as its Maker. Really, the problem was not one of an excess of intelligence, but an inability to comprehend things simultaneously in different frames, which may be a symptom of a deficit of intelligence.
It is a strange quirk of what we think of as ‘modern’ society that it sees its own crude literalism as evidence of increased enlightenment. But, as Campbell advised, ‘Gods suppressed become devils.’ In other words, we deal here with a stark polarisation of options: once pursuit of ‘The Good’ is set aside as a driving mechanism, it is soon supplanted by its antithesis: the pursuit of depravity and evildoing.
In Hero With A Thousand Faces, Campbell wrote: ‘The psychological dangers through which earlier generations were guided by the symbols and spiritual exercises of their mythological and religious inheritance, we today (in so far as we are unbelievers, or, if believers, in so far as our inherited beliefs fail to represent the real problems of contemporary life) must face alone, or, at best with only tentative, impromptu, and not often very effective guidance. This is our problem as modern, “enlightened” individuals, for whom all gods and devils have been rationalized out of existence.’
But it’s worse than that: the devils have been able to present themselves as heroes. As Campbell emphasised, the effect of a living mythological symbol is to waken and give guidance to the energies of life. It ‘turns us on’ and allows — motivates — us to function in a mode of animated engagement with reality. It appropriates the dormant energies of body and mind, and harnesses them to particular ends. This has served our cultures well for the two thousand years of the Christian era, itself built on the strong foundations of the paganism that came before. But, as Campbell also tells us, when these stories no longer seem true, the symbols no longer work their magic, and man, individual by individual, ‘cracks away’ from the group, becoming dissociated, disoriented and alienated. This is what we are confronted with in what we call ‘post-Christian society’. The ‘affect symbols’ which once summoned each individual member of the belief system to the same purpose now ring hollow, and have not been replaced by anything capable of summoning up the same degree of affective engagement with reality.
My objective in as far as this model of the discussion is concerned is not to restore the claims of this or that religion, or even of religion in general, but simply to remind myself and others that the human mechanism is anything but simple, and we should ponder carefully before abandoning or jettisoning things that have proved useful. Progress can take us backwards, not because it is ‘bad’, but because history does not see things in black and white, good and bad. History, like nature, is red in tooth and claw. It was never a given that the imagined nature of progress emanating from the human mind was going to be maximally suited to the biological, animal nature of man himself. In many ways, the fruits of his own genius impact on him more like the actions of a colonising, occupying power. He thinks he has to follow every conceivable thread of progress and invention, unable to consider whether or not it is good for him, or even if it might destroy him. And, all the while, his moral genius lags behind his capacity for technical invention.
Three years ago, it began to dawn on some of us that the Covid mission was an attempt to restore the terrors, and their supposed remedies, that religions emerged as an answer to — terror of death, first and foremost. Under the control of the godless, the culture now moves to take advantage of the destruction of religion, preying upon the hapless post-Christian refugees from what they imagine to be unreason. Covid is an anti-religion in this precise sense: it seeks to restore man to his primal state, before the thought of God ever crossed his countenance.
There was one significant disruption to our onstage conversation today, by a heckler or interloper who made an attempt to throw the discussion near the end, though I am told by the videographers that this will not feature in the recording, as the voice of the interloper cannot be heard on the tape, and in any event it caused the discussion to break away briefly into a series of tangents. I confess I could not hear him so clearly either, but I gathered that his point was that we were not being ‘positive’ enough. I utterly hate that kind of nonsense — as if we have a responsibility to be ‘positive’ no matter how dark it gets. As it happens — and as I pointed out to the heckler — I had just a couple of minutes earlier said that I believed we were winning the war, to which he rejoined along the lines of ‘What war? There’s no war.’ I believe it was at this point that Thomas asked him if he was a civil servant — an excellent question, which caused the interloper to stutter and stall, before resuming his incoherent interruption. In due course he was persuaded to sling his hook, and off he went with a smug smirk on his chops. My sense is that he was a Guardstapo agent, possibly the one who had spent the week trying to find ways of making things awkward for Gerry O’Neill and his team by ringing up asking about traffic management plans, planning regulations, and so forth. No doubt, like every other agent provocateur we encounter in our country these days, he was in the pay of ‘the PR agency from Hell’, which has been managing the innumerable psy-ops perpetrated against Irish society for the past dozen years. In any event, he achieved almost nothing, and the whole shemozzle lasted about a minute and a half.
The event was held in the grounds of a fabulous old house not far from Fermoy town centre. It is a heavenly place, the property of a local family, well-disposed towards the Resistance. Looking around the site this evening, with its campsite on the hill facing the front door, the marquee in the back garden, and the various food and craft stalls dotted around, it struck me that it was a small-scale version of the Lisdoonvarna music festival of the early 1980s — the same spirit, or something like it, the same categories of people (life-embracing, joyous, freedom-loving), the same implicit sense of Ireland as a unique culture in the world, something worth loving and preserving. Leaving this evening, I had a positive feeling that this is something that will expand because we are — dread cliche! — ‘on the right side of history’, and because Ireland longs to live, and those seeking to destroy her know only death, and so have nothing to propose to her now or in the future. It will, I felt certain as we drove away, become possible to heal and restore our broken culture, and in doing so reclaim our country from the jaws of extinction.
Original video available at YouTube. [Mirrored at Odysee below.]
Produced by The Way Forward, Alfa Vedic & The Sovereign’s Way
Directed by Kelly Brogan, Amandha Vollmer, Alec Zeck, Mike Winner, Dawn Lester
Starring David Icke, Tom Cowan, Mark & Samantha Bailey, Dawn Lester, Sally Fallon Morell, Andrew Kaufman, Kevin Corbett, Christiane Northrup, Lee Merritt, Barre Lando, Mike Wallach, Christine Massey, Alec Zeck, Mike Donio, Roman Bystrianyk, Leslie Manookian, Mike Stone, Stefano Scoglio, Ana Maria Mihalcea, Steve Falconer, David Nixon, Etienne de la Boetie2, Marvin Haberland, John Jay Singleton and many more. [Click here and scroll down to see full line up.]
The End of COVID is the end of pandemics. It’s the end of scientific dogma, social distancing, vested interests, public health authorities, and billion-dollar pharmaceutical companies.
On June 20th, the entire production is coming to a close – once and for all.
~~~
The End of COVID is a collaborative effort – a collection of perspectives and expertise from a wide variety of sources. This includes doctors who have a long list of credentials, and holistic health practitioners with no abbreviations next to their names. It includes self-published authors, and New York Times best-sellers – prominent media personalities, and relatively unknown independent journalists.
The common thread is that this project was put together by men and women seeking the truth.
It wasn’t funded by pharmaceutical interests, informed by scientific dogma, or backed by the corporate press. It was made with intention – by mankind, for mankind.
So that we never have to see this show again.
We never have to mask up or be spaced apart. We never have to fear germs or fall for medical propaganda. Because, now, we know better.
We know the real history of virology and vaccines. We know the institutions and influences behind “the science.” And we know how we can step into our power and stand up to the nonsense.
This means the show is over. The trick has been revealed. Never again can we be fooled, persuaded, or coerced.
Instead, we can all turn off the broadcast. And move on – toward a life of health, happiness, and sovereignty.
Regular leaders here probably all saw that explosion of the munitions storage dump in the western Ukraine last week, and the firey roiling mushroom clouds that accompanied them. There has been the usual chatter on the internet and various sites that the explosions may have been of a storage facility where some of the munitions were depleted uranium, and that hence, the explosions may have been “nuclear” in some form or fashion. I have to be honest: I have seen two starkly different recordings of the same explosions, and to my eyes, they show two very different events. In the version that most people have seen, the explosions occur in a massive fireball, and very tellingly, as the fireball rises to form a mushroom cloud, there is continued fire and burning of material in the cloud, a typical signature of a nuclear detonation. Continued combustion in the cloud as it rises is a typical signature of a nuclear explosion, and the burn continues until the material is burned out. The other video – much rarer – shows the initial explosion, but little to no burn immediately thereafter in the mushroom cloud. We were then treated to a variety of experts on various YouTube channels talking about the question that the depleted uranium allegedly in storage at the facility had some sort of burn, and we were assured by these experts that there was no such possibility.
I’m not so sure. Under normal conditions of use, the kinetic impact of a depleted uranium round is so fast and therefore energetic, that the uranium literally burns inside the target, killing the people within. After all, the mechanism of the Little Boy uranium bomb was precisely a 5″ naval rifle – a cannon once again – that fired a projectile of uranium-235 into a target, which itself consisting of more uranium-235. It was the sheer speed and kinetic energy of the impact that initiated the reaction. So for those who know their ordnance, a depleted uranium round is like a hollow charge HEAT round, on steroids. Think of your standard HEAT round as the old actor Wally Cox, and a depleted uranium round as Arnold Schwarzenneggar, and you get the idea. Why depleted uranium? because it is an extremely dense material in its metallic form(much more so than gold or lead) an therefore much heavier per unit of volume than gold or lead. As for a burn under explosive conditions, it is to be remembered that smashing two bits of highly enriched uranium-235 together in one’s hands can literally cause a kind of sub-critical nuclear “fizzle”, and indeed, such an incident actually happened by accident during the wartime American Manhattan Project. So I am not entirely convinced by the experts on YouTube calmly assuring us that we are not watching any sort of nuclear combustion in the vast majority of the videos of the incident. Indeed, perhaps a fuel air explosive would have enough brisance to create the kinetic conditions for rounds of depleted uranium to respond with a burn.
But my chief explosive concern here today is this story shared by E.G. and many other regular readers out there, about 30 tons of ammonia nitrate that appears to have gone missing from a freight train on its way from Wyoming to Looneyfornia:
Now this story just has “TROUBLE” written all over it, and if you’re like me – and you probably are otherwise you probably wouldn’t be reading this website – you’re going to find the “narrative” here a bit disturbing:
A 30-ton shipment of ammonium nitrate, a chemical used as both fertilizer and as a component in explosives, has gone missing during a rail shipment between Wyoming and California last month, resulting in four separate investigations.
A railcar loaded with some 60,000 pounds of the chemical left Cheyenne, Wyoming on April 12, only to be found empty two weeks later at a rail stop in the Mojave Desert, according to a short incident report from the firm which shipped the ammonium, KQED reports.
And of course, there’s the usual-and-to-be-expected reference to ammonia nitrate and the Oklahoma City Bombing:
Ammonium nitrate is commonly used as fertilizer. It’s also an ingredient in high explosives and was used in the homemade bomb detonated in the 1995 attack on the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. (All emphases in the original)
However, the dirty little secret of the dirty and not-so-little ammonia nitrate bomb used in the Oklahoma City Bombing is that the brisance of ammonia nitrate is very low as explosives go, and thus, the mere 4,500 pounds of fertilizer was insufficient in brisance to bring down the B-3 column in the Murrah building by stress loading on that column. It was a retired U.S. Air Force brigadier general, Benton K. Partin, whose specialty was explosive ordnance and damage assessment, who crunched the numbers and came to that conclusion. And that discomforting physics fact means that there had to have been demolition charges on that column (and probably on the others that failed), in order to account for the failure of the columns. The ammonia nitrate bomb simply didn’t have the “oomph” to do it. But it does have enough “oomph” to do some damage, particularly to non-reinforced structures (which the Murrah building was not).
Now comes what to me appears to be the narrative part, because I’m just not buying the explanation given in the article for the disappearance of the ammonia nitrate:
According to Dyno Nobel, the Ammonium – transferred in pellet form in a covered hopper car similar to those used to ship coal – must have fallen from the car on the way to a rail siding (where a short track connects with the main track) around 30 miles from the town of Mojave in eastern Kern County, in a city called Saltdale.
“The railcar was sealed when it left the Cheyenne facility, and the seals were still intact when it arrived in Saltdale. The initial assessment is that a leak through the bottom gate on the railcar may have developed in transit,” said the company, adding that the two-week trip included multiple stops. They report having had “limited control” over the railcar operated by Union Pacific.
The railcar is being transported back to Wyoming for inspection.
Meanwhile, a representative for the Federal Railroad Administration says the investigation points to an improperly closed hopper car gate.
Now, wait just a minute… if the car was sealed in Cheyenne, if it had a leak, wouldn’t the leak have been visible even in the yard in Cheyenne? And if the leak was sprung later while the train was en route, which, incidentally, “included multiple stops” on its two week journey, were no inspections done along the way? Wouldn’t the Union Pacific officials have noticed a leak from the hopper car while it was sided in their yards? Union Pacific is a rather efficient railroad and they are, after all, the railroad that has been restoring steam locomotives to functionality and even using them on freight hauls. This expertise and expense does not, to me, signal the kind of lackadaisical attitude necessary for a hopper car full of ammonia nitrate to spring a leak, and then go unnoticed for two weeks. Sorry, as of this moment and without further information, I’m not buying the narrative. Colour me Highly Skeptical.
And the same goes for the “improperly closed hopper gate.” Presumably the hopper gate was improperly closed in Cheyenne, for the stops along the way would have no reason to open it. And again, we face the same problem here as well, because we’re being asked to believe that the yardmasters and crews along the Union Pacific route taken by the hopper car over two weeks would never have noticed a leak and an improperly closed hopper gate. Even in modern dumbed-down thoroughly quackcinated Amairikuh, I find it difficult to believe that NO one noticed nor raised an alarm or alert.
So we end with an empty hopper car in a hamlet in Looneyfornia and a missing 30 tons of ammonia nitrate.
I do not know about you, but my high octane antennae are pulsing with suspicion. I just cannot get it out of my mind that somewhere out there there’s another “op” being planned with another McVeigh and another rented truck. Oklahoma City’s ammonia nitrate bomb was only about two tons. Thirty tons of the stuff would be very bad, and if the two tons of the Oklahoma City bomb was a cover for some serious demolition charges, one has to wonder if, indeed the thirty tons was stolen by nefarious actors, and a if cover-narrative is being concocted ahead of whatever planned event they have in their evil diabolical heads, then what sort of real explosion might thirty tons of the stuff be a cover for?
… Unfortunately, none of my answers to that question are very good…
It is frankly absurd on its face that any written document or political ritual like voting can grant one group of men the ability to rule and control another group of men, delegate rights they don’t have personally to a “government,” or that succeeding generations can be bound by a contract that none of them or even their forbears signed.
For those who remain religiously attached to the “holy document” of the Constitution or believe themselves bound by an oath they were tricked (fraudulent inducement), forced, or paid to take, then here are some facts that support our thesis that organized crime interests have been using “Government” and control of the media to rob and control the population since the very creation of the Constitution.
The creation and ratification of the Constitution are not what most government school children have been led to believe. It wasn’t designed to protect life, liberty, and property and limit government as claimed, and its failure in those aspects or even its inability to ensure the most basic of freedoms specified in the Bill of Rights is evidence of its failure as protection from tyranny and its success as a means of enslaving, controlling and robbing the population.
The real story of the Constitution is a “Wall Street (of the time)” conspiracy, and that is the exact term that many of their contemporaries used to describe what had occurred to create a system that would allow moneyed interests represented by political puppets to tax everyone on the continent for their benefit and control commerce and the currency which they started doing immediately after ratification. The conspirators were led by slave-owning Freemasons James Madison and John Jay and suspected Freemason and slave owner Alexander Hamilton.
They hijacked a convention convened only to revise the existing Articles of Confederation between the States and, after almost half the delegates refused to participate, wouldn’t sign and/or left early, produced an unauthorized replacement giving unprecedented control to a Federal government that would be controlled by the exact participants in the years to come. In short order, they used this new government to begin taxing the population to pay off “Wall Street” speculators who had bought up Revolutionary War bonds from veterans and businesses that had accepted them during the war for pennies on the dollar.
Absent a 12,000-hour indoctrination program run by the government and the ongoing propaganda of bought-and-paid-for media, it is absurd to believe that a couple of dozen slave owners on a continent of three million people can write down on a fancy piece of paper that they run everything, then have their newspapers proclaim it valid but that seems to be exactly what happened.
“That investigation into the nature and construction of the new constitution, which the conspirators have so long and zealously struggled against, has, notwithstanding their partial success, so far taken place as to ascertain the enormity of their criminality. That system which was pompously displayed as the perfection of government, proves upon examination to be the most odious system of tyranny that was ever projected, a many-headed hydra of despotism, whose complicated and various evils would be infinitely more oppressive and afflictive than the scourge of any single tyrant: the objects of dominion would be tortured to gratify the calls of ambition and cravings of power, of rival despots contending for the sceptre of superiority; the devoted people would experience a distraction of misery.”
The History and Facts the “Government” School Leaves Out
The delegates assembled in Philadelphia in May 1787 for the purpose of amending, not replacing, the Articles of Confederation were very different from the revolutionaries that signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776. The famous revolutionaries were not present: Jefferson and Adams were in Europe, Thomas Paine, Sam Adams, and Chris Gadsden were not chosen, and Patrick Henry refused to participate outright, claiming he “smelt a rat.”
Out of the 74 delegates chosen, 19 refused or didn’t attend! Out of the 55 delegates who showed up, 41 were politicians, 34 were lawyers, 11 were admitted freemasons (with two additional that would join lodges after the convention) with over a dozen more suspected. According to Maryland Delegate James McHenry, at least 21 of the 55 delegates favored some form of monarchy.
The convention operated under great secrecy: Held in the summer months with all the windows nailed shut, sentries posted at the door, and all the participants sworn to secrecy. The proceedings wouldn’t be published for 32 years later. Madison’s edited notes 53 years later. It’s unlikely that the States would have sent delegates at all if they had known of the conspirators’ plans to abolish the articles and replace them with a Federal government, and many delegates openly protested.
William Patterson echoed many: “We ought to keep within its limits or be charged by our constituents with usurpation… We have no power to go beyond the confederation… If the confederacy is wrong, then let us return to our States and obtain larger powers, not assume them ourselves.”
Of the 74 delegates appointed, 19 refused outright or didn’t attend, 14 left early, and some in open disgust. Of the 41 who stayed through September, three refused to sign, leaving 38 out of 74 (53%, hardly a plurality), and they signed not as delegates but “In Witness Whereof.” Of the 38 who “gave themselves the power to make up rules for everyone and take the wealth of others,” 80% would personally enrich themselves by holding some office under the Constitution, including 2 Presidents, 1 Vice President, 5 Justices, 11 Senators, and 8 Representatives.
Control of the Perception
Evident then as evident today. Like organized crime’s control of the media today, the “Wall Street” crowd controlled information/perception during the ratification debates. According to Van Doren’s The Great Rehearsal (p183), Anti-Federalist speeches were never printed because the convention’s transcriber, Thomas Lloyd, “appears to have been bought off by the Federalists, and published only…speeches by Federalists Wilson and McKean”. Serious allegations were made in New York and elsewhere of Federalist mail tampering. The Pennsylvania Herald, the only paper reporting on the ratification debates, was bought off as described:
“The authors and abettors of the new constitution shudder at the term conspirators being applied to them, as it designates their true character… Attempts to prevent discussion by shackling the press ought ever to be a signal of alarm to freemen and considered as an annunciation of meditated tyranny… when every means failed to shackle the press, the free and independent papers were attempted to be demolished by withdrawing all the subscriptions to them within the sphere of the influence of the conspirators…The Pennsylvania Herald has been silenced… the editor is dismissed and the debates of the convention thereby suppressed.”
Best Book: Hologram of Liberty – The Constitutions Shocking Alliance with Big Government by Kenneth W Royce aKa Boston T. Party. Hologram of Liberty explains the Anti-Federalist case and the evidence for the conspiracy of wealthy speculators, lawyers, and politicians to impose a one-sided contract to control and tax the population in a scheme that personally enriched themselves. This summary borrows liberally from Royce’s work and other scholars.
If you are wondering why we have no representation these days… Paul James unravels a history where America went from being a Republic to a defacto corporate, municipal government.
This interview with Paul James will be an eye-opener for the vast majority of Americans.
Our history is not what we have been led to believe.
The loss of our Republican government since President Lincoln is revealed in this riveting historical review that we were never taught in school…. and by design.
Lawful government was to protect our “unalienable” rights, not inalienable rights as we have come to know.
The civil war, tormented by the Rothschilds London and Rothchild’s France, was not intended to free slaves but to indenture and bankrupt America to establish a new form of government in 1871 through the Act of 1871.
This act established a municipal government of the District of Columbia, replacing this country’s “original organic” government. The people who established this corporate, municipal government had no authority to do so, and in fact, we have been operating under a defacto corporation since the 1870s that has become completely tyrannical to the point of attempting to genocide us…..
While we believe we have representatives that have taken an oath to “protect us from enemies foreign and domestic,”… as I have reported earlier, here, the oath has been manipulated to allow America to be infiltrated, put under foreign control, and with a foreign agenda to collapse California and America.
The Oath in the current California Constitution (A. D. 1879), Article XX, Section 3 is required to be taken by every government officer and employee (from Governor Newsom down to a city dog-catcher) before they can enter the duties of their respective offices. Not one state, county or city officer or employee has taken and subscribed the Oath mandated at Article XX, Sec. 3; nor, have they complied with the common law [Calif. Civil Code, Sec. 22.2] or statutory requirement [Calif. Government Code, §§ 1450- 1653] to file a fidelity/performance bond before assuming the duties of their respective offices. Therefore, by operation of law, every act or action that any live actor commits, claiming to be a de jure state, county or city government officer or employee, is being done under color of law [18 U.S.C. § 242], color of office and color of authority. Anyone who is in violation of the fundamental organic Law of the state has no authority whatsoever to enact, enforce or adjudicate any state statutory law, rule or municipal code.
The American People living in every State [not including the district of Columbia], including but not limited to California, are entitled by the supreme Law of the Land, to a “Republican Form of Government” [“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.” Constitution of the United States, Article IV, Section 4].
The current Form of Government in California (and all other united States of America) clearly is not a Republican Form of Government, but rather is a private, for-profit, foreign corporate municipal democracy, organized in California in A. D. 1879, controlled and operated exclusively by constitutionally- banned agents of the BAR [https://www.brighteon.com/13ef3415-e3f0-494c-9182-38566ea2b44f].
In addition, as Paul James lays out, we live under “Lawfare” and “Warfare.”
Lawfare is a form of Mixed War consisting of the use of the so-called justice system (i.e., private, for-profit, foreign BAR court system), to intentionally and corruptly apply private, foreign, corporate government municipal law applicable only for corporations, ens legis persons and legal fictions to the American People, as if they were any of the aforesaid juristic entities. The live agents of the BAR routinely use lawfare against private Americans, to damage or delegitimize them socially and financially, to tie-up their time and resources, to seize their children, homes, businesses, private property and/or imprison them, under color of law; and, this includes enforcing mandatory vaccinations or forced use of medical procedures under color of law. The term is a portmanteau of the words law and warfare.
Mixed War occurs whenever the government of a nation is an enemy of, and at war against, its own people. The most insidious and perfidious type of mixed war exists when the agents of government act against the people under the territorial Boundaries of the republic state of California to deny and infringe upon constitutionally- protected unalienable Rights, under color of law, through the use of fraudulent simulated legal process
[see: Calif. Government Code § 68076 and the following link to fully understand this point: http://www.internallydisplacedpeople.org/joomla30/index.php/courtseals].
If you aren’t familiar with any of the above — the fact that we have actors masquerading as elected officials and a corporation masquerading as a government — this is the interview for you.
“…And he described it as a kill box and then I looked that up and it turned out it’s a military term for establishing a geographic space or three-dimensional area for a military attack by air and by surface to kill the people who are in it and then dismantle the kind of framework and move on to the next campaign.
And what the DoD and the World Health Organization intend to do and have gotten quite far in doing, but not completely reached their goals, is to set up the entire world as their geographic terrain, their target population as all the people in the world, the duration of their campaign as permanent…”
Transcript: Jan. 24, 2023 Legal Walls of the Covid-19 Kill Box Presentation
…And the basic idea is that public health has been militarized and the military has been sort of turned into a public health front or Potemkin Village such that they are using public health language and public health laws to actually carry out a military campaign.
And I would not call them DoD vaccines.
I would call them DoD weapons.
So, I call it the kill box because the first sort of lead that I had was Todd Callender’s January 30th 2022 interview on Elizabeth Lee Vliet’s podcast called Truth for Health.
And he described it as a kill box and then I looked that up and it turned out it’s a military term for establishing a geographic space or three-dimensional area for a military attack by air and by surface to kill the people who are in it and then dismantle the kind of framework and move on to the next campaign.
And what the DoD and the World Health Organization intend to do and have gotten quite far in doing, but not completely reached their goals, is to set up the entire world as their geographic terrain, their target population as all the people in the world, the duration of their campaign as permanent.
And the weapons that they’re using are, number one, informational. That’s the propaganda piece and the censorship piece.
Number two, psychological. That’s the fear and terrorism piece of telling people they need to be afraid all the time and they need to listen to the government.
And then the third piece is the chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear [CBRN] weapons, which are called in their campaign pharmaceuticals, vaccines but are actually toxins and pathogens.
So I started, after I heard that interview — I had already been wondering what was going on but I started trying to track down some of the things Todd Callender talked about in his interview and figure out what the legal frameworks were and how they were set up and what the financial coercion mechanisms were.
My finding, which many other people have found in various, from various other angles, was that this project has been going on for centuries.
It’s basically globalist central bankers and lots of related organizations trying to get complete control of human beings through banking programs and through military programs.
And they kicked it into higher gear in 1913 with the Federal Reserve Act, and then they kicked the public health aspect of it into higher gear starting in the 1930s and 40s.
Before the 1960s, they mostly did it through orchestrated armed conflicts and financial depressions and wars, which are very loud and messy and destructive to infrastructure.
And it makes it difficult for them to have plausible deniability and legal impunity for what they’re doing.
So in the mid-60s they got much better at inducing suicide and homicide by fraudulently labeling poisons as medicines or as vaccines or as prophylactics and telling people that submitting to that poisoning process was their civic duty. And that’s — we saw that in Covid with the shorthand for “Do this or you’re going to kill your grandma.”
And the way that the pharmaceutical method is primarily useful to them is that plausible deniability is much easier and legal impunity is a lot easier.
They can achieve the same goal of killing lots of people without their fingerprints being all over it.
I looked into the coercion cascades, mostly financial. I’m not going to go into a lot of detail with that but it starts at the top with the Bank for International Settlements and they can use their control of other federal central banks, access to financial systems, and then all the way down through state governments, national governments, local, municipal, school districts, hospitals. Everything.
If you comply with what they’re telling you to do as far as masking and testing, isolating yourself, taking injections, then you will get the financial access that you need to run your business or to have a job. And if you don’t comply, they can cut you off from those services. And so that is one of the main mechanisms through which the whole thing was carried out.
The U.S. Congress passed the law to set up the Chemical and Biological Warfare program. And in that law, which is 50 USC Chapter 32, there are very important key terms including “protective,” “prophylactic” and “defensive,” which is how they justified doing it.
They were using those words because the international community of ordinary non-insane people were concerned about biological and chemical weapons and they were working on international treaties to prohibit them.
And so they needed to build in loopholes and the loopholes they built in were that, “We’re not going to do biological and chemical research and weapons development except for protective or prophylactic or defensive purposes.”
And that’s a false characterization because all biologically active products are intrinsically aggressive and toxic and lethal. And that’s where we get disciplines or, that’s the thing that disciplines like toxicology, pharmacokinetics, genotoxicity, drug-drug interactions, are all related to that fact: that everything that goes into the human body or any living body has some effects which can be toxic. So that was the way they tried to get around that.
And then the foundational Public Health Emergencies platform came out in 1983 when Congress passed the Public Health Service Act Amendment and that set up the Public Health Emergencies program under the 1944 law that had originally set up the Public Health Service. Which is a branch of the military.
And it also, in 1983, Congress and Reagan set up a 30 million dollar slush fund and that has continued. It’s got a different name now than it did then, [Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund] but it’s still being funded as recently as the NDAA and the Consolidated Appropriations Act in December of 2022.
The other thing they did in the 80s was set up the 1986 National Vaccine Program and National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.
And that’s the one that set up the liability exemption for manufacturers and funneled anyone who was injured by a vaccine into this different compensation program. And that’s been used as a model since Covid started, for the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program.
So the international piece, the cornerstone, is the World Health Organization, which is not a health organization. It’s a military organization, because of this merger that I’m talking about. It’s sort of the military arm of the one-world government that they’re trying to set up.
And they did a set of amendments to the International Health Regulations in 2005 that entered into force in June 2007. But basically the IHR, which are currently going through another round of amendments to make them worse, called on national governments to strengthen their own domestic laws and fund more programs for surveillance, testing, detention and quarantine — physical control and forced treatment — during international outbreaks of communicable diseases.
And the pretext that they used, because it was bankers who were doing this, was that they needed to protect international trade from disruptions caused by disease outbreaks. But the real intent was to set up these legal systems that transferred sovereign government from the nation-state to the World Health Organization and the BIS automatically when a “public health emergency of international concern” [PHEIC] has been declared.
And Congress and U.S presidents and the cabinet complied with that demand from the World Health Organization.
So two of the key years were 1997 and 1998. That was when the beginnings of the emergency use authorization program was set up and when they transferred the CBRN [chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear] weapons stockpile from DOD, classification I guess, to HHS or CDC classification and control.
It was the same products, as far as I can tell. It was just a relabeling and a re-homing of them.
The EUA [Emergency Use Authorization], that was kind of a two-step thing. At the time the public was really upset about the use of unapproved vaccines for anthrax on military troops and the horrible adverse effects they were having.
So Congress passed a law in November [1997] to kind of revoke authorization for testing or using unapproved products on military troops. But three days later in a different law, made it so that the same programs could be done but the target population would be expanded from just military troops to the entire American population.
Then around 2000 to 2002, using the momentum from 9/11 and the anthrax attacks on Congress, they set up, through the statutes again, program management sort of structures. They did that through the 2000 Public Health Threats and Emergencies Act, [and] through the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force.
And people talked about this at the time. It was construed as putting the country into a permanent state of war — the Global War on Terror — with every other country in the world. So there was no geographic limitation. There was no time limitation. There was no identified enemy other than “terror” and through that — I think other people figured this out at the time and then it sort of got suppressed — but it made everyone in the world into a presumptive combatant or enemy target.
So it was essentially a de facto covert global martial law act by the US government.
And then in those early 2000s we also got the PATRIOT Act, the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act and the Homeland Security Act.
And those were just more of the merging of the DHS [Department of Homeland Security], the DOJ [Department of Justice], the HHS [Health and Human Services], the Department of Defense: all of the cabinet agencies.
So since then, 2003 to [2019] there have been lots and lots of executive orders on these things. Lots more statutes and appropriations. Lots of agency regulations, guidance reports that were circulated to state, local and tribal authorities and law enforcement so that they would know that under a public health emergency, they are subordinated to the federal military.
FDA [Food and Drug Administration] issued a lot of Guidance for Industry documents and sent
those out to the pharmaceuticals and to the academic organizations and NGOs [non-governmental organizations] to let them know about how FDA was going to handle experimental products like “vaccines,” “gene therapies,” “biologics.”
And they did more test runs like 2003 SARS, 2006 MERS and 2009 H1N1.
That brings us up to the Other Transactions Authority [OTA]. And this was revealed through Pfizer’s April 2022 motion to dismiss whistleblower Brook Jackson’s False Claims Act case.
They said, “This was not a vaccine. It was a DoD prototype and we were never obligated to do valid clinical trials. We were never obligated to prove safety or efficacy to anyone. We never had to get FDA authorization through any of the normal guidance for industry channels, because it was a prototype.”
On October 4th, 2022, the US government endorsed that view and filed a statement of interest and support for the motion to dismiss, basically saying that clinical trials were never material or necessary for DOD to pay the contractors for producing and distributing the bioweapons known as Covid-19 vaccines.
And so all of this became visible from 2020 to the present when the World Health Organization Secretary-General issued the “public health emergency of international concern” [PHEIC] at the end of January 2020 and the HHS secretary immediately triggered the domestic frameworks through the “determination that a public health emergency exists” followed by PREP Act declarations for “medical countermeasures,” which are the weapons.
And then Congress and the presidents — Trump and Biden — passed several additional Congressional acts funding and reinforcing the structure of the kill box and issued more executive orders under the Defense Production Act, under the Stafford Act, under the National Emergencies Act, to sort of build out the program.
Basically what it built is a huge public and private funding stream for military-led bioweapons research and use; eliminated informed consent by reclassifying people who could potentially be carrying a disease as presumptive national security threats, so that you could do anything you want to them because you’re on a war footing.
And to shield the products and weapons from product liability, to shield all the people involved from criminal liability and civil liability, and to shield the government funders, developers and regulators from criminal prosecution under the other laws — which are in place but are sort-of superseded by this framework — for use of bioweapons [18 USC 175] use of chemical weapons [18 USC 229], terrorism [18 USC 2331] things like that.
…I see it as a joint project between the U.S Department of Defense — a coordinating committee of that, the Federal Reserve, and the World Health Organization, and the Bank for International Settlements and the United Nations. But the World Health Organization is like a subsidiary of the U.N.
And there are things that the globalists do not like. They don’t like constitutions and charters. They don’t like the conflicting statutory frameworks around bioterrorism, war crimes, genocide, torture. They don’t like any of that stuff.
They don’t like when states and provinces and counties and towns pass their own laws protecting informed consent, protecting people from, for consumer safety. They actually put out a report in October 2022, State Laws Limiting Public Health Protections: Hazardous for Our Health. And there’s a whole bunch of things in there that states have started doing that the globalists do not like.
So doing more of those things, more bringing control back to the state, more using Article 10 of the Constitution, to reclaim state authority, those are all extremely useful.
And I do think it’s going to break. I think there’s going to be a tipping point and the criminal prosecutions are going to start.
And we have all the evidence. And every time they try to answer what we’re talking about by saying national security, they reinforce that this is the right way to go.
This is what they’re doing.
They’re doing war crimes.
Links:
Jan. 24, 2023 – DoD ‘Vaccines’ Press Conference. (L4Atv1, 2 hrs — 0:00:30 Sam Dube – Host Open; 0:03:04 Glen Macko – Overview of DoD Vaccines; 0:05:28 Katherine Watt – Legal: Laws, Contracts, FOIA, SEC; 0:24:39 Sasha Latypova – Manufacturing, Safety, Quality, Intent; 0:33:32 Phillip Altman – Conformation of Skills/Knowledge of Katherine & Sasha; 0:38:08 LTC (Ret) Pete Chambers – Vaccine observations in Military; 0:46:13 Dr Sam Dube – Guidance on “Going Local” for personal protection; 0:56:47 Q&A)
What better way to “celebrate” tax season than to talk taxes? Stop me if you’ve heard this one: Taxation is not theft. It’s just the law of the land. You want to live in this country, you pay the long-established, constitutional, customary tax. If you’re not okay with that, there are plenty of other countries to choose from whose customs and edicts you may find more agreeable. Just go live there, and best of luck to you! So as long as you have that right of exit, the taxes confiscated from your income do not represent any initiation of force, coercion, or violation whatsoever.
This is a valuable argument, to be sure. Not only is it completely wrong but its underlying premise reveals a certain sensibility that is, at the very least, intriguing. If we peel back the layers of this statement, we can see the speaker’s potential to grasp some sort of entry-level morality and maybe even economics, confirming our suspicions that he knows what’s right and is purposefully evading it. A hint of insight is on display here, if only unconsciously, that liberty itself depends on private property rights as he’s desperately trying to frame this “right of exit” nonsense as a private property argument.
Let’s run through a few scenarios here:
I’m having a costume party. To attend, you must dress up as something. You will not be admitted otherwise. If you refuse, due to some personal objection to donning a costume, then enjoy your night someplace other than my costume party. No harm, no foul.
I don’t allow shoes to be worn in my house. If you wish to visit, bare your feet at the door. If you insist on wearing your shoes, then happy walking, but not into my house. No harm, no foul.
Ready for one that’s not so easy to stomach?
In my restaurant, no one of German descent is allowed to dine. Anyone wishing to eat here must first present genealogical proof of no German ancestry. Any hint of German in your background, or refusal to produce the appropriate documentation, no problem. Just get your corndogs someplace else. No harm, no foul.
So this is what’s presented in the taxation argument:
In this country, we pay our taxes. You don’t want to pay up? Leave! And if you don’t and you continue to live, work, and trade in this country, you’ve given your tacit consent to abide by the tax code and render unto Caesar accordingly. To stay put, enjoying all of the fruits of taxation and yet continuing to whine about it and alleging some infringement of your “rights” is just a hypocritical childish plea to have your cake and eat it too.
If this is really what’s being put on the table, then let’s look at what they’re saying.
What do each of the above “policies” have in common? They’re enacted by the rightful property owner. What makes them such? They obtained the restaurant/house/party headquarters through purchase, trade, inheritance, gift, original appropriation, or some other VOLUNTARY arrangement. Their possession and ownership came about by the only true measure of legitimacy—absence of coercion, force, or fraud. Their power to set the rules for admittance or exclusion comes from that ownership.
So to buy this “right of exit” premise, one would have to accept the notion that the federal government is the rightful owner of the United States, the entire landmass. Likewise, one would somehow have to surmise that, at the same time, there are overlapping property claims held by the state, city, and local governments of the further subdivided parcels. This is no small matter as it means that we the people, in effect, own nothing. Every house, building, lot of land, business, vehicle, animal, vegetable, and mineral within the national borders (and some without) is the government’s property, which we’re all simply renting from them.
Anything you or I have is at their discretion and whim. They allow us the privilege of possessing these things only as long as they see fit. These are the only terms under which the above reasoning holds. If the government can demand my payment on pain of expulsion from the country, then it all must be theirs.
But what’s the original source of any property claim at all? Technically all land title chains originate with the US government. Things admittedly get a little tricky here, though not on the issue at hand. Was the founding of the USA a legitimate acquisition of property in the first place? If so, did that make the federal government the de facto original owner? If so, then they would have no more continued control over it once it’s left their hands than the previous owner of your house does over your domestic choices.
If not—and the country was stolen by aggressive conquest, thus never properly claimed by any of our ancestral invaders—well, that’s a can of worms beyond this article. But I will ask you this: Would that justify continued payment and deference to the organization that perpetrated the invasion?
One may claim that the government is not acting as a property owner but merely a trading partner. They offer certain benefits and services in this geographical location—namely, the infrastructure that makes the production and earning of your own property possible—so the choice is yours: If you want to take up space here and soak up your share of these benefits, then you have to pony up your fair share. If you don’t, then you’d better remove yourself from the service zone, you freeloader!
This is really the same argument from a different angle. Under what auspices do they offer said benefits and services? By a forceful declaration that they are to be the sole and exclusive proprietors within the demarcated region. The consent of you, the residents, their “customers,” is irrelevant. If you’re caught on their self-proclaimed turf attempting to either provide or receive these services on any other terms, men with guns will come talk to you.
So once again, it’s simply a coercive property grab, this time for more commercial purposes and in no sense a bona fide economic transaction. You can call it many things, but you can’t call it trade, you can’t call it choice, and you can’t call it voluntary.
“But this is a democratic system, where the state is only acting as a proxy of the people, so the government isn’t asserting universal ownership, but merely managing the property of the people at large.” This argument is deluded, evasive, and telling. It provides an interesting study in fallacious reasoning and behavioral science and invokes a whole new way to be divested of your property. The government will only seize it by force once your neighbors and countrymen have voted it away from you. Whatever happens is up to the caprices of the 50.1 percent. Imagine the bizarre, macabre dystopia painted here, where no property, no moral ideology, and indeed no rights exist at all. But once again, it is beyond the scope of this article.
And lastly, I would be remiss not to point out that there is no right of exit. I hate to tell you, but if you show up at the airport with nothing but your luggage and boarding pass in hand, ready to find out if Ukraine is as nice as people say this time of year, you ain’t goin’ nowhere! This should truly be all you need to do to “just leave” if there really were a such an option. But, of course, you’ve got to have that little magic book, the one that’s obtained through the prescribed qualification process of, plus payment to, those on high to be granted their permission to leave the country.
This is the very definition of not a right. Sure, you may say it doesn’t matter that you’re compelled to ask because they almost always say yes, so it’s practically a right. What if I show up with a passport that expired last week? I mean, it’s practically still valid. Amazing how so much semantic leeway is granted to those who allow us none.
So there you have it. If “pay up or get out” is really a legitimate proposition to live under, it must be because nothing is ours. Everything around us, including you and me, belongs to the state. At best we have possession of some of what we earn, produce, or are given, until and unless the supposed rightful owner no longer approves and wishes to reclaim it. So the next time someone poses this slogan to you, be sure to remind them of its full meaning. If they don’t want to accept that reality, they can always “just leave.”
Jason Montgomery resides in Seoul, South Korea where he teaches English writing, speaking, and listening at a law firm and an English academy. He is also an independent filmmaker and freelance writer.
If germ “theory” is wrong, there is no sense in pursuing alleged disease-causing sub-microscopic organisms. That’s why the germ theorists don’t want us scratching beneath the surface of the so-called ‘science‘ involving bacteria either.
Let’s have a look at why the concept of “pathogens” is a complete fail on their own terms from Koch’s Postulates through to some modern day animal experiments.
Dangerous Nanoparticles Hidden in Vaccines & Our Environment”: “Nanoparticles Are Extremely Reactive, Can Hardly Be Degraded, and Disrupt and Destroy All Tissues They Come in Contact With.”
“Nanoparticles Are Extremely Reactive, Can Hardly Be Degraded, and Disrupt and Destroy All Tissues They Come in Contact With.”
TCTL editor’s note: As a service to our readers, this article, written in German, has been translated to English with the aid of translation software. Please understand that this is not a perfect translation. I do not speak German. However, the key concepts come through very clearly.
The work of Stefan Lanka and ‘Next Level – Knowledge Reconsidered’ challenges the entire paradigm around western medicine’s understand of biology (and the make-believe “science” of virology).
It is vitally important that we come to understand the danger of this long-planned, destructive transformation and total control of humanity and all living beings. We need to awaken to the truth about our own biology and the totality of our multi-dimensional existence. The quality of life for all who inhabit earth depends on sharing real knowledge, questioning the old paradigms built on lies, and the rise of empowered humanity. ~ Kathleen
As has already been learned, the new corona vaccines come with accompanying substances declared as “additives”, the so-called nanoparticles.
Although their high risk potential has already been sufficiently investigated in the past, this is accepted with approval. No consideration is given to the health of the individual, and even possible long-term consequences for those affected are accepted.
By means of continuously running the epidemic mind-frame through clever propaganda, expensive advertising and the generation of social pressure, one pulls out all the stops to get each individual to “roll up their sleeves”.
Yes – to indulge in this vaccine!
One protects even scarcity, in order to awaken needs in the people. And all this despite the fact that it cannot be called effective, let alone safe.
In this article, I share with you various information revolving around the issue of nanoparticles, and can only appeal to your sanity to keep your hands (arm 😉 ) off this vaccine and let others know this as well.
In a nutshell:
Real biochemistry: nanoparticles are extremely reactive, can hardly be degraded and disrupt and destroy all tissues they come in contact with. The body reacts to this disruption for repair purposes by forming globulins, which are misinterpreted by conventional medicine as antibodies.
Why do those responsible claim that nanoparticles are necessary as an additive?
Of special importance are the RNA vaccines, which are additionally equipped with nanoparticles.
Nanoparticles as mini-transporters. But making the right RNA molecule does not mean you have a working vaccine.
” It is difficult to get the RNA into the human body cells,” says Cichutek.
Gene shuttles with nanoparticles are supposed to solve the problem. Measuring only a few millionths of a centimeter, they carry the packaged strands of genetic material through the cell wall and prevent the vaccine from degrading too quickly in the body.
One of the problems in the preparation and administration of mRNA vaccines is the natural instability of mRNA.
In order to prevent, or at least delay, the degradation of mRNA and to deliver the administered (e.g., injected) mRNA to the site of the claimed effect (i.e., into the cells where the ribosomes then carry out the desired protein synthesis), a variety of highly complex additives are used.
So far, meaningful safety studies are available for very few of these additives (Roier S. 2019. Trillium Immunology 3/2019. Retrieved 03.05.2020), and some of the most commonly used adjuvants are related to nanotechnology (e.g., lipid nanoparticles/LNPs), for which in any case only very limited and contradictory experience in human use is available.
The danger of nanoparticles used in food, vaccines and others
The fact that these nanoparticles are extremely controversial and known to pose a high risk is strangely swept under the rug.
But what shocks me personally the most: How can scientists, whose job it is to check how dangerous the use of these nanoparticles and other toxins is in a person’s organism, completely play this down and even endorse it, as if we were dealing with the most normal thing in the world?
Federal Environment Agency warns against nanotechnology, quote:
“In animal experiments, the particles have migrated right into the nucleus of body cells and damaged the genetic information there,”
or
“Their tininess, however, also poses the risk that they are much more likely to overcome natural barriers in the body – such as the blood-brain barrier.”
“It has already been established that when nanoparticles are inhaled, they cause inflammatory reactions in the lungs.”
[Rolf Buschmann, Technical Environmental Protection Officer, BUND]
[…]
“You always have to ask yourself the question: what happens to it in the organism then? That’s why we are particularly skeptical.”
[Rolf Buschmann, Technical Environmental Protection Officer, BUND]
-In a study published in the International Council on Nanotechnology (ICON).
“Using transmission electron microscopy, nanoparticles were observed to settle in the cytoplasm and karyoplasm of lung epithelial and mesothelial cells, but were also found in the mammary fluid. These cases raise concerns that long-term exposure to some nanoparticles can cause severe damage to human lungs without protective measures. Pulmonary fibrosis and foreign body granulomas of the pleura.”
“There is increasing evidence that nanoparticles in polluted air can have a negative effect on our brains.
“Observational studies have shown, for example, that people who live near busy roads and breathe this air permanently have an increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Toxicological studies must now prove whether there is a direct causal relationship.
“We are currently investigating this at our institute. But we are also wondering whether nanoparticles in products can have harmful effects on our brains.”
[…]
“We have studied several nanomaterials. We were able to detect conspicuous features in nanosilver. This substance is used for detergents or toothbrushes, for example, because it kills bacteria.”
[…]
“Of course, we can’t yet say whether this can lead to illness.”
[…]
“Too little is known yet about whether nanoparticles are toxic to nerve cells and tissue. We would like to help close this knowledge gap.”
[…]
“Toxicological tests unfortunately cannot always provide one hundred percent certainty. We are dealing here with complex mechanisms of action, some of which have not yet been elucidated. So it can’t be ruled out that a new substance comes onto the market that only afterwards proves to be harmful to health.”
This article from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research is dated 04/06/2019.
The Federal Government has knowledge of all this and yet – without regard for just one single life – has approved the new mRNA vaccine and is vaccinating people with it at this very moment and intends to use it on our youngest children as well.
Please forgive me, but the deliberate ignoring of such clear facts, which are known to all involved, can only be glossed over with a heavy heart as an oversight on the part of those responsible.
In this context, I would like to refer to the vaccine Pandemrix, which was used in the so-called “swine flu” pandemic and caused considerable side effects. [Cf. WDR]
Dr. Stefan Lanka (molecular biologist, virologist and winner of the measles trial [See our video]), had already warned in 2009, before the use of the then vaccine Pandemrix, shortly before its market launch:
“The strong destructive power of cells by nanoparticles, such as the so-called “auxiliary substance” (adjuvant) MF59 in the flu vaccine for the elderly, is based on the known fact that transport between cells in organs and tissues occurs with particles of this size and the cell cannot distinguish between ‘foreign’ and ‘own’.
“The penetration of the nanoparticles into the cell envelopes damages them and destroys the cells.
“Due to the fact that these nanoparticles are also very stable in the body, it is known that, for a longer time, cells in the body are destroyed. And this reacts with the formation of globulins as a sealing substance of the cells. And this increase of the globulin concentration is claimed by vaccine [manufacturers], against better knowledge, as antibodies and as protection against freely invented pathogens.
“When globulins are present in greater concentration, their binding to all kinds of proteins is detectable.”
The Paul Ehrlich Institute suppressed as long as possible the devastating and inconceivable fact that nanoparticles were already present in other vaccines. Only after diverse pressure was exerted, the PEI had to admit this fact.
“Even if some of these components are located in a size range that is in the nanometer range, they are not technologically targeted nanoparticles, especially not nanoparticles made of metals or plastics.”
Regulatory agencies, including the German Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI), completely ignore this issue.
Note: Amazing that they first denied that nanoparticles were present at all and then, caught, manipulatively tried to wriggle out of it by pretending that they were “not purposefully” manufactured.
Let me tell you something: The task of the Paul Ehrlich Institute is to check from the outset whether harmful substances are present in a vaccination and not to determine only after the child has fallen into the well!
How can we continue to believe such institutions when it comes to our precious health? It is best to leave it alone. I don’t even want to mention the other outrages of the PEI, such as the concealment of the many dead vaccinated babies by the vaccine Hexavac (How safe are vaccines really? – Dr. med [medical doctor] Klaus Hartmann) …
The BioNTech mRNA vaccine is a danger for mankind, for whose side effects including death. Uğur Şahin is personally responsible.
From the point of view of orthodox medicine, the vaccination should not be used.
Because RNA is transformed into DNA by several mechanisms and damages chromosomes.
Because it will hit the body’s own enzymes, which are misinterpreted as components of the virus.
Strictly speaking, the BioNTech RNA vaccine is even more dangerous than nanoparticles themselves, because the RNA to be vaccinated is encased in lipid nanoparticles, and here we find a double-reactive mixture that will accumulate mainly in the brain and cause much more narcolepsy than was the case with the swine flu vaccine.
The vaccine from Mainz (mRNA) contains fats in their non-dissolvable and constantly-very-reactive nano-particle form, including the known allergen, the solvent PEG (polyethanol glycol).
In addition, the vaccine will cause chromosome strand breaks in an unknown number of people, resulting in energy depletion, infertility and disability of offspring if the chromosome breaks also happen in the “germ line” of males and females.
This is the shortest possible description of the vaccine damage for which Uğur Şahin is personally responsible. For sure, there will be an observable number of deaths, which will then be said to have happened as a result of the virus.
With the engrained belief in an evil biology (orthodox medicine), coupled with the collective compulsion for return on investment, one might almost assume that medical professionals actually believe that vaccination could help.
Most practicing physicians have never studied this information and trust the responsible scientists themselves and [do so] completely blindly.
So our task should not be to demonize those responsible, but to point out to them their error.
One of the simplest ways is to look to see if any studies at all have been done on the so-called pharmacokinetic properties.
“Pharmacokinetics describes the totality of processes that a drug undergoes in the body. This includes the drug’s uptake (absorption), distribution in the body (distribution), biochemical conversion and degradation (metabolization), and excretion (excretion).”
In short, what happens to all toxins (disguised as additives) within the organism?
We see that a simple “not applicable” was noted in the SUMMARY OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MEDICINE.
These studies are omitted for just about all vaccines. A statement about whether this vaccine potentially harms the body and how the mixture of the injected material behaves in the body is simply left to fate by those responsible!
If this information does not take your breath away, then I suspect you are not taking it very seriously in other respects either :).
New studies confirm: Various vaccines are contaminated by micro- and nanoscale particles and described as non-biodegradable and non-biocompatible.
Unknown to most people is the fact that today’s vaccines are already contaminated with nanoparticles, as random tests have shown:
“The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us. The inorganic particles identified are neither biocompatible nor biodegradable, that means that they are biopersistent and can induce effects that can become evident either immediately close to injection time or after a certain time from administration. It is important to remember that particles (crystals and not molecules) are bodies foreign to the organism and they behave as such. More in particular, their toxicity is in some respects different from that of the chemical elements composing them, adding to that toxicity which, in any case, is still there, that typical of foreign bodies. For that reason, they induce an inflammatory reaction.”
[…]
“After injection, these microparticles, nanoparticles, and aggregates can remain at the injection site and form swellings and granulomas … However, they can also be transported through the bloodstream, eluding any attempt to guess their final destination … As with all foreign bodies, especially those so small, they trigger an inflammatory response that is chronic because most of these particles cannot be broken down. In addition, the protein corona effect can … due to a nano-bio interaction … generate organic/inorganic composite particles that can stimulate the immune system in undesirable ways…It is impossible not to add that particles of the size commonly observed in vaccines can enter cell nuclei and interact with DNA …”
“After being injected, those microparticles, nanoparticles and aggregates can stay around the injection site forming swellings and granulomas.17 But they can also be carried by the blood circulation, escaping any attempt to guess what will be their final destination…
“As happens with all foreign bodies, particularly that small, they induce an inflammatory reaction that is chronic because most of those particles cannot be degraded. Furthermore, the protein-corona effect (due to a nanobio-interaction can produce organic/inorganic composite particles capable of stimulating the immune system in an undesirable ways. It is impossible not to add that particles, the size often observed in vaccines, can enter cell nuclei and interact with the DNA.”
Several important questions arise from the results of this 2017 study that demand answers:
Are some of these nanoparticles intentionally introduced into vaccines?
Does the standard manufacturing process for conventional vaccines UNFORTUNATELY lead to dangerous and destructive nano-contamination?
New nanotechnology is already being used to manufacture several vaccines – ostensibly to “improve efficacy.” In fact, the upcoming COVID-19 vaccine may be a nano-vaccine. Does this manufacturing process bring with it the inevitable effect of a hurricane of nanoparticle contamination?
How many cases of brain damage and autism in children can open the door to [seeing] nanoparticle contamination?
Finally, where are these contaminated vaccines being manufactured?
The above study did not attempt to find out. It was outside the scope of the research. It is common knowledge that, for example, in the case of the U.S., vaccines or their ingredients are not domestically produced in many cases. Where does this lead to control safety? For example, in China, where there have been numerous pharmaceutical scandals related to product contamination?
The vaccine company is not showing the slightest interest in answering any of these questions. They are busy pretending that the questions do not exist.
It would be suicidal to trust the establishment.
Even more explosive in connection with RNA and nano-vaccines is the reference to the Gene Drive Files, which the Heinrich Böll Foundation uncovered a few years ago. These show that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation commissioned a PR firm to secretly undermine an important UN process on the subject of synthetic biology.
Although all this is well known, Christian Drosten (Berlin Charité) comes up with the following words: “Gene-based vaccines have potential“.
The only conclusion can be: Prof. Drosten does not know what he is talking about!
The Medical Research Center for Prophylaxis and Health Protection in Industrial Workers confirms “nanotoxicity” on human health
Combined subchronic toxicity of aluminum (III), titanium (IV), and silicon (IV) oxide nanoparticles and their alleviation with a complex of bioprotectors
Summary
“The use of nanoparticles-including metallic nanoparticles-has exploded in industry, commerce, and medicine in recent decades. A Russian research team studied the ‘nanotoxicity’ of three types of metal nanoparticles (titanium, silicon, and aluminum oxide) alone and in combination. Repeated injections in rats showed that all three were “toxic to multiple target organs.”
“For the majority of these effects,” however, the alumina nanoparticles were found to be “most harmful,” even though the aluminum dose was only half that of titanium and silicon. No other publications have reported on the combined toxicity of these metal nanoparticles, despite their ‘potentially hazardous nano-effects on human health’.”
The HELMHOLTZ Center for Infection Research has been exploring other avenues for years: Vaccination without a syringe via nanoparticles through creams to be applied to the skin or application via nasal spray.
Quote:
“The nanoparticles penetrate the skin through the hair follicles and trigger an immune response in the body,” says Hanzey Yasar of HIPS. “Such a vaccine would be very easy to administer and would certainly be well received by the population.”
In it, he describes not only how the safety claims of pharmaceutical manufacturers are made without any scientific study, but also how they can be completely refuted based on scientific evidence.
It is known from medicine that a high concentration of nanoparticles leads to fibrotic changes in lung tissue.
There is also evidence that these particles are associated with respiratory diseases as well as an increase in inflammatory markers and an increased tendency to blood clotting disorders, which can increase the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias, heart attacks and strokes.
Nanoparticles cross the blood-brain barrier and it is unexplored what may be triggered by this.
With the background knowledge that all vaccines are based on a false foundation and do little harm at best — adding to the fact that the dangers of the nanoparticles used are known to the entire science bench as well as to critical colleagues — these dangers must be addressed and cannot continue to be ignored, or suppressed.
Act. If not for yourself, then for the children!
The entire NEXT LEVEL – Knowledge Reconsidered team will support you and answer your questions.
“The Project for a New American Century was not a plan for a robust American empire. Just the opposite. It was a plan to use the US and its people as pawns in what was really the Project for a New World Order. America’s contribution to that was to let itself be robbed physically, morally, and spiritually by a parasite class whose goals for control of the world can’t even be understood as human. Indeed, transhumanism is a stated goal of these people.”
~ Richard Hugus
Last November Philip Zelikow and “the Covid Crisis Group” published a 352 page book, Lessons from a Covid War, An Investigative Report. The book went on sale April 23, 2023 and was launched April 24 in a five hour presentation at the National Academy of Medicine in Washington, DC. The launch of the book has lately gotten attention in the news.
By its emphasis on war, the book inadvertently confirms recent evidence uncovered by Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watt that the Covid psy-op was not a supposed public health emergency but a type of 5th generation warfare carried out by the US Department of Defense against US citizens, and much of the rest of the world, in collusion with many other governments.
Who is Philip Zelikow? He was the director of the so-called 9-11 Commission appointed by the G.W. Bush Administration in 2002. He was the editor of theresulting 9-11 Commission Report. He was and still is a University of Virginia history professor said to specialize in public myths and the effect of “catastrophic terrorism” in making abrupt changes in of the course of human history.
As we know, both myth and terror were in full play in the 9-11 and the covid operations. Zelikow was among the neocons of the Project for a New American Century which said in its “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” September 2000, that it would take “a new Pearl Harbor” to motivate the American public to support the militarily aggressive US global hegemony that the Project called for.
Exactly a year later, 9-11 provided the neocon-controlled US government with a pretext for just such aggression against a list of Arab and Muslim countries that did not threaten US hegemony, but did happen to be enemies of the state of Israel, which the neocons happen to adamantly support. So many coincidences!
Twenty years later, Zelikow was called in for another coverup, this time unofficially. Under Zelikow’s guidance 9-11 was painted as a series of tragic failures by the US government, the Pentagon, NORAD, and US intelligence agencies to either predict or prevent the hijacking of four passenger airliners by 19 nefarious hijackers. Using the same formula again, Zelikow assembled a group of 34 academic, medical, and government apologists — the “Covid Crisis Group” — to write the authoritative report on the US handling of the “Covid 19 pandemic.” Once again. the entire US government was totally blindsided. It was found woefully inept, incompetent, and completely unprepared to deal with this terrible out-of-nowhere attack.
Zelikow and his hand-picked authors leave no stone unturned in pointing out the failures of almost all the measures a helpless Uncle Sam took to deal with the “pandemic.” The problems listed by Zelikow’s mainstream mouthpieces were: “operational challenges,” lack of preparedness, “policy failures,” ignorance of the source of SARS CoV-2, the failure of Trump’s leadership in “Operation Warp Speed,” a ”fragmented health care system,” and “poor communication” which led to poor “vaccine uptake” and a failure to prevent people being led astray by “misinformation.”
The solution offered by the Crisis Group: organize from the top down, globally, with a single authority, for the next predicted “pandemic,” much like what we’re hearing from the World Heath Organization. This is not new thinking. It’s a copy and paste of the globalist agenda.
The strategy for covering up an attack by the US government on US citizens is to make it look like the government was a victim of the attack, not the perpetrator. That lie is facilitated by what sounds like a tough critique of government incompetence, crafted by the same people who were involved in the crime. This is like letting a murderer off the hook by hearing nothing but his apology for serious and reprehensible failures in stopping the murder, and forgetting that he committed the murder.
Of course, Zelikow’s exhaustive report passed over the pre-planning, the trail of predictive pharma patents, the economic devastation, the gigantic upward transfer of wealth, the government corruption, the psychological harm, the extensive injury to human health, the thousands of deaths caused by the US “response” to C-19 — all of it deliberate.
The report starts with the premise that a never-before-seen virus attacked us all at once and nobody knew what to do about it. This is more or less how Zelikow and his previous stable of authors said 9-11 happened: our innocent nation was attacked from out of the blue; we were caught totally unaware. It is interesting to see how the public myth and the “catastrophic event” intertwine.
Zelikow is not just an academic observing that catastrophic terror changes history. He is an advisor to people who want to change history by creating catastrophic terror. He almost certainly advises on how to do it. Not only has he nicely tied his two academic theses together, he has won handsome rewards and respectability, AND completed the major deception of being the one to write the official history of the operations his handlers planned.
Zelikow is the consummate insider. Had he not appeared with this coverup masquerading as an earnest critique, we might have missed seeing that the neocons had to be involved in the covid operation just as they were in 9-11.
The Project for a New American Century was not a plan for a robust American empire. Just the opposite. It was a plan to use the US and its people as pawns in what was really the Project for a New World Order. America’s contribution to that was to let itself be robbed physically, morally, and spiritually by a parasite class whose goals for control of the world can’t even be understood as human. Indeed, transhumanism is a stated goal of these people.
Zelikow has tipped his hat with this monstrosity of establishment lies. His has announced he is involved, despite no one asking, and we can infer from this that the neocons were also involved.
“The wicked run when no one is chasing them,” says the proverb. With all the power the neocons wield, most notable today in the Nuland- and Blinken-led attack on Russia, the neocons must of course be connected with the would-be masters at Davos.
How clever this clique must think they are to have fooled the whole world. With such arrogance, how hard the fall.
“Because one believes in oneself, one doesn’t try to convince others. Because one is content with oneself, one doesn’t need others’ approval. Because one accepts oneself, the whole world accepts him or her.” ~ Lao Tzu
A bit of philosophy!
I guess this subject boils down to the obvious truth, that one sees what he wants to see, whether or not reality, logic, and conscience, are in direct contradiction to that perception. This is a natural human reaction, although it is not any preferred method of deduction if honesty and responsibility are desired. In this so-called modern age, it seems that everything has become perception, as most hide from any uncomfortable truth or reality in an effort to shift all responsibility away from themselves in favor of a tyrannical governing system. So long as the compliant dolts of this society believe they are free when they are not, they will take the easy way, accept all government stipends, follow all the ‘rules,’ and pretend that they are happy, because they will not have to make any decision for themselves. Truth and risk, you see, are not accepted by most, and this is a recipe for totalitarian rule to prosper.
Some great philosophers of the past, have posited that there is no truth; that everything is illusion. But we do have this life, and it is as real as is possible, because it is the only thing of which all are certain. The meaning of life is a different story, but then, that is a subject meant to belittle the time we have on this earth, and not in any way something that can be fully understood; at least not in our current state of consciousness. There lies the contradiction. We all know we are alive, if for no other reason than we awaken every morning to the only life we know, so why not accept that knowledge, and make of it something of value, instead of becoming a cog in the wheel of time without individual worth and purpose. Is this not a truth we can accept?
Since none of us can ‘fix’ or change another to suit our perception of the desirable human, and can only change ourselves, why not concentrate on individual awareness and improvement, instead of wasting our time in any effort to force upon others our perception of reality? Each of us, you see, is unique, so each of us has to come to our conclusions alone, for if worrying about the perceived flaws of others consumes one’s mind, how can one improve self and find happiness in life? Obviously, this would require that no aggression be present, and from what is reality, we all know that non-aggression is not universal in nature, so conflict will arise. The true test of man then, is to learn how to respect the thinking and opinions of all others, unless aggression is at hand.
This attitude of peaceful anarchy allows for a general environment of calm and harmony, so long as aggression is not tolerated. That means first, that rule and governing has to become obsolete for all those who choose that path, and any who choose voluntarily to live under a master or government, may certainly do so, if and only if, their preferred system is not forced on any who do not willingly accept it.
Poppycock you say; humans cannot live without governments. Who would build roads, who would make ‘laws,’ who would give everyone ‘free healthcare,’ who would protect you from harm, who would fight constant wars of aggression, who would lockdown the country when someone got the flu, and who would fill the prisons with those who never harmed another? Who would tax you (steal from you) to supply the things you illegitimately desire that should only be the responsibility of each individual? All aggression is immoral and wrong, so all those sanctioning aggression at the hands of government as proxy, are in essence, committing aggression themselves. This is what is not understood by the collective masses, whose idea of right is doing whatever the majority decides, regardless of the consequences to all who disagree.
There is an old saying, and a correct one I might add, that reads, live and let live, which is now completely ignored by this collective herd of parasites. In today’s world, most have accepted the notion that all should be able to live at the expense, labor, and property of others, in order to suit their wants and needs. This is a case where reality is ignored in favor of the perception that living at the expense of others is legitimate and right due to the asinine assumptions of equity and ‘fairness;’ assumptions that rest on the ideology of communism.
Perception becomes reality in the minds of fools when the majority willingly accepts the premise that they deserve something or anything, due solely to the fact that they exist, the color of their skin, their sexual preference, their laziness, or their greed. This is why most think they deserve freedom, but expect that freedom without any effort on their part to gain or secure it. Most believe that government (rulers) gives (allows) them freedom, and that is why they so blindly expect a piece of paper filled with political language is the foundation of their so-called rights, instead of the fact that their freedom rests only on the natural and inherent right to life of the individual. This society is consumed by perception, because to accept the harsh truth of reality requires thinking, action, and consequences, whereas false perception requires no risk or effort, but only obedience to the god of government.
Reality is not always what we see, but it is what we live. Our lives are real, our families are real, and nature is real. We do not have all the answers of our existence or of the universe or beyond, but that does not change the fact that we have this life on earth. Reality becomes perception when one expects to know all there is to know, and no human has that capability. In fact, we, as individuals, know nothing of all there is to know. The wonder of it all is astounding to be sure, but the reality of this life and all it has to offer, is just as amazing.
Take what is real, and revel in it. Do not allow others to impede on your short time on this earth. Do not allow any other to rule over you, or claim to be your master, regardless if many of your fellow men decide to take that worthless and treacherous path. If each of us accepts his individuality, embraces his unique nature, and lives his life as a free man, what is real will become clearly obvious, and perception will be dreams. Once this state of mind is evident, disobedience will become natural, and disobedience is vital in any effort to secure individual freedom.
Let go of the State, and trust yourself instead.
“No man has the right to dictate what other men should perceive, create or produce, but all should be encouraged to reveal themselves, their perceptions and emotions, and to build confidence in the creative spirit.” ~ Ansel Adams
.jpg){kind=link}