• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding metals, finance, politics, government and many other topics"

The Virus is Not Infective, It's Fake News for 100 years used to control populations.

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223
Book of Revelation: “And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength. And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter; The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks…”
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

The VIRUS is building one fiction out of many realities...

The Matrix Revealed: a hypnotherapist’s cosmic glue


Nov13 by Jon Rappoport

In my mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, I interview the most brilliant hypnotherapist on the planet, Jack True, 43 times, over the course of 320 pages.

Jack was one of the “milestone people” for me. Through his insights, I saw how to advance my own research.

For example, he discussed how, under hypnosis, some of his patients exhibited signs of “cosmic glue.” Jack was referring to their obsession to “build one reality out of many separate realities.” To “glue it all together.”

Jack explained how this was one of those mind programs that actually increased a person’s suggestibility and decreased his freedom. It was happening on a subconscious level.

Eventually, a person would build such a huge (and erroneous) reality he would surrender himself, his freedom, and his power to it.


Jack’s mission in life was to liberate individuals from their own “gargantuan constructions,” as he put it. What Jack has to say about his path and his discoveries is invaluable. And this is just one aspect of my mega-collection.
Here are the full contents of my mega-collection The Matrix Revealed.

You can order it here:
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

by Jon Rappoport​

(To read about Jon's mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)​

There are no variants.

Because there is no virus
. SARS-CoV-2 doesn’t exist. I’ve spent the past year and a half proving that.

But fantasies do exist. So do covert ops with intentions to deceive.

Thus, the “scientific world” is agog over the new South African variant, named B11529 (aka Omicron, Botswana). Woo. The ghost is coming out of the closet. Beware. COVID cases are rising…

“We don’t know whether the vaccine will be effective in the face of the new variant. New lockdowns may be necessary. Travel restrictions are coming. Batten down the hatches.”

I mean, really.

As you know, for the past few months stories in the press have been claiming the vaccine-conferred immunity is sinking like a stone. This story is absurd because, again, there is no virus. So there was no conferred immunity to begin with. But anyway, that’s the story that’s been circulating. So NOW…

“It turns out one major reason for the diminished effectiveness of the vaccine is…

“The NEW VARIANT. The South African B11529.”

Uh-huh. “The vaccine is having a tough time preventing infection caused by the new variant. We may need to enforce boosters every three months…”

Keep the fear going. Push harder for the vaccine. Explain away its failures. Fabricate rising case numbers, blaming them on the new variant. Institute heavy new lockdowns.

“The South African variant is deadlier than the Delta, which is deadlier than the original.”

And none of the three exists.

What does exist is fantasy, piled higher and deeper and thicker.

The variant is Fauci. The variant is Bill Gates. The variant is CDC/WHO. The variant is the World Economic Forum. And the Chinese regime. And presidents and governors. And the mainstream press.

And don’t forget this. Vaccine injuries and deaths have been escalating all over the world. In the US alone, reported injuries have broken above 900,000. As I’ve mentioned, the well-known Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare study concluded that, to obtain a true number of injuries, multiply the reported figure by 100.

Something is needed to explain all these injuries and deaths. That is, to lie about them.

And right on time, here comes the new variant.

“These people who seem to be injured by the vaccine are really keeling over from the original virus, the Delta, and woo, the South African B11529.”

Also: Recently, we’ve seen a spate of press stories with the theme---“scientists are mystified by the low COVID case numbers in Africa, where the vaccination rates are very low.” Boom. That story is now gone. Wiped out. Now it’s THE WORLD IS BEING ATTACKED BY THE SOUTH AFRICAN B111529 VARIANT.

Here is one of my articles covering the non-existence of SARS-CoV-2:

---Dr. Andrew Kaufman refutes “isolation” of SARS-Cov-2; he does step-by-step analysis of a typical claim of isolation; there is no proof that the virus exists---

The global medical community has been asserting that “a pandemic is being caused by a virus, SARS-Cov-2.”

But what if the virus doesn’t exist?

People have been asking me for a step-by-step analysis of a mainstream claim of virus-isolation. Well, here it is.

“Isolation” should mean the virus has been separated out from all surrounding material, so researchers can say, “Look, we have it. It exists.”

I took a typical passage from a published study, a “methods” section, in which researchers describe how they “isolated the virus.” I sent it to Dr. Andrew Kaufman, and he provided his analysis in detail.

I found several studies that used very similar language in explaining how “SARS-CoV-2 was isolated.” For example, "Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States, (Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 26, No. 6 -- June 2020)".

First, I want to provide a bit of background that will help the reader understand what is going on in the study.

The researchers are creating a soup in the lab. This soup contains a number of compounds. The researchers assume, without evidence, that “the virus” is in this soup. At no time do they separate the purported virus from the surrounding material in the soup. Isolation of the virus is not occurring.

They set about showing that the monkey (and/or human cells) they put in the soup are dying. This cell-death, they claim, is being caused by “the virus.” However, as you’ll see, Dr. Kaufman dismantles this claim.

There is no reason to infer that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup at all, or that it is killing cells.

Finally, the researchers assert, with no proof or rational explanation, that they were able to discover the genetic sequence of “the virus.”

Here are the study’s statements claiming isolation, alternated with Dr. Kaufman’s analysis:

STUDY: “We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage [in the soup in the lab]…”

KAUFMAN: “Vero cells are foreign cells from the kidneys of monkeys and a source of contamination. Virus particles should be purified directly from clinical samples in order to prove the virus actually exists. Isolation means separation from everything else. So how can you separate/isolate a virus when you add it to something else?”

STUDY: “…We cultured Vero E6, Vero CCL-81, HUH 7.0, 293T, A549, and EFKB3 cells in Dulbecco minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (5% or 10%)…”

KAUFMAN: “Why use minimal essential media, which provides incomplete nutrition [to the cells]? Fetal bovine serum is a source of foreign genetic material and extracellular vesicles, which are indistinguishable from viruses.”

STUDY: “…We used both NP and OP swab specimens for virus isolation. For isolation, limiting dilution, and passage 1 of the virus, we pipetted 50 μL of serum-free DMEM into columns 2–12 of a 96-well tissue culture plate, then pipetted 100 μL of clinical specimens into column 1 and serially diluted 2-fold across the plate…”

KAUFMAN: “Once again, misuse of the word isolation.”

STUDY: “…We then trypsinized and resuspended Vero cells in DMEM containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 2× penicillin/streptomycin, 2× antibiotics/antimycotics, and 2× amphotericin B at a concentration of 2.5 × 105 cells/mL…”

KAUFMAN: “Trypsin is a pancreatic enzyme that digests proteins. Wouldn’t that cause damage to the cells and particles in the culture which have proteins on their surfaces, including the so called spike protein?”

KAUFMAN: “Why are antibiotics added? Sterile technique is used for the culture. Bacteria may be easily filtered out of the clinical sample by commercially available filters (GIBCO) [6]. Finally, bacteria may be easily seen under the microscope and would be readily identified if they were contaminating the sample. The specific antibiotics used, streptomycin and amphotericin (aka ‘ampho-terrible’), are toxic to the kidneys and we are using kidney cells in this experiment! Also note they are used at ‘2X’ concentration, which appears to be twice the normal amount. These will certainly cause damage to the Vero cells.”

STUDY: “…We added [not isolated] 100 μL of cell suspension directly to the clinical specimen dilutions and mixed gently by pipetting. We then grew the inoculated cultures in a humidified 37°C incubator in an atmosphere of 5% CO2 and observed for cytopathic effects (CPEs) daily. We used standard plaque assays for SARS-CoV-2, which were based on SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) protocols...”

STUDY: “When CPEs were observed, we scraped cell monolayers with the back of a pipette tip…”

KAUFMAN: “There was no negative control experiment described. Control experiments are required for a valid interpretation of the results. Without that, how can we know if it was the toxic soup of antibiotics, minimal nutrition, and dying tissue from a sick person which caused the cellular damage or a phantom virus? A proper control would consist of the same exact experiment except that the clinical specimen should come from a person with illness unrelated to covid, such as cancer, since that would not contain a virus.”

STUDY: “…We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.”

KAUFMAN: “How do you confirm something that was never previously shown to exist? What did you compare the genetic sequences to? How do you know the origin of the genetic material since it came from a cell culture containing material from humans and all their microflora, fetal cows, and monkeys?”

---end of study quotes and Kaufman analysis---

My comments: Dr. Kaufman does several things here. He shows that isolation, in any meaningful sense of the word “isolation,” is not occurring.

Dr. Kaufman also shows that the researchers want to use damage to the cells and cell-death as proof that “the virus” is in the soup they are creating. In other words, the researchers are assuming that if the cells are dying, it must be the virus that is doing the killing. But Dr. Kaufman shows there are obvious other reasons for cell damage and death that have nothing to do with a virus. Therefore, no proof exists that “the virus” is in the soup or exists at all.

And finally, Dr. Kaufman explains that the claim of genetic sequencing of “the virus” is absurd, because there is no proof that the virus is present. How do you sequence something when you haven’t shown it exists?

Readers who are unfamiliar with my work (over 300 articles on the subject of the “pandemic” during the past year) will ask: Then why are people dying? What about the huge number of cases and deaths? I have answered these and other questions in great detail. The subject of this article is: have researchers proved SARS-CoV-2 exists?

The answer is no.


---end of Kaufman article---

And while I’m at it, here is another piece I wrote last year about how virus-propaganda (fairy tales) must be managed, in order to make the masses stand up and salute:

---The “hot zone” theory of new frightening diseases---

Remember? There was a 1994 book by that name--- and then “experts” began piling on---it went something like this:

“Out of the deep dark rainforests of Earth (cue sounds of native drumming), as a result of modern plane travel, viruses we’ve never encountered before will spread epidemics across the globe. Our immune systems, ill-equipped to recognize or deal with these strange killer germs, will fold up under the pressure, and all of civilization will be threatened with extinction.”

Let’s see. Since planes fly back and forth, and since all sorts of Westerners travel TO the rainforests, why haven’t we seen whole native tribes wiped out by viruses from the deep dark streets of Brooklyn?

It would even seem that viruses, common in, say, Norway, would cause trouble in Oregon.

Why does it have to be “viruses from jungles?” Or other faraway places like China? Why can’t we have the Second City Virus, emanating from a slaughterhouse in Chicago and infecting people in Nigeria? Why can’t we have a Big Easy virus from New Orleans traveling to Beijing?

Is it possible that jungles and Africa and China and Mexico are typically chosen for virus fairy tales because, in the minds of many Westerners, they satisfy a requirement of “strange,” “different,” “primitive,” and so on? We’re talking theater here---
and when you stage a propaganda play (fiction), you want to tap into the reflex instincts of the audience. The Hartford Virus, the Des Moines Virus, the Vancouver Virus just don’t fit the bill.

Because they can’t drive up the fear that jungles or Africa or China can.

Unless you’ve been living in an ice cave in the Arctic, you know selling fear of THE VIRUS is big business. To do that, you have to strike the right notes.


I personally would be interested in a Beverly Hills or a Scarsdale or a Park Avenue epidemic virus story. I’d like to see the media try to sell that one.

What about a Bill Gates Seattle virus that some Patient Zero unknowingly carries on a plane flight to Mexico City?

Think it through. We NEVER hear killer virus stories about germs traveling from Europe and America to Asia and Africa. Why not? Because such a story won’t sell. It won’t bite.

This is called a clue.


It tells you that virus-stories are shaped and managed and written and managed and broadcast according to a plan that has nothing to do with actual disease.

If a monkey in Africa can bite a man and thus transmit a virus to the West, then a salesman in Duluth can sneeze on a man at a local airport and thus send a virus to Ethiopia.

But amazingly, through secret communication among viruses, it never happens that way. The germs have decided what the traffic pattern is, and the CDC and the World Health Organization are just discovering What Is.

Sure they are. And if you buy that, I have condos for sale on the far side of the moon.

~~~
 

dacrunch

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
10,637
Reaction score
17,245
All over the MSM in Europe is the increasing cases and hospitalizations and the threat of omicron justifying mandatory jabs for all.

No squeaks even debating it...
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

Huge Win! Federal Judge Temporarily Blocks COVID Vaccine Mandate for Health Workers in 10 States

A federal court on Monday temporarily blocked the Biden administration’s COVID vaccine mandate for health workers at hospitals that receive federal funding, providing a temporary reprieve for healthcare workers in 10 states who faced having to be fully vaccinated by Jan. 4, 2022, or lose their jobs.
By Ray L. Flores II, Esq.


A federal court on Monday temporarily blocked the Biden administration’s COVID vaccine mandate for health workers at hospitals that receive federal funding.

Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free.

A federal court on Monday temporarily blocked the Biden administration’s COVID vaccine mandate for health workers at hospitals that receive federal funding, providing a temporary reprieve for healthcare workers in 10 states who faced having to be fully vaccinated by Jan. 4, 2022, or lose their jobs.

U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Schelp issued a preliminary injunction against the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Emergency Regulationrequiring nearly every employee, volunteer and third-party contractor to receive their first dose by Dec. 6 and meet the Jan. 4, 2022 deadline for both doses.

The injunction followed from a lawsuit filed Nov. 10 by a coalition of 10 states, led by Missouri. The lawsuit alleged the mandate violated the Administrative Procedures Act and the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
According to Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, the CMS threatened to turn some of last year’s “healthcare heroes” into this year’s unemployed.

The preliminary injunction pending trial prevents the Biden-Harris administration from enforcing the CMS mandate in the states of Missouri and Nebraska, Arkansas, Kansas, Iowa, Wyoming, Alaska, South Dakota, North Dakota and New Hampshire.

In his ruling, Judge Schelp wrote:
“The independent power of the states serves as a check on the power of the Federal Government: by denying any one government complete jurisdiction over all the concerns of public life, federalism protects the liberty of the individual from arbitrary power.”​

The court’s findings of questionable short- and long-term vaccine efficacy and breakthrough disease transmission are long overdue.

Most exciting are the judge’s comments on CMS rejecting mandate alternatives in those with natural immunity acquired from a previous coronavirus infection.
Children’s Health Defense (CHD) is encouraged that the judge determined, “If judicial review is to be more than an ‘empty ritual,’ the Court here must demand something more than the explanation offered for the action taken by CMS here.”

Judge Schlep opined:
“In general .. the lack of data regarding vaccination status and transmissibility — in general — is concerning. Indeed, CMS states that ‘the effectiveness of the vaccine to prevent disease transmission by those vaccinated [is] not currently known.’

“CMS also admits that the continued efficacy of the vaccine is uncertain. (‘[M]ajor uncertainties remain as to the future course of the pandemic, including but not limited to vaccine effectiveness in preventing breakthrough disease transmission from those vaccinated, [and] the long-term effectiveness of vaccination[.]’).”

It is likely the Biden administration will either seek an emergency injunction pending appeal in the 8th Circuit Court, or will wait for rulings from cases filed in three other states.

These challenges are significant as there currently are lawsuits fighting the CMS Emergency Regulation filed on behalf of more than half of U.S. states.

In closing, Judge Schlep opined:

“… Plaintiffs likely can show the CMS mandate is arbitrary and capricious because the evidence does not show a rational connection to support implementing the vaccine mandate, the mandate’s broad scope, the unreasonable rejection of alternatives to vaccination …”

Commenting on the ruling, CHD President and General Counsel Mary Holland said:

“It obviously appears the tide is turning. The 5th Circuit’s temporary restraining order against ‘fatally flawed’ Biden Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) employer vaccine mandate and subsequent suspension by OSHA of the mandate confirm this fact.”
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

Would the US government let Jesus cure COVID?


by Jon Rappoport
December 8, 2021
(To join our email list, click here.)

In the 1990s, I watched a federal trial in a Los Angeles courtroom. The defendant was charged with selling medical drugs without a license.

The defendant was prepared to argue that a) the substance he was selling was naturally produced in the body and b) it was effective.

The prosecution moved to exclude such testimony, on the grounds that it was irrelevant.

The judge agreed. Therefore, the trial was nasty, brutish, and short. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to prison for several years.

This is how the federal bureaucracy operates. “Do you have a government-issued license to heal? No? You’re a criminal.”

I believe that if Jesus of Nazareth were walking the Earth today, in the United States, he would be arrested on the same grounds.

This would be particularly so if he were curing COVID.

(Of course, as I’ve been proving for more than a year, the virus, SARS-CoV-2, doesn’t exist. Therefore, COVID doesn’t exist. For the most part, flu-like illness, and other traditional lung conditions, have been repackaged and relabeled “COVID.” So Jesus would be curing those lung illnesses.)

Imagine this extreme case: in a stadium packed with 50,000 ill people who have been diagnosed with COVID, Jesus waves his hand and cures all of them in a few seconds.

Now he is threatening the profits of many companies, to say nothing of the power of the government, which backs the vaccine-drug monopoly to the hilt.
So Jesus is arrested. He is put on trial. He opts to defend himself without an attorney. He tells the court that curing COVID is no crime.

The prosecuting attorney objects. “Your Honor,” he says, “whether or not this man has cured COVID is beside the point. He has no license to practice medicine. That is why we are here today. We are simply establishing that a) he was practicing medicine and b) he has no government-issued license. That is the scope of this proceeding.”

The judge agrees. The verdict is decided. Guilty.

Of course, on another front, the major media, who depend for their existence on pharmaceutical advertising, take the ball and run with it. The networks and major newspapers seek out “experts,” who emphatically state that what a man calling himself Jesus of Nazareth “performed” in the stadium was mere hypnotism. It was all a placebo effect. Whatever sudden “remissions” may have occurred are just temporary. Tragically, COVID will return.

Not only that, these 50,000 people have effectively been sidetracked and diverted from seeking “real care from real doctors.” With vaccines, with antiviral drugs, they would have stood a chance of surviving and living long normal lives.

Other media pundits send up this flag: “Many of those present in the stadium were bitter clingers to their religion. They refuse to accept science. They are living in the past. They favor superstition over real medical care. In fact, they are threatening the whole basis of modern medicine, since other confused and deluded Americans may now turn away from doctors and seek snake-oil salesmen and preachers for healing.”

From the highest perches of political power in this country, the word quietly goes out to the media: don’t follow up on those people who were in the stadium; don’t try to track them; don’t compile statistics on their survival rates; don’t investigate whether they were cured; move on to other stories (distractions); let this whole madness die down.

But among the citizenry, an awareness spreads: the government is controlling healing through its issuance of licenses. That’s how the government is essentially protecting one form of “healing” and enabling it to become an all-encompassing cartel.

What would be the alternative or the adjunct to licenses?

Contracts.

Contracts are agreements entered into by consenting adults, who assume responsibility for the outcomes. In the case of healing, a contract would specify that people have a right to be wrong.

Let’s say two consenting adults, Jim and Frank, agree to allow Frank to treat Jim for his arthritis with water from a well on Frank’s land.

The two men acknowledge that no liability will be attached to the outcome. In other words, whether Jim get better or gets worse, no one is going file a suit. No one is going to go to the government for redress of wrongs.

The well water may be wonderful or it may be completely useless. Both men understand and acknowledge that. But they exercise a right to try the treatment, because they are free.

Immediately people say, “This is ridiculous. Water can’t cure arthritis. Frank is cheating Jim. Jim is a victim. He needs to see a doctor. He needs to go on arthritis drugs.”

No, Jim doesn’t have to do anything. He is free.

To put it another way, Jim has the right to be right or wrong. It’s his decision, which is beyond the scope of any authority.

If government tries to remove that right from all of us, it is essentially saying it knows what is correct, it knows what is true, it knows what we need and require, and it’s going to give it to us even if it has to shove it down our throats. Does that sound like freedom to you?

If a man calling himself Jesus of Nazareth lived in the United States today, and if he went around curing COVID, he would be arrested. He wouldn’t be charged with blasphemy or treason. He would be charged with something much simpler and more mundane: practicing medicine without a license.

And he would be convicted and sentenced.

Because the government, in its throne of corruption, wants to protect its proprietary and illegitimate and criminal interests.

“If we kill you with the COVID vaccine, it’s within our right, because we ARE practicing medicine with a license.”
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
21,910
Reaction score
35,275
“If we kill you with the COVID vaccine, it’s within our right, because we ARE practicing medicine with a license.”
I have never seen FAUCI's license. Since he works for .Gov he did not need a license ( just ask most who been in the military) just a diploma / sheepskin from a medical school.
Try practicing law or being a plumber w/o licenses.
 

dacrunch

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
10,637
Reaction score
17,245
I have never seen FAUCI's license. Since he works for .Gov he did not need a license ( just ask most who been in the military) just a diploma / sheepskin from a medical school.
Try practicing law or being a plumber w/o licenses.
and in most States, being a "massage therapist"... and having to "renew your license every 2 years after taking mandatory State-Approved update classes for $$$"... That happened to my wife in Florida... with 40 years of practice (Chiropractors, Spas, etc. & teaching in Certified Massage Schools)... and extensive knowledge in 99% of different "massage practices"...
Highway robbery...
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
21,910
Reaction score
35,275
FAUCI massages every Vaxxers' wallet.
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

COVID scam falls apart; it’s over


by Jon Rappoport
January 3, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

Since the beginning, I’ve been producing the evidence COVID is a scam. Now, official agencies are virtually admitting it.

On December 29, the head of the CDC, Rochelle Walensky, announced, in a White House press briefing, that the PCR test can register positive (meaning the person is “infected”) long AFTER infection is over.

Here’s Walensky’s money quote:
“…people can remain PCR positive for up to 12 weeks after infection and long after they are transmissible and infectious.”


That means MILLIONS of FALSE positive test results have been logged as REAL, in the past two years.

If you can’t trace the implications of THAT, I can’t help you.

Recall the old Zen Koan: What is the sound of one hand clapping?

The new version is: What is the sound of the White House press corps after Walensky’s admission?

And is the answer is: Nothing. Zero. Silence. And not stunned silence. No. Clueless silence. Sold-out silence.

No shouting. No furor. No questions.

“Dear Mr. Smith, We here at the CDC wish to inform to you that your positive PCR COVID test, administered in the spring of 2020, was misleading. There was no proof it meant you were infected. Therefore, your isolation, your hospitalization, during which your business closed and went into bankruptcy, your wife left home taking up residence with the children at her mother’s, your business partner committed suicide—all that was unnecessary. Thank you for your understanding.”

Of course, the blind following the blind following Fauci will say, “But…but…the CDC couldn’t have made a mistake that big…there must be some explanation…”

And yes, there is an explanation. The CDC and other public health officials have known all along they were running a scam. Committing a crime. A Nuremberg-type crime.
*********************************

My note re this:

I think it'll be ignored as much as they possibly can. It's gone to far for them to back off. More and more folks however are becoming aware of the perfidy.

 

chris_is_here

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,823
Reaction score
3,117
Location
Dystopia, USA
It is layers of lies. Diagnosing a virus that has not been isolated with a test that does not work. Telling people that vaxxine effectiveness is waning so you may need to take a booster (more of the exact same thing). Reporting auto fatalities and strokes as covid deaths based on a posthumous (erroneous) positive test result. Blaming the unvacccinated for the so-called pandemic, even though the shots don't prevent illness or spread of contagion. "Safe and effective" drugs that create myocarditis in young, healthy bodies. Imagine sending your all-star athlete kid for a vaxxine, and he's a bed-ridden wreck a week later, with the heart of an 85 old.

I've basically been excommunicated from most aspects of life where I live and I frankly could care less. I have little desire to associate with these brain-dead beta males and andrgenous snowflakes. Fuck em all in the ear, fuck em all in the other ear.
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223
Dr Humphries talk above is a must. She delves into the history of which we're never told. An excellent foray into truth which has been well hidden for one reason and one reason only, money, and certainly not our health. In fact, it's pretty obvious that they could care less that they're killing and maiming us as long as they continue to gather up the scheckels created by this fraud.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
5,042
Reaction score
5,237
Dr Humphries talk above is a must. She delves into the history of which we're never told. An excellent foray into truth which has been well hidden for one reason and one reason only, money, and certainly not our health. In fact, it's pretty obvious that they could care less that they're killing and maiming us as long as they continue to gather up the scheckels created by this fraud.

I wonder how long til jutube bans it?
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223
Was wondering that myself...
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

My bottom line on the existence of the virus, its isolation and sequencing

by Jon Rappoport
February 3, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

What proof would I accept? What sort of proof would convince me that SARS-CoV-2 exists?

Suppose, for example, a study described how researchers actually DID separate a virus from all the material surrounding it in their cell-soup in the lab?

Would that be enough?
And the answer is no.
Why?

Because I don’t trust studies based on research conducted in elite labs where no independent outsiders are allowed. And that’s the situation, when it comes to purported virus isolation.

These labs are like the famous bunkers where key government officials are taken, in the event of a massive attack against the country.

Try getting in off the street.

And who are these researchers in the super-secret labs? To put it another way, what sort of establishment do they represent?
Is it a clean establishment with a track record of honesty? Or is it a cartel with a criminal history?
If it’s a cartel, why should I accept the “scientific methods” of these researchers or their honesty?

As my long-time readers know, I’ve spent decades exposing lies and crimes of the medical cartel. Chapter and verse. (For example this: Medical weapons of mass destruction)

When it comes to vital issues that mean the difference between life and death—drug/vaccine-fueled destruction of human life; mistreatment and errors in hospitals; faked disease case and death numbers; inaccurate, meaningless, and deceptive diagnostic tests; the fabricated existence of a whole range of phony diseases and disorders and syndromes; the true numbers of medically caused deaths—medical authorities have been lying and sliming their way out of accountability for MANY decades.

And all this doesn’t touch on the history of public health declarations of epidemics that have turned out to be duds.

Nor does it include the overall history of Rockefeller medicine, which is based on the fatuous notion that there are thousands of separate and distinct diseases, each one of which is caused by a germ that must be treated by a profit-making drug.

Nor does it include the history of vicious suppression of innovative treatments developed by individuals who’ve worked outside the mainstream.

Therefore, suspicion is warranted. Is absolutely necessary. And “suspicion” is a vast understatement.

I refuse to trust the researchers who simply claim they’re isolating viruses.

When it comes to the so-called basic building blocks of MANY so-called diseases—which ARE “the viruses”—all the discovery-research HAS BEEN conducted by insiders in their off-limit labs. Without independent witnesses. Without educated witnesses who can watch and question each and every step of “the accepted method” for isolation of new viruses.

Frankly, you would have to be crazy to accept anything coming out of these insider-club labs.
So NO. I don’t accept such findings.

Before I describe how outsiders SHOULD be allowed to witness and participate in secret lab work, let me give you two quotes to consider.

They come from decidedly mainstream and elite editors of elite medical journals. These editors have read and explored and probed and lifted the fake cover from published medical material for decades. Material they themselves have published. Therefore, these are CONFESSIONS.

ONE: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)

TWO: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…”
“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)

Suspicion is warranted. It’s absolutely necessary. And again, “suspicion” is a vast understatement.

More than a year ago, I mentioned how virus-isolation research—if the word “research” applies at all—should be done.

And I issue this now, as a challenge, to the entire insider-club of virologists, all of whom claim their established method of finding and sequencing new viruses is scientific and rigorous:
Let’s have a film crew on site. As you work. In your lab. Looking over your shoulders and recording every move you make.

And with the film crew, let’s have several knowledgeable, outside, independent researchers. People whom you would ordinarily refuse to give the time of day. People who are insightful. Possibly, people like Dr. Stefan Lanka, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan.

As the film crew works, and as you conduct and describe your step-by-step “isolation” of a new virus, these outsiders can stop you at any moment and question you. In depth.

“Why did you just do that?” “Why didn’t you record that step?” “Explain that answer you just gave me. It makes no sense.” “Exactly what did you just withdraw from the solution in the dish, and how do you know what it was?”
This is not a public relations exercise or an educational documentary for medical students. This is REAL. This is research about your research. No holds barred.

You give a slippery answer to a question; you evade with a vague generality; you try to pull rank; you get nailed to the wall. On film.

THIS is the procedure I want.

All the way from start to finish. Including the so-called sequencing of the “new virus.”

And then we would know a great deal more about what you’re actually doing and not doing in your labs. In the absence of what I’m proposing and demanding, THERE IS NO REASON TO ASSUME THE PROCESS OF VIRUS-ISOLATION IS LEGITIMATE.

Virologists, your work affects every human on Earth. Profoundly. To see this, all a person has to do is look around him these days, at what is called “COVID.” It proceeds from your so-called discovery of SARS-CoV-2.

I view you virologists as I would view the court magicians and soothsayers and high priests who surrounded and advised the leaders of tribes and nations in ancient times.

Those “experts” huddled with the leaders in their very private rooms and spun stories and predictions, and recommended strategies to deal with supposed ongoing and looming crises.

And then the leaders took actions that affected the lives of all the people.
So it is now. With you virologists.

So my demands are entirely within bounds. If you have a shred of honesty, and if you stop and think about it, what I’m demanding is prosaically simple:
You account for every step you take. In real time. Where you work. Right there, you submit yourselves to the detailed scrutiny of independent outsiders.

That’s my bottom line.

And I challenge any scientist, analyst, investigator, doctor, researcher, reporter, alt. reporter who says what I’m demanding is not necessary. You’re wrong. You’re dead wrong.

You either haven’t thought things through, or you’re lying.

Someone is going to tell me what I’m demanding, as proof, is impossible. It would never happen. “They” would never let it happen. They would never let independent outsiders into their holy labs.

You think I don’t know that?

If outsiders can’t get into their labs, what does that tell you?

And someone will say, “We just have to rely on the best evidence we have.”

No we don’t. Because the best available evidence is no evidence.

In a vast sea of death-dealing medical lies, a sea that has existed for more than a hundred years (actually much longer), if experts tell you they’re discovering viruses in labs you can’t enter, and they say you must believe them, and you buy that…
I have condos for sale on the far side of the moon. Full cash only, no payments.

Here it is: Virologists are saying and writing they’ve found a purple man with pink hair and green lips and four arms living a thousand miles under the surface of a planet in the next solar system over. And he causes disease.

Then they’re saying, “Prove us wrong.”

On top of that, they’re saying, “You can’t watch us work while we discover such creatures.”

Conclusion: the purple man doesn’t exist.

Virologists, text me when you’ll let my people into your lab.
Until then, get lost.

Dear reader, the elephant in the room is trust, not data.

When it comes to the “discovery of viruses,” there are no reliable data. We, on the outside, are told that what happens behind locked doors is irrefutable. Period.

We’re told we just can’t understand what the pros are doing. The problem is our lack of knowledge, our lack of training.

We’re the peasants toiling in the valley. Our better, the baron, is up in his castle on top of the mountain. He’s planning our lives, he’s taking care of us.

Sure. Of course. Uh-huh.

Sounds familiar. It’s pretty much the history of the world.

Or it was, until people who came before us finally staked out a territory called freedom, which involved opening locked doors and finding out what lay behind them.

Consider a parochial example: the mafia. They, too, plan behind closed doors. They concoct methods of carrying out crimes. They record their profits. Then, finally, a prosecutor announces, “We were able to get into their books. We saw the details. We made arrests.”

I want my independent accountants to get into the virologists’ books. But not after the fact. I want my people to BE there while the virologists are creating the books, entry by entry, in the lab.

“Why did you just make that entry? Where did your conclusion come from? Who are you trying to kid? You’re just fabricating this stuff? You know, that’s called RICO. That’s a RICO case. Continuing criminal enterprise. They’ll send you away for a long time…”

And all of a sudden, the high and mighty virologist, who’s been able to con the world with his hustle, who knows how to come off sounding superior in every way, feels a dent in his armor. A big dent. He smells his own blood.
And he starts talking.

He wants to make a deal. He’ll roll over on his colleagues. He’ll expose the whole sham.

“…You don’t understand. It’s the money. It’s all about the money. Where it comes from. We have to do this kind of work. Otherwise, we starve. They cut us off. I know the people on the funding committees. I’ll give you their names. They take orders, too. The whole thing is a system. I can draw you a map. I can’t go to jail. I have a family. I’m paying eighty grand a year just to send my kids to college. There’s the mortgage, and the cottage on the Cape…”

The whole bluff POPS and deflates, and we begin to hear words we understand, at last. The words of confession. The down-to-earth sordid truth.

There was never a towering mystery in the castle on the hill.

There was just the passing of the buck. The soiled buck. From hand to hand.

The “science” was the front.

“…You see, it works this way. The pharmaceutical companies have to have new viruses. For every fake virus, they develop a real drug and a real vaccine. It’s marketing. That’s what they’re doing. That’s what they’ve always been doing. This is much bigger than anyone realizes. I’m just a little fish. The big boys run the whole show. They pay the Congress and the FDA. They pay everybody…”

He keeps talking. He can’t stop. He’s way past “isolation, purification and sequencing.” They’re in his rear-view mirror. Now he’s fighting for his freedom from prison. Now he’s telling the truth.

And the ever-present storm clouds over the valley where we peasants toil are blowing away. The air is fresher.
We’re breathing easier.

The big-cheese baron is really a shrunken little man—when he takes his perp walk in chains.
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
21,910
Reaction score
35,275
The big-cheese baron is really a shrunken little man—when he takes his perp walk in chains.
Its" a shrunken little man" already. Its name is FAUCI. It suffers from Napoleon, aka Little Man Syndrome . He is a darling of the left even when many of the left thought he was a TRUMP puppet ( Until the higher ups told them to STFU). He has been a mad scientist in DC since 1984, BEFORE HIV/AIDS, before EBOLA. ( That makes me wonder about his connections with those. Especially when I looked with amazement that "The Government " (FAUCI) was bringing in EBOLA patients to Texas Hospitals, a clean area from the virus ). Why bring it into the states when you and your "researchers" could have easily went and set up at the source.
FAUCI has Deaths on his hands, since his watch began in 1984.
FAUCI is a medical tyrant as he quashes alternative treatments where success may have been occurring. doctors and protocols.
FAUCI owns patent rights to ingredients used in all WuFlu Jab Juices.
FAUCI approves the changing of the medical definition of "VACCINE". mRNA is not a vaccine but meets all definitions of a therapeutic exactly like that of HCQ, Ivermectin, and others that are hit with restricted usage.
FAUCI is the highest paid Public Employee in US Government.
FAUCI is MENGELA 2.0
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223
The Terrain the film is out...


 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

Why can’t all viruses be fakes?


by Jon Rappoport
May 27, 2022
(To join our email list, click here.)

As you know, I’ve spent two years presenting evidence that the discovery of SARS-CoV-2 was a fake.
But I still press on. I examine the reality machine to see why people have such a problem acknowledging the virus—and by extension, all viruses—are nothing more than fairy tales.

I’ve come up with a number of explanations.

For example: DOCTORS.

Rejecting viruses is rejecting doctors. Doctors are security guards around the reality machine.

“Doctors can’t be wrong.”

“I can’t live in a world where doctors are so wrong.”

“I would never be able to stop weeping for the doctors who are so wrong.”

“If I told my doctor I didn’t believe in viruses, he would cut me off, and I couldn’t stand that.”

“I’m a journalist, and my best sources are doctors. The good doctors. And they all say viruses are real. I need my sources.”

“Without information from doctors, the world would spin into chaos.”

“My mind instructs me to believe doctors are only guilty of making mistakes up to a certain threshold. Beyond that, they simply can’t be criticized.”

OK, that takes care of the doctor fixation. But then we have what I call the world-view fixation:

“I don’t want to live in a world where there are no viruses. I would feel lonely and afraid.”

“I need the assurance that this world of ours is filled with tiny invisible killers. When I accept that, I can maintain equilibrium. You know, their threat and our response. It makes sense.”

“I love the idea of tiny killers. It comforts me.”

“I know precisely what to be afraid of in this world. Otherwise, I would start to see ghosts in closets at night again. I remember them from childhood. Those bastards were PERSONAL. They were coming for ME. Viruses are neutral. They don’t know me. To them, I’m just cells. They don’t PREFER me. They’ll take anyone. I like that.”

“Even if viruses are bullshit, they’re sophisticated bullshit. I favor that over some sort of primitive bullshit.”
“Rejecting viruses would equal rejecting my college education. I need that education to assert my superior position against the Lower Ignorant Ones.”

“The ecological chain of life includes viruses. If we remove them from the chain, Nature makes no sense. That’s what I hear.”

“The world is a dangerous place. This is good, because it helps me to explain my problems and lack of determination. Without viruses, the danger factor would be reduced, and I can’t have that.”
“The nature of reality dictates that when you’re right, you should be psychotically nasty about being right. If I’m not right about the existence of viruses, I can’t be as nasty as I want to be. And that would be a tragedy.”

“My father is a doctor, and he is a great man. At least as great as Al Capone.”
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

by Jon Rappoport​


Actually, this is a point I’ve made before, but now I’m boiling it down to the bare essentials.

Here we go:

If you were a) honest and b) the head of a major public health agency, there is something you would do, before declaring COVID a worldwide pandemic requiring extraordinary measures (e.g., lockdowns).

You would carry out a study.

A study to confirm that a newly discovered virus (SARS-CoV-2) really exists and is causing illness and death on a global scale.

After all, that is the claim. So wouldn’t you want to prove it’s true? Wouldn’t you feel compelled to do that---rather than just SAY it’s so?

This study wouldn’t focus on 20 or 30 or 50 patients. Those numbers are far too small. We’re not talking about the assertion of a minor viral outbreak. This is supposedly a titanic disaster.

You would gather together a few thousand people, at minimum.

All these people have been diagnosed with the purported pandemic infection.

You would take tissue samples from these patients and analyze them. You would test them for the presence of the new virus.

How could you NOT?

---And yet, such a study WAS NEVER DONE.

NEVER.


Try making excuses for that omission.

We’re talking about science on such a basic level, a child would understand it. You say X is causing a global pandemic---so test for the presence of X. Test for it in a sufficient number of people. Immediately.

Since you’re claiming more than a billion people could become infected, surely you should test at least a few thousand people, to make sure you’re right.

THIS WAS NEVER DONE as one complete study.

Now, we could certainly argue about the kind of test you should run to see if the virus is present. Is the test accurate? Is it reliable? Is it relevant? Of course. I’ve covered that subject exhaustively. But here I’m putting all that aside. The point is, you WOULD test for the virus.

Even the staunchest most rabid defenders of the existence of SARS-CoV-2 would have to agree, if they were being honest.

In other articles, I’ve offered much proof that SARS-CoV-2 doesn’t exist---but here I’m just making the most basic of points: RUN THE STUDY, DO THE TEST.

So what do I get in the way of replies from the “defenders?” They completely ignore the need for the wide-ranging study I’m demanding; and instead they persist in offering up small studies that focus on three patients, 40 patients---as if that is sufficient for declaring a global pandemic and wreaking massive destruction, by lockdowns and other measures.

They keep insisting these little minor studies are sufficient. Why? Because that’s all they have. So they pretend they’re doing good science.

They’re not.

They’re faking it.

Some of them know they’re faking it.

Here’s an analogy anyone should be able to understand. Putting aside lying and cheating and fabricating in doing studies, when a company wants to gain approval from the FDA for a new drug or a new vaccine, how many people do they enroll in their clinical trials, to prove safety and efficacy?

THOUSANDS.

Not three, or 50.

Pfizer enrolled 30,000 people in their clinical trial of the RNA COVID vaccine.

Why didn’t they just enroll 40?

Because they couldn’t get away with it.

I’m talking about standard research practice here.

So why doesn’t the same standard practice apply to proving the existence of a virus that is supposedly causing widespread illness and death across the world?

The rabid defenders of the virus also try to make this point: since millions and millions of people have tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, this proves the virus exists and is causing terrible damage.

This is what I call “after the fact” proof.

By that standard, Pfizer would have been able to market its COVID vaccine without any clinical trials at all.

No. The proof required for a major medical/scientific assertion comes WHEN THE ASSERTION IS FIRST MADE, before all sorts of brutal measures are taken that are based on that assertion.

The rabid defenders of the virus twist and distort science to fit their agenda---and then claim OF COURSE everybody knows the virus exists.

You buy what they’re selling at your own peril. They have their story and they’re telling it over and over.

They’re naked, walking in the rain, pitching you raincoats.

~~~​
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
21,910
Reaction score
35,275
THE FAUCIs 4 PRISONs :jail::jail:
Then a proper :hang::hang:
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223
by Jon Rappoport​

(To read about Jon's mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)​

I was going to recapitulate the evidence that the virus, SARS-CoV-2, doesn’t exist. But I decided to leave it out of this article. I’m just going to focus on the vaccine and what it’s supposed to be doing.

Let’s say you’re a vaccine researcher. You develop a new type of shot that deploys RNA.

The RNA, when injected, has one purpose. It induces cells of the body to produce something called the spike protein. That’s it.

According to your theory, the body’s immune system will spring into action and mount a neutralizing attack against this protein.

As result, when the “real thing” comes along---the virus, which contains the spike protein---the vaccinated person will be protected. His immune system will ward off the virus.

Since, again, the whole and only reason you’re injecting the RNA shot is to make the body produce the spike protein…

Aren’t you going to make sure the body is, in fact, producing that protein?

Of course you are.

How will you do that?

In the only way you can.

You’ll line up 10 or 20 thousand vaccinated people and test them.

You’ll test them to make sure you can find that spike protein in their bodies.

So show me the study.

Show me that vaccine researchers and vaccine makers and the FDA actually had that study done.

Where is it?

I’m not talking about looking at three patients in China or Berlin or New York. I’m talking about an extensive test to make sure the vaccine is doing the ONE thing it’s supposed to be doing. Across the population.

I don’t see that study anywhere.

A couple of people have told me, “Well, OF COURSE the vaccine causes the body to make the spike protein. That’s what the RNA technology is all about. We KNOW that. The technology is WELL ESTABLISHED.”

So is the safety of drugs, until the drugs start killing lots of people.

I want something simple. Verification. Across the population. Verification that the vaccine is doing the one thing it’s supposed to be doing.

And I want to know why this verification hasn’t been attempted.

One professor actually told me, “Perhaps you might be able to devise a test that would detect the spike protein directly in the body…but it might be very difficult to do that…”

Really? In other words, a vaccine was developed to do a thing it might be impossible to verify?

And this was understood up front?


A few months ago, someone sent me a study. She said the study showed the spike protein HAD been found in vaccinated people. I read the study. First of all, the authors were reporting on just a few people. No good. Not useful. Second, as far as I could tell, the method of finding the spike protein was suspect. It relied on detecting indirect and unreliable markers that supposedly proved (but didn’t prove) that the protein was present in these few people. No good. Not useful.

Where is the large correctly done study?

I don’t find it anywhere.

Dr. Andrew Kaufman, who has dismantled and exposed the non-scientific process by which virologists’ claimed to have discovered SARS-CoV-2, offers these important comments about the spike protein:

“You can buy a readily available SARS-Cov-2 Spike protein antibody which can be used in a standard western blot or ELISA to test recipients of the injections for the spike protein. This is cheap and easy to do. Why hasn’t it been done?”

I believe the answer is clear. The scientists and bureaucrats in charge don’t want to run the test. They want to avoid finding out whether the one thing the vaccine is supposed to achieve isn’t being achieved. They want to avoid finding out the vaccine, on their own terms, is a total failure.
 

UcoOnca

Seeker
Joined
Apr 22, 2022
Messages
366
Reaction score
1,207
This conversation with Dissolving Illusions co-author, Roman Bystrianyk, is a great vaccine red pill.

No vaccine, ever, has done what it was said to have done. Is it because viruses don't exist?

Watch and make up your own mind.

 

Juristic Person

They drew first blood
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
6,310
Reaction score
5,189
Anybody hear about this new virus they are calling "Covid-19"? Apparently there are many different forms of it they call "variants" and some are more deadly than others. But I'm hearing that if you cover your mouth and keep your hand over it then you will be safe. It also helps to stand 72 inches away from other people and if those people got injected with experimental gene altering messenger rna, then you will be even more safer.

Also, since this new virus came, other viruses have gone away so it seems to have some beneficial protection elements to it in keeping people from getting things like the flu.

I'll post more as I uncover new information about this virus...
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223
Anybody hear about this new virus they are calling "Covid-19"? Apparently there are many different forms of it they call "variants" and some are more deadly than others.

Thats the story. But IMHO it's only a story. A narrative crafted to make you fear, and thus give up your money and life to those who wish to enslave you with this narrative and all the fear and concernation such engenders.
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

by Jon Rappoport​

(To read about Jon's mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)​

Let me put this on the table: Inflation IS their climate change plan.

That old broken down demented grifter, Joe Biden, said the price of gas at the pump was the doing of GAS STATION OWNERS, and all they had to do was cut the price.

The Political Left---meaning Globalists---want to limit driving and traveling and use of oil across the board. This is the limit-CO2 agenda.

But that agenda was and is a cover for enforced poverty and lower energy use.

That agenda is the Globalists’ planned future for all of us.

A decrepit country struggling to maintain any sort of functioning economy at all.

Because that country is easier to take over.

It has nothing to do with global warming and CO2, which was a con from the get-go. A way of throttling industry.

Every tyrant down through history has longed for the day when he could say to the people, “If you don’t want to starve, let me take care of you. I will. You just have to obey all my orders.”

I don’t know what the oil company CEOs are doing these days. But if they grew a pair of balls, they would find a way to deliver oil at a reasonable price, even if they had to break the law to do it and force the federal government to send in troops to stop them. THEN the public would know what’s going on. THEN the people would speak. THEN we would have something.

The problem is, the oil execs have been sucking at the federal money teat for far too long. They’ve turned into collaborators.

They don’t know how to go public and speak straight from the shoulder to the people. They only know how to do corporate speak, blown-dry air-brushed bullshit.

They’ve had it too easy.

We got a preview of corporate courage when Trump stood aside and let that worm, little Anthony Fauci, take over the country during the fraudulent pandemic. The national lockdown was declared, and big-time corporate heads did NOTHING to rebel and keep their doors open for business. They just gathered around the federal bailout trough and snorted in cash.

They STILL don’t see what’s waiting for them up the road. The Globalist plan to enforce poverty means the customers bases of those corporations will shrink and keep shrinking.

More and more, the corporations will become giant bureaucracies of the federal government.

Not ONE of these CEOs will stand up and say, “America, this is what is REALLY going on…the government is driving you into poverty. We’re not going to sit here and take it. As of today, we’re all-out rebels, but we need millions of you to support us…”

America is 10 CEOs and 10 microphones away from the beginning of a revolution.

If people could see it.​
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

Why do governments salute when he predicts a pandemic and tells them to lock down their countries?​

Does anyone care about his past?​

Why does he still have a prestigious job?​

Who is he connected to?​

by Jon Rappoport​

(To read about Jon's mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)​

Note: I’m republishing this piece, from 2020, so people don’t forget the criminal and the crime…

Neil Ferguson, through his institute at London’s Imperial College, can call the shots on a major percentage of the global population.

He’s Mr. Genius, when it comes to projecting computer models of epidemics.

Fellow experts puff up his reputation.

According to the Business Insider (4/25/2020), “Ferguson's team warned Boris Johnson that the quest for ‘herd immunity’ [letting people live their lives out in the open in the UK] could cost 510,000 lives, prompting an abrupt U-turn [massive national lockdown in the UK]…His simulations have been influential in other countries as well, cited by authorities in the US, Germany, and France.”

Not only cited, not only influential, but swallowed whole.

Business insider continues: “On March 23, the UK scrapped ‘herd immunity’ in favor of a suppression strategy, and the country made preparations for weeks of lockdown. Ferguson's study was responsible.”

There’s more. A lot more.

Same BI article: “Dr Deborah Birx, coronavirus response coordinator to the Trump administration, told journalists at a March 16 press briefing that the Imperial paper [Ferguson’s computer projection] prompted the CDC's new advice to work from home and avoid gatherings of 10 or more.”

Ferguson, instigator of LOCKDOWN. Stripping away of basic liberties. Economic devastation.

So let’s look at Ferguson’s track record, spelled out in the BI piece:

“Ferguson co-founded the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, based at Imperial, in 2008. It is the leading body advising national governments on pathogen outbreaks.”

“It gets tens of millions of dollars in annual funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and works with the UK National Health Service, the US Centres for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC), and is tasked with supplying the World Health Organization with ‘rapid analysis of urgent infectious disease problems’."

Getting the picture?

Gates money goes to Ferguson.

Ferguson predicts dire threat from COVID, necessitating lockdowns---thus preparing people to accept a vaccine. The vaccine Gates wants.

Ferguson supplies a frightening computer projection of COVID deaths---to the CDC and WHO. Ferguson thus communicates a rationale for the Gates vaccine plan.

National governments surrender to WHO and CDC. LOCKDOWNS.

Business Insider: “Michael Thrusfield, a professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, told the paper he had ‘déjà vu’ after reading the [Ferguson] Imperial paper [on COVID], saying Ferguson was responsible for excessive animal culling during the 2001 Foot and Mouth [mad cow] outbreak.”

“Ferguson warned the government that 150,000 people could die. Six million animals were slaughtered as a precaution, costing the country billions in farming revenue. In the end, 200 people died.”

“Similarly, he [Ferguson] was accused of creating panic by overestimating the potential death toll during the 2005 Bird Flu outbreak. Ferguson estimated 200 million could die. The real number was in the low hundreds.” HELLO?

“In 2009, one of Ferguson's models predicted 65,000 people could die from the Swine Flu outbreak in the UK — the final figure was below 500.”

So you have to ask yourself, why would anyone believe what Ferguson has been predicting in this COVID hustle?

Are his fellow experts that stupid?

Are presidents and prime ministers that stupid?

And the answer is: This is a monumental covert op; some people are that stupid; some are caught up in the op and are afraid to say the emperor has no clothes; some are aware of what is going on, and they want to destroy national economies and lead us into, yes, a new world order.

Gates knows he has his man: Ferguson. As the recipient of tens of millions of dollars a year from the Gates Foundation, Ferguson isn’t about to issue a model that states: COVID is nothing to worry about, let people live their lives and we’ll be all right. The chance of that happening is on a par with researchers admitting they never properly identified a new virus as the cause of illness in 2019, in Wuhan.

In order to justify injecting every man, woman, and child in the world with heavy metals, synthetic genes that alter genetic makeup, a host of germs, and who knows what else, Gates needs A STORY ABOUT A DEADLY VIRUS THAT NECESSITATES SHUTTING DOWN AND IMPRISONING THE PLANET, ACHIEVING A CAPTIVE AUDIENCE.

He’s got the story, all dressed up in a computer model, composed by a man with a past record of abject and devastating failures.

Neil Ferguson is the ghost in the machine. The machine is the World Health Organization and the CDC. The man behind the ghost is Bill Gates.​
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

The Steve Kirsch debate about the existence of the virus



Let me be clear. I’m speaking for myself here, as a reporter who says SARS-CoV-2 doesn’t exist.

I’m not speaking for Andrew Kaufman, Stefan Lanka, Tom Cowan, Christine Massey, Sam Bailey, or anyone else who has come to the same conclusion.

OK. Steve Kirsch frames the debate this way: There are a set of facts about COVID you can lay on the table. Then you decide which hypothesis best explains those facts.
In his case, he chooses: “SARS-CoV-2 exists.”

This approach is an elementary mistake.

I’m not challenging any hypothesis. I’m ATTACKING A STRAIGHT-OUT LABORATORY PROCEDURE.

My attack is on the level of: “You poured the liquid from beaker A into beaker B. Wrong. You should have poured it into beaker C.”

Virologists employ a lab procedure to discover a virus they’ve never seen before. They claim this procedure ISOLATES the virus from all the surrounding material in a soup they create. I say their procedure doesn’t produce that result at all. Period.

I say there is no isolation.

That’s it in a nutshell.

Arguing about hypotheses is entirely beside the point.

But I will write a few words on that subject, just to clear the air.

If a real scientist laid a whole collection of facts on the table, he would then do a hard examination of each one, to make sure it is a true fact. When satisfied, he might sit and think and ask himself, “What hypothesis would explain these facts?”

Let’s say he comes up with one. That’s just the beginning of doing actual science. Why? Because the only scientific value of a hypothesis is its ability to PREDICT.

And by that I mean, MAKE A SPECIFIC AND VERY USEFUL PREDICTION THAT CAN BE VERIFIED OR DENIED BY ACTUAL EXPERIMENT.

Claiming a hypothesis which explains a set of facts as a reason to pop champagne corks signals a gross misconception about what science is.

Forming a debate on that basis would be futile, irrelevant, and a waste of time.

Finally, for now, carrying out a debate on video may impart useful information to viewers, but there is a reason why medical and science journals stubbornly persist in presenting studies as words on the page---as opposed to having the authors dress up and describe their work on camera instead.

Words on the page are much better.

They allow other scientists, journalists, and civilians to go over a study very carefully, phrase by phrase. They allow other scientists to REPLICATE the authors’ work, in order to discover whether the results and conclusions stand up.

Of course, in this “fast moving world, with people on the go, living the active lifestyle,” we should perhaps adopt Easier and Quicker as the mode of scientific decision-making.

“OK, Fred, are the cameras set up, are we ready to roll? Are all the debaters online? Have you got the poll screen in place, so the viewers can vote and decide what’s science and what isn’t when we’re done?”

I’m breathless with anticipation.

On the other hand, if we have “a panel of independent experts” on hand to make that ruling, we can rent them out, in the future, to The New England Journal and The Lancet. Yes, a roving panel making all sorts of judgment calls. They’ll spice up science, which is badly in need of instant melodrama and boffo box office.

Hell, let’s make this debate a game show.

“Great idea, Jim. A couple of tall models in bikinis walking around with big signs, and a host like, oh, Chris Wallace or that guy who keeps talking about laying down a bet for a million dollars.

What’s his name? Kirsch. Steve Kirsch.”

Stevie, baby, nobody cares about your money. Nobody cares about your million dollars.
-- Jon Rappoport
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

The Many Medicinal Benefits of Cannabis and Cannabidiol (CBD)

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

STORY AT-A-GLANCE​

  • There are many medical benefits to cannabis and CBD (cannabidiol) and they are increasingly recognized by the scientific community
  • As of 2022, 19 states have legalized cannabis for adult use and the 2018 Farm Bill legalized industrial hemp as a crop
  • As patients and the medical community embrace cannabis and CBD for pain relief, harm and even deaths from opioids will diminish
  • Los Sueños Farms outside of Pueblo, Colorado, the largest U.S. cannabis farm with 36 acres and 36,000 plants, shows how technologically advanced the industry has become
  • The existence of cannabinoid receptors in humans and other mammals, called the endocannabinoid system, gives clues to why cannabis and CBD affect so many body systems positively
  • Many industries, from Big Pharma to the alcohol, lumber, gas and oil and clothing industries, could lose profits from a booming cannabis industry
This article was previously published February 2, 2019, and has been updated with new information.
Production of cannabis is booming as the medical benefits of CBD (cannabidiol) are increasingly recognized.
According to Project CBD, at least 50 conditions1 are believed to be improved by CBD, including pain, seizures, muscle spasms, nausea associated with chemotherapy, digestive disorders such as colitis and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), degenerative neurological disorders such as dystonia, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, mood disorders, anxiety, PTSD and high blood pressure.
Yet, despite the legalization of cannabis for adult use in 19 states2 in the past few years and the inclusion in the 2018 Farm Bill of industrial hemp as a crop,3 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration up until recently listed CBD as a Schedule I drug, the most dangerous drug category reserved for drugs like heroin and LSD.
The classification made no sense because CBD is nonpsychoactive — it is not addictive, does not produce a "high" and there are few to no dangerous side effects. In fact, there seems to be no reason for the FDA and Drug Enforcement Agency's (DEA) long-term vilification of CBD except possible collusion with Big Pharma, whose dangerous and lucrative pain treatments.
In 2022 opioids are causing over 100,000 Americans' deaths every year — equivalent to around 274 deaths a day. In states where CBD and cannabis are becoming widely used, there are few reports of negative social or medical consequences. Conversely, there is evidence that in the same states where cannabis is legal, there have been fewer opioid emergencies, overdoses and deaths.4

The restrictive, Schedule I classification of CBD has also produced medical "refugees" — people whose health conditions are only improved by CBD, not pharmaceutical products, forcing them to relocate to states with looser CBD laws.

A Surprising but Suspicious Change in CBD Classification​

At the end of 2018, FDA surprised many with this modification of the Schedule I classification for some CBD products:5
"With the issuance of this final order, the Acting Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration places certain drug products that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and which contain cannabidiol (CBD) in schedule V of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Specifically, this order places FDA-approved drugs that contain CBD derived from cannabis and no more than 0.1 percent tetrahydrocannabinols in schedule V.
This action is required to satisfy the responsibility of the Acting Administrator under the CSA to place a drug in the schedule he deems most appropriate to carry out United States obligations under the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961."
Schedule V drugs are considered to have a lower potential for abuse than other controlled drugs.6 The category includes drugs whose benefits may outweigh risks such as those for antidiarrheal, antitussive and analgesic conditions such as cough preparations with less than 200 milligrams of codeine like Robitussin AC, Lomotil, Motofen, Lyrica and Parepectolin.
Yet, does the recent modification of schedule status really reflect new realism on the part of the FDA, or is it simply a nod to drug makers' desire to "get in on the action" and market share? After all, we have seen a similar phenomenon when Big Pharma attacks the reliability, effectiveness and quality control of popular supplements and vitamins while hypocritically seeking to market the same products themselves.

Cannabis Farms Are Becoming Large and Efficient​

The Los Sueños Farms,7 outside of Pueblo, Colorado, with 36,000 plants, depicted in a recent video called "Largest Outdoor Cannabis Farm in World, Canna Cribs Episode 4," from Growers Network, reveals how technologically far the industry has come.
The 36-acre farm, which consists of four separate farms, processes 40,000 pounds of "biomass" each harvest. Depending on the genetic expression of the plants, some are grown outside, some in greenhouses and some in greenhouses with no walls to allow solar maximization while permitting fresh air to circulate and prevent too much heat from accumulating.
For the outdoor plants, an advanced drip watering system with an emitter every 12 inches provides pressure compensated irrigation and the ability to provide specific nutrients. Drones with several lenses hover above the plants and report back their respiration rate, any insects or disease risks and plants that might be struggling for one reason or another. Humidity and lighting are computer controlled for indoor plants.
When the crop is ready, cannabis flowers are dry trimmed in an advanced piece of machinery called a twister. While the machinery does not require human labor, a quality control person does inspect the product as it comes out of the twister to make sure all stems have been removed at their base.

Cannabis Post Production Processing Is Crucial for Quality​

Fertility and nutrients are important, say Los Sueños Farm employees, but the quality of the product itself comes down to curing. In massive curing rooms, racks of product dry at a temperature of 64 degrees Fahrenheit and are made ready for packaging in seven to 10 days.
They are then vacuum packed and nitrogen sealed in 10-pound bags. The bags have a window so customers can view the cannabis and assess its quality without exposing it to the harmful effects of light or environmental humidity.
After the cannabis leaves Los Sueños Farms, preparation continues for the end user. At processing facilities and retail dispensaries like the Colorado-based Mesa Organics, a partner of Los Sueños, sophisticated extraction methods are then used to cull the raw crude extract from the plant material.
At Mesa Organics, supercritical CO2 is used for the extraction process, not hydrocarbons, says owner Jim Parco, because "any hydrocarbons that are burned over 900 degrees convert to benzene" which can be lethal.
In fact, hydrocarbon extraction is banned in some parts of California, says Parco, because of the "occupational risks to the communities." The use of supercritical CO2 also creates a purer product. After lipids, waxes and terpenes are removed through extraction, CBD, THC and other cannabinoids from the plant remain and the product is ready to be marketed.

A Cannabinoid With Many Benefits​

CBD is one of some 104 compounds classified as cannabinoids in cannabis plants, with as many as seven or eight more recently discovered compounds that may be considered cannabinoids.8 CBD is contained in both Cannabis Sativa (hemp) and Cannabis Indica (marijuana), but hemp has such a low CBD content, it is primarily grown for fiber and seed — uses we will discuss later.
It is not a surprise CBD has so many benefits since there is actually an endocannabinoid system in the human body and other mammals. It is part of our physiology. Cannabinoid receptors, which recognize and interact with CBD, are found in the human brain, lungs, liver, kidneys and immune system.
There are myriad medical uses attributed to CBD, and the list keeps growing. Here are some uses that have recently been scientifically documented.
Allergic asthma — "CBD treatment decreased the inflammatory and remodeling processes in the model of allergic asthma," according to the European Journal of Pharmacology9
Anxiety and sleep — "Cannabidiol may hold benefit for anxiety-related disorders," The Permanente Journal10
Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) — "Cannabis in ASD patients appears to be [a] well tolerated, safe and effective option to relieve symptoms associated with ASD," Scientific Reports11
Blood pressure — "This data shows that acute administration of CBD reduces resting BP and the BP increase to stress in humans," JCI Insight12
Cancer pain, nausea and lack of appetite — "The National Cancer Institute currently recognizes medicinal C. sativa as an effective treatment for providing relief in a number of symptoms associated with cancer, including pain, loss of appetite, nausea and vomiting, and anxiety," BioMed Research International13
Cancer/tumors — "Cannabidiol (CBD), one of the compounds present in the marijuana plant, has antitumor properties," Cancer Letters14
Diabetes — "These results suggest that the neuroprotective effects of CBD in middle-aged diabetic rats ... are related to a reduction in neuroinflammation," Neurotoxicity Research15
Epilepsy — "CBD is a well-tolerated and effective antiseizure agent and illustrates a potential disease-modifying effect of CBD on reducing both seizure burden and associated comorbidities well after the onset of symptomatic seizures," Epilepsia16
Inflammation — "CBD that exerts prolonged immunosuppression ... might be used in chronic inflammation, the terpenoids ... might thus be used to relieve acute inflammation," Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research17
Irritable bowel diseases — "Clinical trials suggest that there may be a therapeutic role for cannabinoid therapy in the treatment of IBD," Current Gastroenterology Reports18
Multiple Sclerosis — "As cannabis legalization has impacted the variety of cannabis products available, there appears to be growing numbers ... using cannabis ... reporting use of highly efficacious products with minimal side-effects," Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders19
Neurodegenerative and cardiovascular diseases — "CBD has been found to possess antioxidant activity in many studies, thus suggesting a possible role in the prevention of both neurodegenerative and cardiovascular diseases," BioMed Research International20
Ovarian function/female reproductive system — Impacts "the female reproductive system where it affects folliculogenesis, oocyte maturation and ovarian endocrine secretion," Journal of Ovarian Research21
PTSD and nightmares — "Administration of oral CBD in addition to routine psychiatric care was associated with PTSD symptom reduction ... CBD also appeared to offer relief in a subset of patients who reported frequent nightmares as a symptom of their PTSD," Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine22
Pain, migraine, detoxification from opioids — "There is accumulating evidence for various therapeutic benefits of cannabis/cannabinoids, especially in the treatment of pain, which may also apply to the treatment of migraine and headache. There is also supporting evidence that cannabis may assist in opioid detoxification and weaning, thus making it a potential weapon in battling the opioid epidemic," Headache23
Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases — "CBD may be effective in the treatment of five syndromes, currently labeled recalcitrant to therapeutic success, and wherein improved pharmacological intervention is required: intractable epilepsy, brain tumors, Parkinson's disease (PD), Alzheimer's disease (AD) and traumatic brain injury," Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience24
Pediatric seizures — "The efficacy and safety profile of CBDV suggest it may have therapeutic value for early life seizures," Neuropharmacology25

Why Is There Such Resistance to Cannabis and CBD?​

Despite CBD's many benefits, it remains in a legal no man's land, says the Brookings Institution:26
"Over the past 22 years, 33 states have legalized cannabis for medical purposes, and over the past six years, 10 states have legalized cannabis for adult use. Every one of those programs is illegal under federal law, with no exceptions [if federal authorities choose to prosecute] ...
Even CBD products produced by state-legal, medical or adult-use cannabis programs are illegal products under federal law, both within states and across state lines ... Under the 2018 Farm Bill, there will be more broadly available, legal, CBD products; however, this does not mean that all CBD products are legal moving forward."
Many trace the original vilification of cannabis which gained it Schedule I status to its association with hippies and opposition to the Vietnam War 50 years ago. Not only were "pot" arrests a way of muzzling protestors, the "out of the box" thinking that marijuana fostered fed young people's strong questioning of authority, fueling the counter culture and war opposition.
But, as I noted earlier, the medical use of CBD oil, especially as a treatment for pain, also represents a significant threat to the sale of opioids which have so enriched Big Pharma in the last decade.
The cannabis plant also poses economic threats to the lumber, energy, food and other industries; its fiber products can be used to make paper, biofuel, building materials, food products and oil, clothing, shoes and even jewelry.
In fact, according to Viridis Labs, industrial hemp "can be used in an estimated 50,000 different products across a wide spectrum of industries including textiles, bioplastics, Cosmetics, building materials and human and animal."27 Still, if the use of CBD were more widely adopted by Americans for medical treatments, we would probably all be healthier.
 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

Part 2: The Steve Kirsch debate on the existence of the virus

Doing revolutionary science​

I’m moving on from Part 1 into a completely different area.
There is lab work in the sciences that crucially affects populations. Two examples: virologists claiming they’ve isolated SARS-CoV-2; and researchers deciding they’ve found a way to adapt RNA technology to produce a COVID vaccine.
In the first case, the purported discovery of SARS-CoV-2 enabled the launch of the global pandemic announcement, which eventually led to the lockdowns and the crashing of economies. In the second case, the RNA-vaccine “breakthrough” led to the vaccination of billions of people, and massive numbers of injuries and deaths.
These are crucial effects, to say the least.
And yet, those on the outside, who have no access to these labs AS THE WORK IS BEING DONE, those who are independent scientists and analysts and can only read the studies once they are published---
---This is an unconscionable situation, when you stop and think about it.
The whole world is changed by the research, but we can’t watch it IN PROGRESS.
People have been brainwashed into thinking this lack of access to labs is normal. Standard. Non-official persons entering these labs and tracking the work step by step would amount to a criminal invasion. That’s what we’re supposed to believe:
“Just accept our statements about our findings and shut up and obey.”
“We’re the pros. You’re the idiots.”
“We’re certified. You’re the guinea pigs.”
“Call security, call the FBI, call DHS, terrorists are trying to break into our lab.”
“This is a holy sanctum, anointed by God. You’re a mortal sinner.”
Here’s my kind of debate on the existence of SARS-Cov-2. Here’s my bottom, bottom line.
Virologists are compelled to replicate, in the lab, the so-called discovery of SARS-CoV-2. An outside team of truly independent scientists and journalists is present.
So is a camera crew. With many cameras. And many mics.
The team watches every single move the virologists make. Any member of the team can stop the work and ask a question or criticize a move.
The questions and answers and the criticisms and replies are all recorded. Ditto for every action the virologists take.
THIS is a REAL debate. The most real debate.
“Wait. That’s ridiculous. You can’t expect these highly trained virologists to submit themselves to this kind of…inspection.”
Of course I can.
For example: Our team member in the lab says, “All right, you’re observing that the monkey cells and the human cells in this soup you’ve created are dying off. You claim the killer must be ‘the virus’ in the patient’s tissue sample---the sample you dropped in the soup. You claim nothing else in the soup could be killing the cells. So let me ask you this? Where is the control experiment?”
“The what?”
“The control. My, my. You really forgot about that?”
“I don’t understand. Turn off the cameras.”
“Leave them on, boys. This is interesting. Let me explain, Dr. High Horse. You should have a second dish of soup that is absolutely identical to the first dish, except the second dish does NOT contain the tissue sample from a patient. You also keep an eye on that second dish and see whether the monkey cells and the human cells in it die off. If they do…then your contention that ‘the virus’ in the patient sample is killing those cells is worthless. And you have no evidence your virus is in the patient sample. Or that it exists.”
“Oh. Well…”
“Well, what? You don’t mean to say all those virologists in all those labs who claimed they found the new virus omitted the control experiment, do you?”
YOU KNOW, THAT KIND OF THING. THAT KIND OF INVESTIGATION.
On camera, in the lab, in person.
“That would never happen. They would never let you in there.”
Which proves what? I’m just stating what the MOST REAL DEBATE WOULD CONSIST OF, in a half-sane world. It would look exactly like that.
Subscribe now
Here’s a parallel for you. A civilian no one ever heard of develops a car he says runs on water. He says he’s got a new process that VERY cheaply splits the water into hydrogen and oxygen, and the car runs on the hydrogen.
Over years and decades, the legend grows. Finally, major media are starting to nibble around the edges of the story.
So one day, a bunch of Saudis and oil execs and scientists and men in suits show up at this man’s garage, and express great interest in his work. THEY REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHETHER THIS CRAZY GUY HAS STUMBLED ON A REVOLUTIONARY WAY TO POWER A CAR.
So what would they ask him to do?
See, they’re the outsiders with no access, and he’s the insider.
Are they just going to ask him for assurances?
Hell no. They’re going to ask him to take the engine apart and put it back together again. They’re going to ask him to take the fuel system apart and put it back together again. They’re going to want to go through his whole car and his garage and his kitchen and his bathroom with a fine-toothed comb. BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS SITUATION, SINCE IT COULD AFFECT THE FUTURE OF CIVILIZATION, AND THEIR PROFITS, AND SO ON.
They’re not screwing around.
And neither should we.
Our lives and futures and the lives of future generations are on the line with this “virus thing.”
We should be looking at every beaker and tube and slide and instrument in the virology lab. We should be looking over the shoulders of the virologists and watching every move they make and asking pointed questions and demanding answers.
So we really know whether they’re doing science or preposterous bullshit.
And of course we wouldn’t be paying attention to random assurances from “highly qualified and respected scientists” along the way. We’d be studiously ignoring them.
If you need another parallel to the real kind of investigation I’m demanding, think of bringing a team into the Vatican and inspecting every inch of space in every building, including the basements and caverns…to see what’s really there. The whole enchilada.
All right, you get the idea. You see what I’m asking for.
Now, short of that, what do we have? What can we get access to?
Well, it’s not entirely reliable, but here it is:
We can read published studies which claim to have found SARS-CoV-2. Those studies all have methods sections. In them, the researchers describe, step by step, what they did to “isolate the virus.”
We have that.
Subscribe now
I’m now going to republish one of those methods sections, chunk by chunk, and have Dr. Andrew Kaufman make his criticisms as we go along. I published all this about a year ago.
I want to emphasize that Dr. Kaufman’s analysis should be just the beginning of highly detailed analyses of these methods sections, from a number of other independent critics. We need much more of this.
The devil is in the details.
Here we go:
I found several studies that used very similar language in explaining how “SARS-CoV-2 was isolated.” For example, "Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States, (Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 26, No. 6 -- June 2020)".
STUDY: “We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage [in the soup in the lab]…”
KAUFMAN: “Vero cells are foreign cells from the kidneys of monkeys and a source of contamination. Virus particles should be purified directly from clinical samples in order to prove the virus actually exists. Isolation means separation from everything else. So how can you separate/isolate a virus when you add it to something else?”
STUDY: “…We cultured Vero E6, Vero CCL-81, HUH 7.0, 293T, A549, and EFKB3 cells in Dulbecco minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (5% or 10%)…”
KAUFMAN: “Why use minimal essential media, which provides incomplete nutrition [to the cells]? Fetal bovine serum is a source of foreign genetic material and extracellular vesicles, which are indistinguishable from viruses.”
STUDY: “…We used both NP and OP swab specimens for virus isolation. For isolation, limiting dilution, and passage 1 of the virus, we pipetted 50 μL of serum-free DMEM into columns 2–12 of a 96-well tissue culture plate, then pipetted 100 μL of clinical specimens into column 1 and serially diluted 2-fold across the plate…”
KAUFMAN: “Once again, misuse of the word isolation.”
STUDY: “…We then trypsinized and resuspended Vero cells in DMEM containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 2× penicillin/streptomycin, 2× antibiotics/antimycotics, and 2× amphotericin B at a concentration of 2.5 × 105 cells/mL…”
KAUFMAN: “Trypsin is a pancreatic enzyme that digests proteins. Wouldn’t that cause damage to the cells and particles in the culture which have proteins on their surfaces, including the so called spike protein?”
KAUFMAN: “Why are antibiotics added? Sterile technique is used for the culture. Bacteria may be easily filtered out of the clinical sample by commercially available filters (GIBCO). Finally, bacteria may be easily seen under the microscope and would be readily identified if they were contaminating the sample. The specific antibiotics used, streptomycin and amphotericin (aka ‘ampho-terrible’), are toxic to the kidneys and we are using kidney cells in this experiment! Also note they are used at ‘2X’ concentration, which appears to be twice the normal amount. These will certainly cause damage to the Vero cells.”
STUDY: “…We added [not isolated] 100 μL of cell suspension directly to the clinical specimen dilutions and mixed gently by pipetting. We then grew the inoculated cultures in a humidified 37°C incubator in an atmosphere of 5% CO2 and observed for cytopathic effects (CPEs) daily. We used standard plaque assays for SARS-CoV-2, which were based on SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) protocols...”
STUDY: “When CPEs were observed, we scraped cell monolayers with the back of a pipette tip…”
KAUFMAN: “There was no negative control experiment described. Control experiments are required for a valid interpretation of the results. Without that, how can we know if it was the toxic soup of antibiotics, minimal nutrition, and dying tissue from a sick person which caused the cellular damage or a phantom virus? A proper control would consist of the same exact experiment except that the clinical specimen should come from a person with illness unrelated to covid, such as cancer, since that would not contain a virus.”
STUDY: “…We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.”
KAUFMAN: “How do you confirm something that was never previously shown to exist? What did you compare the genetic sequences to? How do you know the origin of the genetic material since it came from a cell culture containing material from humans and all their microflora, fetal cows, and monkeys?”
---end of study quotes and Kaufman analysis---
Readers who are unfamiliar with my work (over 500 articles on the subject of the “pandemic” during the past two years) will ask: Then why are people dying? What about the huge number of cases and deaths? I have answered these and other questions in great detail. The subject of this article is: have researchers proved SARS-CoV-2 exists?
The answer is no.
As I stated, Dr. Kaufman’s analysis should be just the beginning of intense and detailed examination of studies that describe “how the virus was isolated.”
As opposed to a few hours of Zoom debate in which people summarize their opposing positions, and then submit to a vote from a panel of judges who descend from the sky with motives as pure as Superman and Wonder Woman. All this happens with Steve Kirsch in the background holding a million dollar prize. In Vegas, Steve would be called the house. And the house always wins.
No dice.
-- Jon Rappoport
 

Voodoo

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
7,640
Reaction score
12,881
Location
Deep Underground Bunker
This is a good video and I had wondered about Rabies... Interesting and easy on the eyes.

 

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223
I want Dr. Sam as my doctor...
 

Voodoo

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
7,640
Reaction score
12,881
Location
Deep Underground Bunker

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Eagle
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
13,223

Why Serious Scientific Debates Are Conducted In Writing, Not On-camera


Last week, I set the record straight on why a proposed debate about the existence of SARS-CoV-2 is not happening.

That was MY position and mine alone.

So is this.

Steve Kirsch insists the debate should be held on-camera.

True scientific debates would never take place in that fas
hion.

Video flows by. Speakers talk. Viewers build up IMPRESSIONS of what’s going on---there is no meticulous examination of facts and fantasies.

Yes, people are solidly addicted to video as a way of obtaining their news; but that doesn’t mean it’s a proper medium for vital debates about science.

WRITTEN WORD is how you conduct scientific debates, if truth is the objective. Then the reader can FORGET ABOUT tone of voice, charm of delivery, physical appearance of the debaters, and various tricks of that trade.

A reader can focus on every important detail on the page. He can spot gaps in logic, errors of fact, unwarranted assumptions. He can deploy the trait called REASON, which since the time of Aristotle, has been the hallmark of good science.

He isn’t WATCHING people talk. He’s poring over what they claim, every bit of it. “The devil is in the details” isn’t an off-the-cuff maxim. It’s core reality, once you get down to the serious business of deciding what science is and isn’t.

This is why such debates should be carried out on the page.

Of course, people addicted to video are going to argue for video, just as the junkie will argue in every possible way for his next fix. He has a need. He has to satisfy it. When confronted by someone who tells him he’s heading down the wrong path, he’ll lash out. He’ll accuse. He’ll lie.

And if he’s pandering to junkies, he’ll describe the virtues of the drug. In this case, video:

“You see, you sit there and watch, and you can TELL who’s speaking the truth and who isn’t. You can look at their eyes. You can see the way they make gestures. You can hear the hills and valleys in their way of talking…”

Yes, and so perhaps Walter Cronkite would be the ideal man to have on board arguing that SARS-CoV-2 exists. He was everybody’s wise old uncle. Whatever Walter uttered was an automatic slam-dunk.

The lovers of video also tend to favor science as democracy. “Let the people watch and decide who’s right…”

“Well, the debate was very interesting. Dr. Conglomerate really knew his stuff. He was rattling off facts like a pro. And the woman who backed him up, Dr. Pants Suit, looked straight at the camera the whole time. Wow. I was extremely impressed when she said over four hundred virologists were on record agreeing with her. If I recall, she cited Professor Moishe Meshugge, the Bulgarian, whose great grandfather discovered one of the first viruses…”

Whereas, IN WRITING, Dr. Pants Suit penned this: “…We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.”

To which Dr. Andrew Kaufman replied, in writing: “How do you confirm something that was never previously shown to exist? What did you compare the genetic sequences to? How do you know the origin of the genetic material since it came from a cell culture containing material from humans and all their microflora, fetal cows, and monkeys?”

Oops. Wait. What? Now, we’re getting technical. Now we’re digging down into the actual lab procedure by which virologists claim they’re discovering viruses never seen before.

There is where the devil is, in the details. And as you can see, we have a problem. The language of the lab is very dense. It’s going take quite an effort to translate it into terms non-virologists can understand.

The effort is vital. It’s absolutely necessary, because THERE is where the debate actually takes place. Are these lab virologists on the money, or are they leaping from one unwarranted assumption to another?

You decide that on the page, in writing, not on a screen with moving mouths.

“But wait…I don’t want that technical debate. I want to watch people talking on video. I want to see who seems to be right. I want to figure out who the heroes and villains are. I want to sip my coffee and find out how the plot turns out. How the story ends. I want to be watching an episode of Law & Order. Otherwise IT’S NOT FAIR. Keep it simple. When you drop the apple, does it fall to the ground, or does it hover in the air?”

Yes, well, no one said this debate would be easy---except for the people who want video and talking heads and a poll when it’s over.


As I just mentioned, one of the big challenges of a true debate is taking that lab language and making it comprehensible for non-virologists. And if doing that seems somehow distracting or troublesome or irritating or annoying or “an intentional diversion” from an easy walk in the park that winds up, in a few hours, with THE FINAL ANSWER, well, you can’t always ingest the truth like a candy bar or a fast-food cardboard burger.

If you think you can, you’re a misguided child of the culture, and one of the prime convincers of this modern instant culture is VIDEO.

It’s the absolute wrong way to go in this case. It gives you a corn dog on a stick in a mall.

It gives you somebody in your ear telling you the corn dog is all you need to munch, to reach the bottom line.

But hey, if you want to see men and women on a screen talking and arguing in generalities and claiming they have the upper hand, go for it.

You won’t find me there. I’ve got other big game to hunt.

Mr. Steve Kirsch has turned himself into a rank carnival barker, peddling a distorted and deformed product sitting behind a cheap curtain. He knows many people want to see what’s behind the curtain, because whatever it is, it’s video, and that’s what they need.

Does he know what he’s doing, or is he another junkie with the same need?

You’d have to ask him. But I believe in his more sober moments, he understands an on-camera debate on the virus issue solves nothing.

It’s just show business. It’s a crap low-rent carnival in a dried-up field on a slow Saturday afternoon.

-- Jon Rappoport