March 11, 2021 | By Jemima McEvoy | Forbes.com | Source | Oklahoma, Wyoming, Texas, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota & Iowa Have Dropped All Covid-19 Restrictions
These Seven States Have Dropped All Covid-19 Restrictions
“Oklahoma became the latest to lift virtually all Covid-19 restrictions on Thursday, bringing the total number of states that have chosen to fully reopen—despite warnings from public health officials—to seven, with a number of others also moving in that direction.
Oklahoma: Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) said he will be signing an executive order on Friday that will roll back his few remaining coronavirus restrictions, removing limits on events and public gatherings, as well as the state-wide mask mandate (the state averaged 643 cases and 23.9 deaths each day over the past week).
Wyoming: Gov. Mark Gordon (R) announced March 8 that the state would repeal its statewide mask mandate and allow “bars, restaurants, theaters and gyms to resume normal operations” on March 16, but stipulated face masks will remain mandatory inside the state’s schools (the state averaged 7,343 cases and 1.3 deaths each day over the past week).
Texas: The largest state to remove all restrictions, Gov. Greg Abbott (R) announced on March 2 that Texas would be nixing its mask mandate and allowing businesses to reopen “100%” this Wednesday, banning jurisdictions from implementing local mask mandates unless they meet certain hospitalization metrics (the state averaged 4,909 cases and 189.9 deaths each day over the past week).
Mississippi: Gov. Tate Reeves (R) also decided to drop the state’s mask mandate and all Covid-19 restrictions on March 2, with the limits lifted the next day (the state averaged 396 cases and 14.6 deaths each day over the past week).
Montana: Gov. Greg Gianforte (R) announced the end of Montana’s mask mandate on Feb. 12, removing the last of the state’s restrictions, though some local jurisdictions have kept face covering requirements in place (the state averaged 129 cases and 2 deaths each day over the past week).
North Dakota: The state opted not to renew its mask mandate, first enacted in November, when it expired in January 2021, ending North Dakota’s restrictions (the state averaged 78 cases and 0.4 deaths each day over the past week).
Iowa: Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) ended the last of the state’s restrictions, the mask mandate issued in November 2020, in early February (the state averaged 481 cases and 14.4 deaths each day over the past week).”
March 12, 2021 | By Robert F. Kennedy Jr | Global Research | Source | Before COVID, Gates Planned Social Media Censorship of Vaccine Safety Advocates with Pharma, CDC, Media, China and CIA
“In October 2019, shortly before the COVID outbreak, Gates and other powerful individuals began planning how to censor vaccine safety advocates from social media during a table-top simulation of a worldwide pandemic, known as Event 201.
Over the last two weeks, Facebook and other social media sites have deplatformed me and many other critics of regulatory corruption and authoritarian public health policies. So, here is some fodder for those of you who have the eerie sense that the government/industry pandemic response feels like it was planned — even before there was a pandemic.
The attached document shows that a cabal of powerful individuals did indeed begin planning the mass eviction of vaccine skeptics from social media in October 2019, a week or two before COVID began circulating. That month, Microsoft founder Bill Gates organized an exercise of four “table-top” simulations of a worldwide coronavirus pandemic with other high-ranking “Deep State” panjandrums. The exercise was referred to as Event 201.
Gates’ co-conspirators included representatives from the World Bank, the World Economic Forum (Great Reset), Bloomberg/Johns Hopkins University Populations Center, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, various media powerhouses, the Chinese government, a former Central Intelligence Agency/National Security Agency director (there is no such thing as a former CIA officer), vaccine maker Johnson & Johnson, the finance and biosecurity industries and Edelman, the world’s leading corporate PR firm.
At Gates’ direction, these eminences role-played members of a Pandemic Control Council, wargaming government strategies for controlling the pandemic, the narrative and the population. Needless to say, there was little talk of building immune systems, off-the-shelf remedies or off-patent therapeutic drugs and vitamins, but lots of chatter about promoting uptake of new patentable antiviral drugs and vaccines.
But the participants primarily focused on planning industry-centric, fear-mongering, police-state strategies for managing an imaginary global coronavirus contagion culminating in mass censorship of social media.
Oddly, Gates now claims that the simulation didn’t occur. On April 12, 2020, Gates told BBC, “Now here we are. We didn’t simulate this, we didn’t practice, so both the health policies and economic policies, we find ourselves in uncharted territory.”
Unfortunately for that whopper, the videos of the event are still available across the internet. They show that Gates and team did indeed simulate health and economic policies. It’s hard to swallow that Gates has forgotten.
Gates’s Event 201 simulated COVID epidemic caused 65 million deaths at the 18-month endpoint and global economic collapse lasting up to a decade. Compared to the Gates simulation, therefore, the actual COVID-19 crisis is a bit of a dud, having imposed a mere 2.5 million deaths “attributed to COVID” over the past 13 months.
The deaths “attributed to COVID” in the real-life situation are highly questionable, and must be seen in the context of a global population of 7.8 billion, with about 59 million deaths expected annually. The predictions of decade-long economic collapse will probably prove more accurate — but only because of the draconian lockdown promoted by Gates.
Gates’ Event 201 script imagines vast anti-vaccine riots triggered by internet posts. The universal and single-minded presumption among its participants was that such a crisis would prove an opportunity of convenience to promote new vaccines, and tighten controls by a surveillance and censorship state.
Segment four of the script — on manipulation and control of public opinion — is most revealing. It uncannily predicted democracy’s current crisis:
The participants discussed mechanisms for controlling “disinformation” and “misinformation,” by “flooding” the media with propaganda (“good information”), imposing penalties for spreading falsehoods and discrediting the anti-vaccination movement.
Jane Halton, of Australia’s ANZ Bank, one of the authors of Australia’s oppressive “no jab, no pay” policy, assured the participants that Gates Foundation is creating algorithms “to sift through information on these social media platforms” to protect the public from dangerous thoughts and information.
George Gao, the prescient director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control, worries about how to suppress “rumors” that the virus is laboratory generated: “People believe, ‘This is a manmade’… [and that] some pharmaceutical company made the virus.”
Chen Huang, an Apple research scientist, Google scholar and the world’s leading expert on tracking and tracing and facial recognition technology, role-plays the newscaster reporting on government countermeasures. He blames riots on anti-vaccine activists and predicts that Twitter and Facebook will cooperate in “identify[ing] and delete[ing] a disturbing number of accounts dedicated to spreading misinformation about the outbreak” and to implement “internet shutdowns … to quell panic.”
Dr. Tara Kirk Sell, a senior scholar at Bloomberg School of Health’s Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, worries that pharmaceutical companies are being accused of introducing the virus so they can make money on drugs and vaccines: “[We] have seen public faith in their products plummet.” She notes with alarm that “Unrest, due to false rumors and divisive messaging, is rising and is exacerbating spread of the disease as levels of trust fall and people stop cooperating with response efforts. This is a massive problem, one that threatens governments and trusted institutions.”
Sell reminds her fellow collaborators that “We know that social media is now the primary way that many people get their news, so interruptions to these platforms could curb the spread of misinformation.” There are many ways, Sell advises, for government and industry allies to accomplish this objective: “Some governments have taken control of national access to the Internet. Others are censoring websites and social media content and a small number have shut down Internet access completely to prevent the spread of misinformation. Penalties have been put in place for spreading harmful falsehoods, including arrests.”
April 23, 2020 | by Selwyn Duke | The New American | Source | Study: Lockdowns Save NO Lives. Are Politicians Destroying the Economy for NOTHING?
April 23, 2020 | by Selwyn Duke | The New American | Source | Study: Lockdowns Save NO Lives. Are Politicians Destroying the Economy for NOTHING?
“Once the initial premise that Wuhan coronavirus patients would overwhelm the healthcare system without lockdowns in place collapsed, politicians moved on to justifying the measures based on saving lives overall — even though experts warn there’ll be a “second virus wave” regardless. But now even this claim is being refuted by a new study showing that there’s no evidence whatsoever that the lockdowns save lives.
Writing at Spiked, Kentucky State University assistant professor Wilfred Reilly compared the “locked down” states with those resisting such measures and relying solely on “social distancing,” the latter being “Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming,” reports the academic.
The results? Given that these states are less populated and are more sparsely so than many locked down states, it’s not surprising they’ve “experienced substantially fewer cases and deaths than the lockdown states, even with New York out of the mix,” writes Reilly. (Note: His removal of New York, which he calls an “outlier” state, only improves the locked down states’ numbers.)
Yet the “free” states fared better even when adjusted for population. “Comparing the social-distancing states plus South Carolina [which didn’t adopt a shelter-in-place order until April 6 and still allows most religious services] to US states minus New York,” Reilly tells us, “the social-distancing states experienced 663 fewer cases per million and 42 fewer deaths per million on average than the lockdown states.”
Going further, Reilly then ran a “regression model” factoring in other variables: “population, population density, median income, median age, diversity (measured as the percentage of minorities in a population), and the state’s Covid-19 response strategy (0 = lockdown, 1 = social distancing),” as the professor related.
“The question the model set out to ask was whether lockdown states experience fewer Covid-19 cases and deaths than social-distancing states, adjusted for all of the above variables,” Reilly continued.
“If you are advocating for lockdowns, you are complicit in tearing families apart. You are complicit in inflicting untold suffering on millions of people around the world. You are complicit in casting the poorest and most vulnerable in our societies into even further grinding poverty. You are complicit in murder.”
“In an open letter to WHO and in a follow-up video interview, Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, says that by vaccinating everyone with a vaccine that doesn’t prevent transmission, we are destroying people’s immune systems, and setting the stage for a global health disaster.
Bossche says the COVID vaccines approved so far have been developed by “just brilliant” people and he has no criticism of them But, as he tells Dr. Phillip McMillan in an interview, “please use the right vaccine at the right place. And don’t use it in the heat of a pandemic on millions of millions of people.”
Bossche says that a mass vaccination campaign in the middle of a pandemic, with vaccines that don’t prevent transmission, is disastrous at an individual — and at a global — level:
“We are going to pay a huge price for this. And I’m becoming emotional because I’m thinking of my children, of the younger generation. I mean, it’s just impossible what we are doing. We don’t understand the pandemic.”
In an open letter to the World Health Organization (WHO), Bossche wrote that “we are currently turning vaccinees into asymptomatic carriers shedding infectious variants.”
Bossche hasn’t heard back from WHO, which concerns him.
“It is about humanity … I mean, it’s about your children. It’s your family. It’s my family. It’s everyone. Right. And it’s simply for me, I put everything at stake because I’ve done my homework. And this is simply a moral obligation. A moral obligation.”
“In her rebuttal to Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche’s open letter to the WHO, Rosemary Frei, MSc, outlines what she says are “a few of the dozens of clues” suggesting that Bossche’s argument “is a continuation of the overall COVID deception.” Link
“On March 6, an open letter by Geert Vanden Bossche, Ph.D., DVM, and a video interview of him by Phillip McMillan, MD, from a company called Vejon Health, were posted online.
On the surface, Vanden Bossche appears to perhaps be addressing credible concerns about COVID.
He’s saying that the current crop of COVID vaccines will cause the novel coronavirus to mutate into a “super-infectious virus.” And therefore he’s calling for an immediate halt of the use of the current vaccines.
If humans are “committed to perpetuating our species, we have no choice but to eradicate these highly infectious viral variants” via “large vaccination campaigns,” Vanden Bossche claims at the conclusion of his open letter. However, he continues, in contrast to the currently used COVID vaccines, these new vaccines must focus on stimulation of mass production of the component of the immune system known as natural killer cells, he asserts.
But Vanden Bossche bases his views on unproven hypotheses. This is similar to, and builds on, high-profile modeling-paper authors who use theoretical frameworks to inflame fears about the supposed dangerousness of the new variants.
Despite this, Vanden Bossche’s views were very quickly and positively received by high-profile vaccine sceptics such as Del Bigtree in his March 11 episode (starting at 57:25) and Vernon Coleman in his March 13 video and article.
Bigtree and Coleman virtually unquestioningly accept and amplify Vanden Bossche’s views. They strongly insinuate to their overwhelmingly credulous subscribers that there’s virtually no fact-checking or pause for sober second thought required.
But from my experience as a former long-time medical writer and journalist (1988-2016) — particularly a four-month stint with media-relations giant FleishmanHillard in 1994 (yes, I’ve worked for the dark side) — this has all the hallmarks of a drug-companyastroturfcampaign. It’s another step in the decades-long erasure of the fact that our sophisticated and highly effective immune systems work well and don’t need any assistance from the biomedical/pharmaceutical industry.
There’s abundant evidence that Vanden Bossche has a not-so-hidden agenda. For example, just before the three-minute mark in the video interview of Vanden Bossche by McMillan, Vanden Bossche indicates he’s a long-time vaccine developer. He adds he’s now focusing on vaccines that “educate the immune system in ways that are to some extent more efficient than we do right now with our conventional vaccines.” Clearly he’s got significant conflicts of interest. Therefore he has zero credibility when it comes to advising the public or anyone else about how to avoid negative effects of mass vaccination.
However, Bigtree, Coleman and others don’t point out any of the red flags. Despite taking Vanden Bossche’s assertions extremely seriously, these high-profile alternative-media figures don’t even do basic due diligence such as looking into McMillan, who’s the man who interviewed Vanden Bossche, or the company McMillan is apparently affiliated with, Vejon Health. Bigtree, for example, relies heavily on the McMillan interview for the content of his March 11 segment.
As far as I know, McMillan and Vanden Bosch aren’t among the thousands of M.D.s, Ph.D.s, and other people with graduate degrees or equivalent qualifications who have thoroughly debunked the official COVID narrative over the last 12 months. Rather, the pair suddenly popped out of the woodwork.
Also, McMillan isn’t anything close to an expert on vaccines. On his website he describes himself as a “dementia authority.” The most recently published paper of his that I can find is from 2016 and is on Alzheimer’s in the journal Medical Hypotheses. (In that paper, he and his co-author propose nutritional supplementation to lower the body’s burden of aluminum, a high level of which is linked to Alzheimer’s.) In addition, when one clicks on Vejonhealth.comone gets a message indicating the website isn’t in use. Indeed, Vejon appears to be a dormant company.
So I ignored McMillan’s interview and Vanden Bossche’s open letter when I first learned about them last week. But then on March 12, I was contacted by the producer of something called the Gary Null Show on the Progressive Radio Network. The producer, Richard Gale, asked me to be a guest. I agreed to do the interview on March 15.
About 1.5 hours before the interview was to start, I contacted Gale and asked what the interview would focus on. Gale told me Null wanted to discuss Bigtree’s segment on the Vanden Bossche letter and Gale sent me a link to it. So I quickly read the open letter and watched the full interview and Bigtree segment on it. A field of red flags popped up in my mind.
At the appointed interview start time of 12:30 p.m. on March 15, Null proceeded to read live to air, for about 12 minutes, some key points from the open letter. He told the audience to take them seriously. Then Null put me on the air. But he wouldn’t let me talk about the letter. Instead, he repeatedly interrupted my efforts to do so and he insisted I only discuss the new variants. So I hung up. And I’ve been edited out of the archived broadcast of Null’s show.
I’m going to be interviewed live today (March 16) starting at 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time by Ryan Cristián of The Last American Vagabond. We’ll talk about the Vanden Bossche letter and McMillan interview. Apparently Ryan’s on the same page as me.
Meanwhile, my tweets about the open letter and the Null interviewhave gotten a lot of reaction. And, as it happens, since Sunday people have been emailing to encourage me to read Vanden Bossche’s letter and watch his interview. Many are swayed by his calling for an immediate halt of the use of the current crop of COVID vaccines and by the fact that people like Bigtree are propagating his messages.
So I decided to write this article to expose a few of the dozens of clues showing that this curious case is a continuation of the overall COVID deception.
But, when combined with the contents of his open letter, it’s impossible to believe that he’s in fact an insider who’s now turned against his very high-powered comrades. (More on this below.) It’s more likely that he’s their accomplice.
Another indication that the letter is designed to propagandize rather than to let objective evidence speak for itself is the wording Vanden Bossche uses. He writes, for example, that he was “racing against the clock” to write “this agonizing letter” in which he “put[s] all of my reputation and credibility at stake” to help “turn the tide” against this “irrepressible monster” that the virus could soon become unless we heed Vanden Bossche.
In his open letter Vanden Bossche also writes, “I can assure you that each of the current vaccines have been designed, developed and manufactured by brilliant and competent scientists.” However, he doesn’t say a word about the massive adverse-event rate and very scant efficacy profile of the vaccines that were created by these “brilliant scientists.”
Vanden Bossche also asserts that there’s an “ever[-]increasing threat from rapidly spreading, highly infectious variants.” But as I detailed in my Feb. 3 article and accompanying video on the new variants, there is no proof that they are highly infectious or will be any time soon.
There is the possibility of viral resistance, as for example I note in my March 9, 2021, article and accompanying video. But it’s not the major threat Vanden Bossche attempts to scare us about by saying the virus is likely to mutate so much and so quickly because of the current mass vaccination campaigns that soon it could escape all current attempts to stop its spread. Remember, for example, that yearly flu mass vaccination hasn’t caused influenza to spiral out of control and decimate the global population.
Vanden Bossche also writes that some antibodies are made by the innate immune system, but that these ‘natural’ antibodies are non-specific. He also states that they have “suboptimal” “maturity, and are “rather limited and only short-lived.” He claims they are a very weak link in our immune reactions to pathogens such as the novel coronavirus: “the combination of viral infection on a background of suboptimal Ab [antibody] maturity and concentration enables the [novel corona] virus to select mutations [, thereby] allowing it to escape the immune pressure.”
However, this is on very shaky ground. Because, among other things: 1) Neither in the original March 6 piece nor his March 13 follow-up does Vanden Bossche provide any direct, non-theoretical evidence that this is happening; 2) The ‘natural antibodies’ that are produced after encountering a pathogen are only a small part of a quick, effective and broad-based first-line immune-system defense — known as ‘innate’ or ‘passive’ immunity — which in fact largely comprises other components; and 3) Vanden Bossche downplays the effectiveness of the antibodies our bodies naturally produce as part of the second-line (‘adaptive’) part of the immune system that also has served us extremely well for millennia.
A March 11 commentary by Michael Yeadon and Marc Girardot has similar information to my points 3, 4 and 5. However the pair present it in a way that’s very pro-mRNA-vaccine and pro- much of the official-COVID-narrative — neither of which I endorse.”
“Los Angeles, California – The official Recall Campaign against California Governor Gavin Newsom has now gathered more than 2,060,000 signatures as of Wednesday evening, March 10, 2021.
1,871,573 signatures have been pre verified internally through an outside third party vendor.
1,800,000 signatures have been turned into 58 different county registrar of voter offices.
1,497,000 valid signatures are needed to force a special recall election per California Election Code.
The announcement was made during an online meeting with campaign leaders and volunteers.
Orrin Heatlie, Chairman of The California Patriot Coalition, RecallGavin2020 Committee, made the following statement:
“The People of California are speaking loud and clear. We have cleared another milestone. Politics as usual in California are over as we know it to be,” said Heatlie.
“This campaign is not about political powerbrokers, it is about The People, The People and All of the People of California,” said Randy Economy, Senior Advisor and Official Media Spokesman for RecallGavin2020.
“We have built an Army of volunteers who have defied the odd and we will not rest till California Governor Gavin Newsom is defeated in this historic movement,” said RecallGavin2020 co-proponent Mike Netter.”
“CHINA may have carried out a massive disinformation campaign to encourage the world to go into lockdown, an American lawyer has extraordinarily claimed.
Michael Senger suggested the Communist Party promoted nationwide shutdowns in a bid to “cripple rival economies” amid the coronavirus pandemic.
Covid-19 is believed to have originated in the Chinese city of Wuhan before spreading across the world – so far killing almost one million people.
Senger however claims the Communist Party may have weaponised social media in an aggressive psy-op to spread hysteria to push for the lockdowns.
The campaign may have pushed nations into committing economic suicide.
He points to thousands of tweets which were encouraging world governments to try out the draconian rules first adopted by China.
Senger even alleges Prime Minister Boris Johnson was targeted by Chinese disinformation after he first suggested herd immunity rather than a lockdown.
The lawyer, from Atlanta, Georgia, laid out his theory in an article for Tablet Magazine titled “China’s Global Lockdown Propaganda Campaign”.
Writing on Twitter, he said: “By promoting fraudulent data, aggressively deploying disinformation, and flexing its institutional clout, Beijing transformed the snake oil of lockdowns into ‘science’, crippling rival economies, expanding its influence and sowing authoritarian values.”
He argued lockdowns “might not even be science it all” and claimed they are based on brutal policies used by Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
“COV19 IS A CON JOB SO BRILLIANT ONE CAN’T HELP BUT ADMIRE IT . . .
No matter how much the MSM tries to convince you, those propagating the COVID narrative cannot overcome the entirely fraudulent foundation of the scamdemic. There is no virus.
AT A GLANCE…
THE STORY: As the WHO, CDC and Governments ramp up COVID fear with new scary stories of SARS variants, let’s get back to the basics: there still has never been true virus isolation.
THE IMPLICATIONS: No matter how much the MSM tries to convince you, those propagating the COVID narrative cannot overcome the entirely fraudulent foundation of the scamdemic. There is no virus.
Above: what has never happened and seemingly never will: true virus isolation. SARS variants, spike proteins and more all rest on 1 big fat assumption: that SARS-CoV-2 exists. But we are still without proof of that.
Without virus isolation, the SARS variants
brainwashing theme is being increasingly pushed by the NWO (New World Order) social engineers to prop up the pandemic. With more people becoming aware that there is no emergency and there is no pandemic, the COVID manipulators are propagating more lies by inventing SARS variants and using them as fuel to continue the scamdemic.
Apparently, there are now South African, UK and Californian variants of which you need to be very afraid. However, whether it’s new variants, spike proteins or other SARS-CoV-2 paraphernalia, all of these stories depend on a basic assumption: that a new virus SARS-CoV-2 exists. You can’t have variants of a virus that doesn’t exist. You can’t have spike proteins on a virus that doesn’t exist.
As always, Dr. Tom Cowan and Dr. Andrew Kaufman (whom I have quoted extensively in previous articles such as this one and this one) shine light on the true state of affairs. According to them, no true isolation of a virus has EVER happened, either for SARS-CoV-2 or other viruses like HIV. In a recent discussion, they talk about the lack of scientific evidence for the proof of viruses alleged to cause disease in the context of a recently aired debate between Dr. Judy Mikovits and Kaufman.
The discussion became a little tense as Kaufman prodded Mikovits to explain how she had ever isolated a virus (as she claims to have repeatedely done), when all she had done was show viruses budding out of the cell (not true isolation). Mikovits replied it had to be that way for retroviruses, because the human body would eat up loose RNA or DNA. Mikovits did however agree and explicitly state that SARS-CoV-2 had never been isolated.
Cowan makes the following point around the 16-minute mark about virus isolation:
“If they [viruses] are not isolated … they don’t exist as independent entities. These is simply no way they can cause disease, there’s no way we can characterize them, there’s no way we can take a segment and say ‘that’s unique to this’, so there’s no way we can do a PCR test.”
Kaufman brings up an interesting jaguar analogy around the 26-minute mark. Imagine a European explorer had heard of new wild cats/leopards in the South American jungle, and set out to find one. Since they are stealthy predators, he could not find one, but instead found some teeth. Would that count as proof of a new wild cat (a jaguar)? A scientist claiming discovery a new virus, amidst all the millions of tiny particles that swim around in our cells and bloodstream, is like a European explorer visiting South America for the first time and claiming he found a jaguar just because he found the tooth of a wild cat, despite not having found the skeleton or body of it. Why does a tiny piece of RNA count as proof of an alleged novel virus SARS-CoV-2?
Statement On Virus Isolation (SOVI)
Cowan, Kaufman and Sally Fallon Morell have together written a short document entitled Statement On Virus Isolation (SOVI) where they definitively explain that, according to “common sense, the laws of logic and the dictates of science,” the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated or purified. The word isolation is often defined differently by virologists trying to justify their methods (adding it to other media like milk and bovine serum, plus mixing it with chemicals like antibiotics). The SOVI statement includes the Oxford definition of the word isolation: “the action of isolating; the fact or condition of being isolated or standing alone; separation from other things or persons; solitariness.” Therefore, logically, these points follow:
the structure and composition of something not shown to exist can’t be known, including the presence, structure, and function of any hypothetical spike or other proteins;
the genetic sequence of something that has never been found can’t be known;
“variants” of something that hasn’t been shown to exist can’t be known;
it’s impossible to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 causes a disease called Covid-19.
The writers then outline how a person would isolate the virus if they were being scientifically rigorous and careful:
“In as concise terms as possible, here’s the proper way to isolate, characterize and demonstrate a new virus. First, one takes samples (blood, sputum, secretions) from many people (e.g. 500) with symptoms which are unique and specific enough to characterize an illness. Without mixing these samples with ANY tissue or products that also contain genetic material, the virologist macerates, filters and ultracentrifuges i.e. purifies the specimen. This common virology technique, done for decades to isolate bacteriophages and so-called giant viruses in every virology lab, then allows the virologist to demonstrate with electron microscopy thousands of identically sized and shaped particles. These particles are the isolated and purified virus.
These identical particles are then checked for uniformity by physical and/or microscopic techniques. Once the purity is determined, the particles may be further characterized. This would include examining the structure, morphology, and chemical composition of the particles. Next, their genetic makeup is characterized by extracting the genetic material directly from the purified particles and using genetic-sequencing techniques, such as Sanger sequencing, that have also been around for decades. Then one does an analysis to confirm that these uniform particles are exogenous (outside) in origin as a virus is conceptualized to be, and not the normal breakdown products of dead and dying tissues. (As of May 2020, we know that virologists have no way to determine whether the particles they’re seeing are viruses or just normal break-down products of dead and dying tissues.)”
That is how it would be done to ensure proper virus isolation. However what has happened since the outbreak of the COVID scamdemic is scientific fraud over and over and over again:
“Instead, since 1954, virologists have taken unpurified samples from a relatively few people, often less than ten, with a similar disease. They then minimally process this sample and inoculate this unpurified sample onto tissue culture containing usually four to six other types of material — all of which contain identical genetic material as to what is called a “virus.” The tissue culture is starved and poisoned and naturally disintegrates into many types of particles, some of which contain genetic material. Against all common sense, logic, use of the English language and scientific integrity, this process is called “virus isolation.” This brew containing fragments of genetic material from many sources is then subjected to genetic analysis, which then creates in a computer-simulation process the alleged sequence of the alleged virus, a so called in silico genome. At no time is an actual virus confirmed by electron microscopy. At no time is a genome extracted and sequenced from an actual virus. This is scientific fraud.
The observation that the unpurified specimen — inoculated onto tissue culture along with toxic antibiotics, bovine fetal tissue, amniotic fluid and other tissues — destroys the kidney tissue onto which it is inoculated is given as evidence of the virus’ existence and pathogenicity. This is scientific fraud.”
Mainstream Virology Claims True Virus Isolation is Impossible
Let’s return to what Mikovits said, and what many mainstream virologists say: we can’t isolate viruses from their host cell because there’s not enough of them, they’re too small or they would immediately die if we did so (and therefore must be found within the host cell). So mainstream virology redefines what isolation means when it comes to viruses. Cowan has countered this point repeatedly:
“From now on, when anyone gives you a paper that suggests the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated, please check the methods sections. If the researchers used Vero cells or any other culture method, you know that their process was not isolation. You will hear the following excuses for why actual isolation isn’t done:
There were not enough virus particles found in samples from patients to analyze.
Viruses are intracellular parasites; they can’t be found outside the cell in this manner.
If No. 1 is correct, and we can’t find the virus in the sputum of sick people, then on what evidence do we think the virus is dangerous or even lethal? If No. 2 is correct, then how is the virus spread from person to person? We are told it emerges from the cell to infect others. Then why isn’t it possible to find it?”
Imaginary SARS-CoV-2 Variants and Spike Protein Changes
Predictably, both the WHO and the CDC are pushing the idea that imaginary variants of an imaginary virus are breaking out worldwide.
They are even giving these so-called variants technical names: the supposed UK variant is called B.1.1.7, the supposed Brazil variant is called P.1 and the supposed California variant is B.1.427 and B.1.429 (aka CAL.20C/L452R).
The supposed South African variant is B.1.351 or 501Y.V2, allegedly due to its N501Y mutation. N501Y is scientific shorthand for the substitution of one protein building block (amino acid) for another at position 501 in the part of the virus called the spike protein.
Speaking of spike protein, we all have all been told since the start of this fake pandemic that this is what made the SARS-CoV-2 virus so deadly, but remember: the spike protein is part of the digital, in silico, computer database genome of the virus. They could have made up anything. There is no proof of a real virus with a real spike protein. It’s more technical gobbledygook to give the virus the appearance of existence and reality when it DOES NOT EXIST.
Once this concept is fully grasped, the implications are quite astounding.”
February 26, 2021 | Hotze Health & Wellness Center | WARNING: DR. HOTZE ON THE DANGERS OF THE COVID-19 VACCINE |
“The So-Called COVID-19 “Vaccine” Is Really A Dangerous Experimental Gene Therapy – Just Say “No!”
– Steven Hotze, M.D.
“The so-called COVID-19 “vaccine” is not a vaccine at all. It is an experimental gene therapy. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) gives the definition of the term vaccine on its website, https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm. A vaccine is a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease. Immunity is the protection from an infectious disease. If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.
This so-called COVID-19 “vaccine” does not provide the individuals who receive the vaccine with immunity to COVID-19, nor does it prevent the transmission of this disease. It does not meet the CDC’s own definition of a vaccine. That is why it is a deceptive trade practice, under 15 U.S. Code, Section 41 of the Federal Trade Commission, for pharmaceutical companies who are producing this experimental gene therapy, to claim that this is a vaccine. These pharmaceutical companies are lying to the public. The government health bureaucrats are also lying to the public, by calling this treatment a vaccine. This COVID-19 experimental gene therapy is only designed to minimize your symptoms if you were to be infected with the COVID-19 virus.
Let me reemphasize that this COVID-19 experimental gene therapy does not meet the CDC’s own definition of a vaccine. It does not provide immunity or prevent transmission of the disease. By referring to this therapy as a “vaccine,” the pharmaceutical companies are attempting to shield themselves, because vaccine injuries or deaths are exempted by law from any product liability lawsuits.
The United States health bureaucrats initiated Operation Warp Speed to fast track the so-called COVID-19 “vaccine.” On December 11, 2020, the FDA approved the Pfizer-BioNTech “vaccine,” and Moderna’s was approved a week later. These “vaccines” were approved without any published animal studies and without any long-term human studies. This means that the individuals who get them are the guinea pigs.
These “vaccines,” which are manufactured using cells derived from human babies that were aborted in the 1970s, should more accurately be called an experimental gene therapy. They are an untested, unproven experimental gene therapy that poses a much greater danger to your health than COVID-19 itself.
Moderna is a pharmaceutical and biotech company located in Cambridge, Massachusetts, founded in 2010 as ModeRNA Therapeutics. It has been developing experimental gene therapy using synthetic mRNA for the treatment of various diseases including COVID-19. Moderna has never successfully developed a product for treatment of any disease prior to this. An experimental gene therapy using synthetic mRNA to treat an infectious disease has never been attempted in humans, because of its failure in previous animal studies.
Not A Vaccine
The theory behind conventional vaccines is to inject a small amount of the infecting virus or bacteria protein into your body, which in turn will cause your immune system to produce antibodies to that infecting organism and provide you with immunity.
The new COVID-19 so called “vaccine” is not a vaccine at all. It is a synthetic messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) experimental gene therapy, and it works much differently. The theory behind it is that when this synthetic mRNA is injected into your body, it will insert itself into your cells and begin producing the coronavirus spike proteins. In turn, your immune system is expected to produce antibodies to the coronavirus protein made by your own cells.
There is no way to know how long your cells will produce these virus proteins, or if they will ever stop producing them. Your immune system will be hyper-charged and will overreact when exposed to any type of coronavirus in the future. This is what happened when mRNA experimental gene therapy was used against other types of coronaviruses in animals in 2005 and 2012. The animals died from an immune system hyper-reaction when they were later exposed to the coronavirus against which they had been previously vaccinated. This hyper-reaction is called an antibody dependent enhancement reaction.
Because these are the first mRNA “vaccines” ever used in humans, you would think that they would have been first tested and proven safe in published animal studies and have at least two years of human testing, which are routinely required. Instead, the COVID-19 mRNA “vaccine” was only tested on humans for a couple of months. Wouldn’t it be prudent to have long term-human studies before recommending mass vaccination?
Over 40,000+ Adverse Effects and nearly 1000 Deaths from so called “vaccine” in U.S. so far
Adverse effects are inevitable. In the first month of use, there were more than 40,000 documented adverse reactions in the U.S., including thousands of cases of anaphylactic shock and serious neurological problems. Because only 10% of adverse effects are routinely reported, hundreds of thousands have likely been harmed. That is only in the first 30 days! As of February 14, there were also 934 deaths in individuals who had received this experimental gene therapy so-called “vaccine,” including baseball great, Hank Aaron.
Even more worrisome are delayed and long-term adverse effects. The synthetic mRNA experimental gene therapy turns on the production of COVID-19 proteins, but it has no off switch. It just keeps on replicating, and the immune system keeps on mounting an immune response. That is why some researchers are concerned that it will provoke autoimmune reactions, setting you up for a lifetime of serious inflammatory disease.
Another major concern is the possibility that the COVID-19 experimental gene therapy can make infections worse. There is convincing evidence that this experimental gene therapy may trigger an antibody-dependent enhancement reaction and increase the virus’s ability to infect your cells. In other words, if you come down with a coronavirus infection after receiving your experimental gene therapy, then you may have a much worse case than if you had never had this therapy. Many experts are predicting a surge of life-threatening infections, inflammatory disorders and deaths in the coming months for those who have received this treatment.”
March 8, 2021 | by David Dobrodt | Black Rock’s March to World Power | Source
“Karel Verecken, editor of Nouvelle Solidarite, discusses how BlackRock became a central player in global finance following the financial crash that began in 2007, all in service to the oligarchical interests of the British Monarchy. Karel’s article titled, “BlackRock’s March to World Power,” is featured in in the EIR Special Edition, “The Great Leap Backward: LaRouche Exposes the Green New Deal.”