For instance, the Bush administration’s coordinated propagandistic efforts to win support for
an invasion of Iraq was a conspiracy.6 And those who called it what it was early on were promoting a conspiracy theory, by most definitions. (Alas, if only that conspiracy theory had been more successful, much suffering and death may have been avoided.) In addition, as U.C. Davis History Professor Kathryn S. Olmsted explains:
As the U.S. government grew, it gained the power to conspire against its citizens, and it soon began exercising that power. By the height of the cold war, government agents had consorted with mobsters to kill a foreign leader, dropped hallucinogenic drugs into the drinks of unsuspecting Americans in random bars, and considered launching fake terrorist attacks on Americans in the United States. Public officials had denied potentially life-saving treatment to African American men in medical experiments, [and] sold arms to terrorists in return for American hostages, and faked documents to frame past presidents for crimes they had not committed. (Olmsted 2009, 8)
There are also scores of conspiracy theories that remain plausible, yet unproven—or at least not widely accepted as proven. Many of these may well be true too, for all we know.
In an article published in the Journal of Political Philosophy, Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule argue that the government and its allies ought to actively undermine groups that espouse conspiracy theories deemed “demonstrably false.” They propose infiltrating such groups in order to “cure” conspiracy theorists by treating their “crippled epistemology” with “cognitive diversity.”
They base their proposal on an analysis of the “causes” of such conspiracy theories, which emphasizes informational and reputational cascades. Some may regard their proposal as outrageous and anti-democratic. I agree. However, in this article I merely argue that their argument is flawed in at least the following ways:
(1) their account of the popularity of conspiracy theories is implausible, and (2)their proposal relies on misleading “stylized facts,” including a caricature of those who doubt official narratives and a deceptive depiction of the relevant history.
In an article entitled “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures,” published in the Journal of Political Philosophy, Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule have argued that the government and its allies ought to counter “conspiracy theories” or “extreme views”[2] by infiltrating and undermining the groups that espouse them. While they specify that this would apply only to theories that are (or are deemed to be) “demonstrably false,” they give no hint regarding how such a judgment is to be reached. I will argue that Sunstein and Vermeule’s proposal is not well supported.
Among other problems, their account of the “causes,” which purportedly explain the popularity of (supposedly) “demonstrably false” conspiracy theories, is premised on a caricature of those who doubt official narratives. Moreover, the air of acceptability that they attempt to evoke regarding their proposed “cures” relies on a deceptive depiction of the relevant history. To
use their own terminology, their argument is based on misleading “stylized facts” (described below).
Before I begin my critique, I should say something about Sunstein and Vermeule. At the time the final version of their paper was published, they were both Harvard law professors. Sunstein had just moved from the University of Chicago to Harvard, and shortly thereafter he was chosen by President Obama to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, in which capacity he now serves. He is reputed to be “the most cited law professor on any faculty in the United States” according to a White House website, and “one of America’s leading constitutional scholars” according to Obama himself.[3] Indeed, accordingto Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, “Cass Sunstein is the pre-eminent legal scholar of our time—the most wide-ranging, the most prolific, the most cited, and the most influential” (Mangan 2008). So, although some people may regard their proposal as too outrageous to merit rebuttal, I agree with Sunstein and Vermeule
on one thing: problematic views ought to be confronted, not ignored. And so,particularly given Sunstein’s acclaim and position, it is worth explicitly detailing at least some of the falsities and fallacies on which their proposal is based.
This document is prepared for humanity by Dr. David E. Martin.
Background:
Over the past two decades, my company – M·CAM – has been monitoring possible violations of the 1925 Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous, or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare (the Geneva Protocol) 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons and Their Destruction (the BTWC). In our 2003-2004 Global Technology Assessment: Vector Weaponization M·CAM highlighted China’s growing involvement in Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology with respect to joining the world stage in chimeric construction of viral vectors. Since that time, on a weekly basis, we have monitored the development of research and commercial efforts in this field, including, but not limited to, the research synergies forming between the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes for Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC), Harvard University, Emory University, Vanderbilt University, Tsinghua University, University of Pennsylvania, many other research institutions, and their commercial affiliations.
The National Institute of Health’s grant AI23946-08 issued to Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (officially classified as affiliated with Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID by at least 2003) began the work on synthetically altering the Coronaviridae (the coronavirus family) for the express purpose of general research, pathogenic enhancement, detection, manipulation, and potential therapeutic interventions targeting the same. As early as May 21, 2000, Dr. Baric and UNC sought to patent critical sections of the coronavirus family for their commercial benefit.[1]
In one of the several papers derived from work sponsored by this grant, Dr. Baric published what he reported to be the full length cDNA of SARS CoV in which it was clearly stated that SAR CoV was based on a composite of DNA segments.
“Using a panel of contiguous cDNAs that span the entire genome, we have assembled a full-length cDNA of the SARS-CoV Urbani strain, and have rescued molecularly cloned SARS viruses (infectious clone SARS-CoV) that contained the expected marker mutations inserted into the component clones.”2 On April 19, 2002 – the Spring before the first SARS outbreak in Asia – Christopher M. Curtis, Boyd Yount, and Ralph Baric filed an application for U.S. Patent 7,279,372 for a method of producing recombinant coronavirus. In the first public record of the claims, they sought to patent a means of producing, “an infectious, replication defective, coronavirus.” This work was supported by the NIH grant referenced above and GM63228. In short, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services was involved in the funding of amplifying the infectious nature of coronavirus between 1999 and 2002 before SARS was ever detected in humans.
Medical disinformation and the unviable nature of COVID-19 conspiracy theories
David Robert Grimes
Abstract
The coronavirus pandemic has seen a marked rise in medical disinformation across social
media. A variety of claims have garnered considerable traction, including the assertion that
COVID is a hoax or deliberately manufactured, that 5G frequency radiation causes coronavirus, and that the pandemic is a ruse by big pharmaceutical companies to profiteer off a
vaccine. An estimated 30% of some populations subscribe some form of COVID medicoscientific conspiracy narratives, with detrimental impacts for themselves and others. Consequently, exposing the lack of veracity of these claims is of considerable importance. Previous work has demonstrated that historical medical and scientific conspiracies are highly
unlikely to be sustainable. In this article, an expanded model for a hypothetical en masse
COVID conspiracy is derived. Analysis suggests that even under ideal circumstances for
conspirators, commonly encountered conspiratorial claims are highly unlikely to endure,
and would quickly be exposed. This work also explores the spectrum of medico-scientific
acceptance, motivations behind propagation of falsehoods, and the urgent need for the
medical and scientific community to anticipate and counter the emergence of falsehoods.
RESEARCH ARTICLE - PLOS ONE - PDF
"It is easy but misguided to dismiss this as the domain of a small cohort of unreachable cranks,
but this is to underplay the problem. Mere exposure to medical myths can distort the percep tion of unsuspecting individuals, to our collective detriment. Acceptance of medico-scientific
consensus and guidance is likely not a simple binary; in studies of vaccine up-take, vaccine hesiitancy exists on a spectrum, which can be readily influenced by several mechanisms" --David Robert Grimes
Now that is a bold and unequivical pronouncement. And just who are these unreachable cranks? One would be Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), who is speaking out about the risks of COVID-19 shots, including their link to neurodegenerative diseases and vaccine acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (VAIDS).
Others would surely include, Dr. Martin Kulldorff, Dr. Scott Atlas, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Dr. Joseph Mercola, and Doctor Reiner Fuellmich & Dr. David Martin, both a medical doctor and an attorney.
One might be wise to ask just what medical expertise that David Grimes has. Who is advising him as far as the pandemic is concerned? Is it the lying Dr. Fauci and his cohort of unreachable cranks?
MIT research scientist Stephanie Seneff discusses the risks of COVID-19 shots, including their link to neurodegenerative diseases and vaccine acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (VAIDS).
Stephanie Seneff, a senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), is speaking out about the risks of COVID-19 shots, including their link to neurodegenerative diseases and vaccine acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (VAIDS).
Seneff is perhaps most well known for her studies on the chemical glyphosate. She determined that the increase in glyphosate usage in the U.S., as well as in Canada, is extremely well-correlated with the concurrent increase in the incidence of multiple diseases, including breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, kidney cancer, thyroid cancer, liver cancer, bladder cancer and myeloid leukemia.
She also believes that glyphosate exposure may have worsened COVID-19 outcomes for many people, and could also lead to more severe reactions following COVID-19 shots, but as the pandemic progressed, she got involved in researching messenger RNA (mRNA) shots.
“It’s a technology that was extremely novel, that had never been used before, and I felt really worried about that,” Seneff told Zeee Media. “That degree of sophistication in the technology would normally take 12 years to get to market, and normally only 2% of products that were tried would actually make it to the market.”
This led Seneff, who holds a B.S. degree in biophysics, M.S. and E.E. degrees in electrical engineering and a Ph.D. in electrical engineering and computer science, to do a deep dive into mRNA shots.
Problems With mRNA Technology
mRNA COVID-19 shots teach your cells to produce a protein, or piece of protein, that triggers an immune response, including the production of antibodies. However, because natural mRNA is easily broken down, this means the experimental gene therapy needs a special delivery system to make it to the body’s cells.
The shots use lipid nanoparticles that contain polyethylene glycol (PEG) for this purpose. The mRNA is wrapped in lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) that carry it to your cells, and the LNPs are “PEGylated” — that is, chemically attached to PEG molecules to increase stability.
Usually, if you were to inject RNA into your body, enzymes would immediately break it apart, but the COVID-19 shots are specifically designed so that doesn’t happen. Instead, the RNA doesn’t break down and quickly and efficiently begins producing protein. Seneff says:
“They also basically redesigned the RNA itself, first of all to make it look like a human RNA rather than a viral one, so the cell does not realize it’s been invaded, because it looks like a human molecule … So they’ve done all of these things — everything they can think of — to make sure that it’s sturdy, that it sticks around, that it doesn’t degrade, and it keeps on making protein.”
In fact, Seneff states that recent studies show mRNA and the spike protein persists in the lymph nodes of people who’ve received COVID-19 shots at least 60 days later — something Seneff says is not only really shocking but also completely abnormal.
Another important point is that, by injecting the mRNA, it bypasses barriers that a virus would face after natural exposure. The virus would be inhaled and pass through your nose into your lungs.
“If you have a strong immune system,” Seneff says, “it will stay in your lungs, it won’t go beyond that.” However, once it enters your tissues and bloodstream, it can cause systemic problems, which can occur in serious cases of natural infection as well as after receiving a COVID-19 injection.
Spike Protein Is Neurotoxic, Even Without the Virus
Spike protein is naturally found in SARS-CoV-2 and is also produced in your body when you receive a COVID-19 shot. In its native form in SARS-CoV-2, the spike protein is responsible for the pathologies of the viral infection.
It’s also been revealed that the spike protein on its own is enough to cause inflammation and damage to the vascular system, even independent of a virus. It’s also neurotoxic, according to Seneff, and spike proteins can circulate in your body after infection or injection, causing damage to cells, tissues and organs.
For instance, Pfizer’s biodistribution study, which was used to determine where the injected substances end up in the body, showed the COVID spike protein from the shots accumulated in “quite high concentrations” in the ovaries.
Psychological operations (PSYOP) are operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.
If you’ve heard the term “mass formation psychosis” recently, it’s likely because Malone mentioned it on an episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience” December 31, 2021, which was viewed by more than 50 million people.14 January 2, 2022, mass formation psychosis reached a value of 100 on Google Trends,15 which means it had reached peak popularity, after previously being practically unheard of.
The technocrats quickly took action, manipulating search results and populating Google with propaganda to discredit Malone and the mass formation psychosis theory — even though Mattias Desmet, professor of clinical psychology at the University of Ghent in Belgium, who has 126 publications to his name,16 has been studying it for many years, and the phenomenon actually dates back over 100 years.
Those under the spell of mass formation psychosis obsessively focus on a failure of the normal world or a particular event or person, who becomes the focus of the attention and can effectively control the masses.
Mass formation can occur in a society with feelings of social isolation and free-floating anxiety among a large number of people, and provides a coherent explanation of why so many people have fallen victim to the unbelievable lies and propaganda of the mainstream COVID-19 narrative. The phenomenon leads to totalitarian thinking and, eventually, to totalitarian states, but as Malone told Owens, fortunately about one-third of people are resistant to it.
Trusted News Initiative (TNI) to combat spread of harmful vaccine disinformation and announces major research project
At a recent summit chaired by the BBC’s new Director General, Tim Davie, the Trusted News Initiative (TNI) agreed to focus on combatting the spread of harmful vaccine disinformation.
Published: 10 December 2020
"The Trusted News Initiative partners will continue to work together to ensure legitimate concerns about future vaccinations are heard whilst harmful disinformation myths are stopped in their tracks."— Tim Davie, Director-General
This is obviously an agenda for censorship, an attempt to silence any voices that disagree with the official narrative. This is opposed to every principle of free speech. it is obviously an authoritarian and draconian agenda that anyone concerned with freedom of speech should fight against.
After mining the Department of Defense database (one of the best in the US) and comparing 2021 data gathered before the COVID shots, three whistleblowers are sounding the alarm about a 10x to 20x increase in malignancy post-jab, as well as other alarming early warning signs.
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Dr. Robert Malone discusses COVID-19 shots’ effects on fertility and targeting children with social pressure and coercion to get jabbed
In this nearly four-hour discussion with Candace Owens, Malone touches on the global narrative that’s intent on hunting down physicians and taking away their licenses for providing early COVID-19 treatment and how Bill Gates and Big Tech have succeeded in creating monopolies and gained control of information
Malone describes three Department of Defense (DOD) whistleblowers who datamined the DOD health database, revealing disturbing increases in rates of miscarriage, cancer, neurological disease and stillbirths since COVID-19 jabs rolled out
Malone is dedicated to speaking out because he wants to protect future generations; he’s concerned about the pandemic response’s effects on children, stating that public policies have had a particularly strong adverse effect on the young
If people reconnect and come together once again for a real greater good, Malone believes we can avoid a Great Reset and instead experience a Great Awakening
The Difference Between mRNA Injections and Vaccines
BY Joseph Mercola TIME March 7, 2022
If the US government would call the COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ by what they really are, far fewer people would be lining up for their two shots.
Did you know that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines aren’t vaccines in the medical and legal definition of a vaccine? They do not prevent you from getting the infection, nor do they prevent its spread. They’re really experimental gene therapies.
I discussed this troubling fact in an interview with molecular biologist Judy Mikovits, Ph.D. While the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots are labeled as “vaccines,” and news agencies and health policy leaders call them that, the actual patents for Pfizer’s and Moderna’s injections more truthfully describe them as “gene therapy,” not vaccines.
Definition of ‘Vaccine’
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a vaccine is “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.” Immunity, in turn, is defined as “Protection from an infectious disease,” meaning that “If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.”
Neither Moderna nor Pfizer claim this to be the case for their COVID-19 “vaccines.” In fact, in their clinical trials, they specify that they will not even test for immunity.
Unlike real vaccines, which use an antigen of the disease you’re trying to prevent, the COVID-19 injections contain synthetic RNA fragments encapsulated in a nanolipid carrier compound, the sole purpose of which is to lessen clinical symptoms associated with the S-1 spike protein, not the actual virus.
They do not actually impart immunity or inhibit transmissibility of the disease. In other words, they are not designed to keep you from getting sick with SARS-CoV-2; they only are supposed to lessen your infection symptoms if or when you do get infected.
As such, these products do not meet the legal or medical definition of a vaccine, and as noted by David Martin, Ph.D., in the video above, “The legal ramifications of this deception are immense.”
What Constitutes ‘The Greater Good’?
Martin points to the 1905 Supreme Court ruling in Jacobson vs. Massachusetts, which essentially established that collective benefit supersedes individual benefit. To put it bluntly, it argued that it’s acceptable for individuals to be harmed by public health directives provided it benefits the collective.
Now, if vaccination is a public health measure that is supposed to protect and benefit the collective, then it would need to a) ensure that the individual who is vaccinated is rendered immune from the disease in question; and b) that the vaccine inhibits transmission of the disease.
Only if these two outcomes can be scientifically proven can you say that vaccination protects and benefits the collective — the population as a whole. This is where we run into problems with the mRNA “vaccines.”
Moderna’s SEC filings, which Martin claims to have carefully reviewed, specifies and stresses that its technology is a “gene therapy technology.” Originally, its technology was set up to be a cancer treatment, so more specifically, it’s a chemotherapy gene therapy technology.
[...]
But there’s another problem. Martin points out that “COVID-19 disease” has been defined as a series of clinical symptoms. Moreover, there’s no causal link between SARS-CoV-2, the virus, and the set of symptoms known as COVID-19.
How is that, you might ask? It’s simple, really. Since a vast majority of people who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 have no symptoms at all, they’ve not been able to establish a causal link between the virus and the clinical disease.
Here’s yet another problem: The primary end point in the COVID-19 vaccine trials is not an actual vaccine trial end point because, again, vaccine trial end points have to do with immunity and transmission reduction. Neither of those was measured.
Bill Gates’ Relationship With Jeffrey Epstein Played Part in Divorce: Melinda Gates
Melinda Gates has said that billionaire Bill Gates’ relationship with “evil personified” Jeffrey Epstein played a part in her divorce from the Microsoft co-founder.
Epstein was found dead in a New York federal jail on Aug. 10, 2019, at the age of 66. At the time, he was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges for abusing women and girls in Manhattan and Florida from 2002 to 2005.
He had pleaded not guilty. His death was ruled a suicide by hanging.
In her first public interview since the couple announced their split in May last year, Melinda explained that while a number of things had contributed to her separation from the billionaire businessman, his relationship and meetings with the late financier had also played a part.
Speaking to CBS, Gates explained, “It’s not one thing, it was many things. But I did not like that he had meetings with Jeffrey Epstein.
“I made that clear to [Bill],” she said, adding that she had also met Epstein, whom she described as “evil personified.”
We're on the Brink of WWIII Because the Media Covered Up the Hunter Biden Scandal
FUCK JOE BIDEN!!!
Yesterday afternoon, President Biden rambled about how "everybody knows" someone who has been involved in sexual exploitation online, saying:
"I bet everybody knows somebody, somewhere along the line that in an intimate relationship, what happened was the guy takes a revealing picture of his naked friend, or whatever, in a compromising position and then literally in a sense mortifies that person. Sends it out. Put it online."
Well, I don't know anybody who's had that happen but apparently, this is a dime a dozen to the President.
Later that evening, The New York Times published a comprehensive report about the ongoing federal probe into Hunter Biden's tax filings, in which they inadvertently confirmed (in a middle paragraph) the existence of the First Son's laptop, after having called it "Russian disinformation" for the past 17 months.
The "Laptop from Hell" story was censored on all mainstream media and social media just prior to the 2020 election, in what amounts to coordinated election manipulation and fraud.
https://www.facebook.com/randy.hillier/videos/powerful-information-revealed-about-covid-ft-dr-reiner-fuellmich-dr-david-martin/530142078244383/
\\][//
For instance, the Bush administration’s coordinated propagandistic efforts to win support for
an invasion of Iraq was a conspiracy.6 And those who called it what it was early on were promoting a conspiracy theory, by most definitions. (Alas, if only that conspiracy theory had been more successful, much suffering and death may have been avoided.) In addition, as U.C. Davis History Professor Kathryn S. Olmsted explains:
As the U.S. government grew, it gained the power to conspire against its citizens, and it soon began exercising that power. By the height of the cold war, government agents had consorted with mobsters to kill a foreign leader, dropped hallucinogenic drugs into the drinks of unsuspecting Americans in random bars, and considered launching fake terrorist attacks on Americans in the United States. Public officials had denied potentially life-saving treatment to African American men in medical experiments, [and] sold arms to terrorists in return for American hostages, and faked documents to frame past presidents for crimes they had not committed. (Olmsted 2009, 8)
There are also scores of conspiracy theories that remain plausible, yet unproven—or at least not widely accepted as proven. Many of these may well be true too, for all we know.
From, CONSPIRACY THEORIES AND STYLIZED FACTS1
\\][//
CONSPIRACY THEORIES AND STYLIZED FACTS1
Kurtis Hagen
Abstract
In an article published in the Journal of Political Philosophy, Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule argue that the government and its allies ought to actively undermine groups that espouse conspiracy theories deemed “demonstrably false.” They propose infiltrating such groups in order to “cure” conspiracy theorists by treating their “crippled epistemology” with “cognitive diversity.”
They base their proposal on an analysis of the “causes” of such conspiracy theories, which emphasizes informational and reputational cascades. Some may regard their proposal as outrageous and anti-democratic. I agree. However, in this article I merely argue that their argument is flawed in at least the following ways:
(1) their account of the popularity of conspiracy theories is implausible, and (2)their proposal relies on misleading “stylized facts,” including a caricature of those who doubt official narratives and a deceptive depiction of the relevant history.
In an article entitled “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures,” published in the Journal of Political Philosophy, Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule have argued that the government and its allies ought to counter “conspiracy theories” or “extreme views”[2] by infiltrating and undermining the groups that espouse them. While they specify that this would apply only to theories that are (or are deemed to be) “demonstrably false,” they give no hint regarding how such a judgment is to be reached. I will argue that Sunstein and Vermeule’s proposal is not well supported.
Among other problems, their account of the “causes,” which purportedly explain the popularity of (supposedly) “demonstrably false” conspiracy theories, is premised on a caricature of those who doubt official narratives. Moreover, the air of acceptability that they attempt to evoke regarding their proposed “cures” relies on a deceptive depiction of the relevant history. To
use their own terminology, their argument is based on misleading “stylized facts” (described below).
Before I begin my critique, I should say something about Sunstein and Vermeule. At the time the final version of their paper was published, they were both Harvard law professors. Sunstein had just moved from the University of Chicago to Harvard, and shortly thereafter he was chosen by President Obama to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, in which capacity he now serves. He is reputed to be “the most cited law professor on any faculty in the United States” according to a White House website, and “one of America’s leading constitutional scholars” according to Obama himself.[3] Indeed, accordingto Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, “Cass Sunstein is the pre-eminent legal scholar of our time—the most wide-ranging, the most prolific, the most cited, and the most influential” (Mangan 2008). So, although some people may regard their proposal as too outrageous to merit rebuttal, I agree with Sunstein and Vermeule
on one thing: problematic views ought to be confronted, not ignored. And so,particularly given Sunstein’s acclaim and position, it is worth explicitly detailing at least some of the falsities and fallacies on which their proposal is based.
20 page PDF
\\][//
The Fauci/COVID-19 Dossier
This document is prepared for humanity by Dr. David E. Martin.
Background:
Over the past two decades, my company – M·CAM – has been monitoring possible violations of the 1925 Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous, or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare (the Geneva Protocol) 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons and Their Destruction (the BTWC). In our 2003-2004 Global Technology Assessment: Vector Weaponization M·CAM highlighted China’s growing involvement in Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology with respect to joining the world stage in chimeric construction of viral vectors. Since that time, on a weekly basis, we have monitored the development of research and commercial efforts in this field, including, but not limited to, the research synergies forming between the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes for Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC), Harvard University, Emory University, Vanderbilt University, Tsinghua University, University of Pennsylvania, many other research institutions, and their commercial affiliations.
The National Institute of Health’s grant AI23946-08 issued to Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (officially classified as affiliated with Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID by at least 2003) began the work on synthetically altering the Coronaviridae (the coronavirus family) for the express purpose of general research, pathogenic enhancement, detection, manipulation, and potential therapeutic interventions targeting the same. As early as May 21, 2000, Dr. Baric and UNC sought to patent critical sections of the coronavirus family for their commercial benefit.[1]
In one of the several papers derived from work sponsored by this grant, Dr. Baric published what he reported to be the full length cDNA of SARS CoV in which it was clearly stated that SAR CoV was based on a composite of DNA segments.
“Using a panel of contiguous cDNAs that span the entire genome, we have assembled a full-length cDNA of the SARS-CoV Urbani strain, and have rescued molecularly cloned SARS viruses (infectious clone SARS-CoV) that contained the expected marker mutations inserted into the component clones.”2 On April 19, 2002 – the Spring before the first SARS outbreak in Asia – Christopher M. Curtis, Boyd Yount, and Ralph Baric filed an application for U.S. Patent 7,279,372 for a method of producing recombinant coronavirus. In the first public record of the claims, they sought to patent a means of producing, “an infectious, replication defective, coronavirus.” This work was supported by the NIH grant referenced above and GM63228. In short, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services was involved in the funding of amplifying the infectious nature of coronavirus between 1999 and 2002 before SARS was ever detected in humans.
205 pages
PDF available free om the Internet.
\\][//
Powerful information revealed about COVID ft. Dr. Reiner Fuellmich & Dr. David Martin
https://www.facebook.com/randy.hillier/videos/powerful-information-revealed-about-covid-ft-dr-reiner-fuellmich-dr-david-martin/530142078244383/
\\][//
The conspiracy theory meme as a tool of cultural hegemony:
A critical discourse analysis
Ed Rankin, PhD
Fielding Graduate University
"Those challenging the official accounts of significant events are often labeled conspiracy
theorists and the alternative explanations they propose are often referred to as conspiracy
theories. These labels are frequently intended to dismiss the beliefs of those questioning potential
hegemonic control of what people believe. The conspiracy theory concept functions as an
impediment to legitimate discursive examination of conspiracy suspicions. The effect of the label
appears to constrain even the most respected thinkers. This impediment is particularly
problematic in academia, where thorough, objective analysis of information is critical to
uncovering truth, and where members of the academy are typically considered among the most
important of epistemic authorities. This paper follows the development and use of such terms as
pejoratives used to shut down critical thinking, analysis, and challenges to authority. Evidence
exists suggesting government agents were instrumental in creating the pejorative meme
conspiracy theorist and the use of this pejorative continues in contemporary media. How has the
phrase conspiracy theorist developed as a powerful hegemonic tool against those who challenge
authority and claims made by powerful people and institutions?"
\\][//
https://www.facebook.com/randy.hillier/videos/powerful-information-revealed-about-covid-ft-dr-reiner-fuellmich-dr-david-martin/530142078244383/
\\][//
bitchute.com/video/DTllPyCMsmjJ/
73 PATENTS ON SARS-COV-2 BIOWEAPON BY NIAID AND BIG PHARMA - DR DAVID E. MARTIN (CORONA AUSSCHUSS)
\\][//
Medical disinformation and the unviable nature of COVID-19 conspiracy theories
David Robert Grimes
Abstract
The coronavirus pandemic has seen a marked rise in medical disinformation across social
media. A variety of claims have garnered considerable traction, including the assertion that
COVID is a hoax or deliberately manufactured, that 5G frequency radiation causes coronavirus, and that the pandemic is a ruse by big pharmaceutical companies to profiteer off a
vaccine. An estimated 30% of some populations subscribe some form of COVID medicoscientific conspiracy narratives, with detrimental impacts for themselves and others. Consequently, exposing the lack of veracity of these claims is of considerable importance. Previous work has demonstrated that historical medical and scientific conspiracies are highly
unlikely to be sustainable. In this article, an expanded model for a hypothetical en masse
COVID conspiracy is derived. Analysis suggests that even under ideal circumstances for
conspirators, commonly encountered conspiratorial claims are highly unlikely to endure,
and would quickly be exposed. This work also explores the spectrum of medico-scientific
acceptance, motivations behind propagation of falsehoods, and the urgent need for the
medical and scientific community to anticipate and counter the emergence of falsehoods.
RESEARCH ARTICLE - PLOS ONE - PDF
"It is easy but misguided to dismiss this as the domain of a small cohort of unreachable cranks,
but this is to underplay the problem. Mere exposure to medical myths can distort the percep tion of unsuspecting individuals, to our collective detriment. Acceptance of medico-scientific
consensus and guidance is likely not a simple binary; in studies of vaccine up-take, vaccine hesiitancy exists on a spectrum, which can be readily influenced by several mechanisms" --David Robert Grimes
Now that is a bold and unequivical pronouncement. And just who are these unreachable cranks? One would be Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), who is speaking out about the risks of COVID-19 shots, including their link to neurodegenerative diseases and vaccine acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (VAIDS).
Others would surely include, Dr. Martin Kulldorff, Dr. Scott Atlas, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Dr. Joseph Mercola, and Doctor Reiner Fuellmich & Dr. David Martin, both a medical doctor and an attorney.
One might be wise to ask just what medical expertise that David Grimes has. Who is advising him as far as the pandemic is concerned? Is it the lying Dr. Fauci and his cohort of unreachable cranks?
\\][//
COVID Vaccines and Neurodegenerative Disease
Joseph Mercola
March 18, 2022
MIT research scientist Stephanie Seneff discusses the risks of COVID-19 shots, including their link to neurodegenerative diseases and vaccine acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (VAIDS).
Stephanie Seneff, a senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), is speaking out about the risks of COVID-19 shots, including their link to neurodegenerative diseases and vaccine acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (VAIDS).
Seneff is perhaps most well known for her studies on the chemical glyphosate. She determined that the increase in glyphosate usage in the U.S., as well as in Canada, is extremely well-correlated with the concurrent increase in the incidence of multiple diseases, including breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, kidney cancer, thyroid cancer, liver cancer, bladder cancer and myeloid leukemia.
She also believes that glyphosate exposure may have worsened COVID-19 outcomes for many people, and could also lead to more severe reactions following COVID-19 shots, but as the pandemic progressed, she got involved in researching messenger RNA (mRNA) shots.
“It’s a technology that was extremely novel, that had never been used before, and I felt really worried about that,” Seneff told Zeee Media. “That degree of sophistication in the technology would normally take 12 years to get to market, and normally only 2% of products that were tried would actually make it to the market.”
This led Seneff, who holds a B.S. degree in biophysics, M.S. and E.E. degrees in electrical engineering and a Ph.D. in electrical engineering and computer science, to do a deep dive into mRNA shots.
Problems With mRNA Technology
mRNA COVID-19 shots teach your cells to produce a protein, or piece of protein, that triggers an immune response, including the production of antibodies. However, because natural mRNA is easily broken down, this means the experimental gene therapy needs a special delivery system to make it to the body’s cells.
The shots use lipid nanoparticles that contain polyethylene glycol (PEG) for this purpose. The mRNA is wrapped in lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) that carry it to your cells, and the LNPs are “PEGylated” — that is, chemically attached to PEG molecules to increase stability.
Usually, if you were to inject RNA into your body, enzymes would immediately break it apart, but the COVID-19 shots are specifically designed so that doesn’t happen. Instead, the RNA doesn’t break down and quickly and efficiently begins producing protein. Seneff says:
“They also basically redesigned the RNA itself, first of all to make it look like a human RNA rather than a viral one, so the cell does not realize it’s been invaded, because it looks like a human molecule … So they’ve done all of these things — everything they can think of — to make sure that it’s sturdy, that it sticks around, that it doesn’t degrade, and it keeps on making protein.”
In fact, Seneff states that recent studies show mRNA and the spike protein persists in the lymph nodes of people who’ve received COVID-19 shots at least 60 days later — something Seneff says is not only really shocking but also completely abnormal.
Another important point is that, by injecting the mRNA, it bypasses barriers that a virus would face after natural exposure. The virus would be inhaled and pass through your nose into your lungs.
“If you have a strong immune system,” Seneff says, “it will stay in your lungs, it won’t go beyond that.” However, once it enters your tissues and bloodstream, it can cause systemic problems, which can occur in serious cases of natural infection as well as after receiving a COVID-19 injection.
Spike Protein Is Neurotoxic, Even Without the Virus
Spike protein is naturally found in SARS-CoV-2 and is also produced in your body when you receive a COVID-19 shot. In its native form in SARS-CoV-2, the spike protein is responsible for the pathologies of the viral infection.
It’s also been revealed that the spike protein on its own is enough to cause inflammation and damage to the vascular system, even independent of a virus. It’s also neurotoxic, according to Seneff, and spike proteins can circulate in your body after infection or injection, causing damage to cells, tissues and organs.
For instance, Pfizer’s biodistribution study, which was used to determine where the injected substances end up in the body, showed the COVID spike protein from the shots accumulated in “quite high concentrations” in the ovaries.
Entire article and video:
https://www.theepochtimes.com/covid-vaccines-and-neurodegenerative-disease_4346730.html
\\][//
Psychological operations (PSYOP) are operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.
Motto(s): "Persuade, Change, Influence"; (Army); …
Psychological operations (United States) - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Psychological_operations...
\\][//
The Silencing of Mass Formation Psychosis
If you’ve heard the term “mass formation psychosis” recently, it’s likely because Malone mentioned it on an episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience” December 31, 2021, which was viewed by more than 50 million people.14 January 2, 2022, mass formation psychosis reached a value of 100 on Google Trends,15 which means it had reached peak popularity, after previously being practically unheard of.
The technocrats quickly took action, manipulating search results and populating Google with propaganda to discredit Malone and the mass formation psychosis theory — even though Mattias Desmet, professor of clinical psychology at the University of Ghent in Belgium, who has 126 publications to his name,16 has been studying it for many years, and the phenomenon actually dates back over 100 years.
Those under the spell of mass formation psychosis obsessively focus on a failure of the normal world or a particular event or person, who becomes the focus of the attention and can effectively control the masses.
Mass formation can occur in a society with feelings of social isolation and free-floating anxiety among a large number of people, and provides a coherent explanation of why so many people have fallen victim to the unbelievable lies and propaganda of the mainstream COVID-19 narrative. The phenomenon leads to totalitarian thinking and, eventually, to totalitarian states, but as Malone told Owens, fortunately about one-third of people are resistant to it.
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/03/19/robert-malone-candace-owens-interview.aspx
\\][//
GLOBAL PROPAGANDA INITIATIVE
Trusted News Initiative (TNI) to combat spread of harmful vaccine disinformation and announces major research project
At a recent summit chaired by the BBC’s new Director General, Tim Davie, the Trusted News Initiative (TNI) agreed to focus on combatting the spread of harmful vaccine disinformation.
Published: 10 December 2020
"The Trusted News Initiative partners will continue to work together to ensure legitimate concerns about future vaccinations are heard whilst harmful disinformation myths are stopped in their tracks."— Tim Davie, Director-General
****************************************************
This is obviously an agenda for censorship, an attempt to silence any voices that disagree with the official narrative. This is opposed to every principle of free speech. it is obviously an authoritarian and draconian agenda that anyone concerned with freedom of speech should fight against.
https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/2020/trusted-news-initiative-vaccine-disinformation
\\][//
Data Reveal Disturbing Trend From COVID Jab
After mining the Department of Defense database (one of the best in the US) and comparing 2021 data gathered before the COVID shots, three whistleblowers are sounding the alarm about a 10x to 20x increase in malignancy post-jab, as well as other alarming early warning signs.
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Dr. Robert Malone discusses COVID-19 shots’ effects on fertility and targeting children with social pressure and coercion to get jabbed
In this nearly four-hour discussion with Candace Owens, Malone touches on the global narrative that’s intent on hunting down physicians and taking away their licenses for providing early COVID-19 treatment and how Bill Gates and Big Tech have succeeded in creating monopolies and gained control of information
Malone describes three Department of Defense (DOD) whistleblowers who datamined the DOD health database, revealing disturbing increases in rates of miscarriage, cancer, neurological disease and stillbirths since COVID-19 jabs rolled out
Malone is dedicated to speaking out because he wants to protect future generations; he’s concerned about the pandemic response’s effects on children, stating that public policies have had a particularly strong adverse effect on the young
If people reconnect and come together once again for a real greater good, Malone believes we can avoid a Great Reset and instead experience a Great Awakening
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/03/19/robert-malone-candace-owens-interview.aspx
\\][//
The Difference Between mRNA Injections and Vaccines
BY Joseph Mercola TIME March 7, 2022
If the US government would call the COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ by what they really are, far fewer people would be lining up for their two shots.
Did you know that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines aren’t vaccines in the medical and legal definition of a vaccine? They do not prevent you from getting the infection, nor do they prevent its spread. They’re really experimental gene therapies.
I discussed this troubling fact in an interview with molecular biologist Judy Mikovits, Ph.D. While the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots are labeled as “vaccines,” and news agencies and health policy leaders call them that, the actual patents for Pfizer’s and Moderna’s injections more truthfully describe them as “gene therapy,” not vaccines.
Definition of ‘Vaccine’
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a vaccine is “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.” Immunity, in turn, is defined as “Protection from an infectious disease,” meaning that “If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.”
Neither Moderna nor Pfizer claim this to be the case for their COVID-19 “vaccines.” In fact, in their clinical trials, they specify that they will not even test for immunity.
Unlike real vaccines, which use an antigen of the disease you’re trying to prevent, the COVID-19 injections contain synthetic RNA fragments encapsulated in a nanolipid carrier compound, the sole purpose of which is to lessen clinical symptoms associated with the S-1 spike protein, not the actual virus.
They do not actually impart immunity or inhibit transmissibility of the disease. In other words, they are not designed to keep you from getting sick with SARS-CoV-2; they only are supposed to lessen your infection symptoms if or when you do get infected.
As such, these products do not meet the legal or medical definition of a vaccine, and as noted by David Martin, Ph.D., in the video above, “The legal ramifications of this deception are immense.”
What Constitutes ‘The Greater Good’?
Martin points to the 1905 Supreme Court ruling in Jacobson vs. Massachusetts, which essentially established that collective benefit supersedes individual benefit. To put it bluntly, it argued that it’s acceptable for individuals to be harmed by public health directives provided it benefits the collective.
Now, if vaccination is a public health measure that is supposed to protect and benefit the collective, then it would need to a) ensure that the individual who is vaccinated is rendered immune from the disease in question; and b) that the vaccine inhibits transmission of the disease.
Only if these two outcomes can be scientifically proven can you say that vaccination protects and benefits the collective — the population as a whole. This is where we run into problems with the mRNA “vaccines.”
Moderna’s SEC filings, which Martin claims to have carefully reviewed, specifies and stresses that its technology is a “gene therapy technology.” Originally, its technology was set up to be a cancer treatment, so more specifically, it’s a chemotherapy gene therapy technology.
[...]
But there’s another problem. Martin points out that “COVID-19 disease” has been defined as a series of clinical symptoms. Moreover, there’s no causal link between SARS-CoV-2, the virus, and the set of symptoms known as COVID-19.
How is that, you might ask? It’s simple, really. Since a vast majority of people who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 have no symptoms at all, they’ve not been able to establish a causal link between the virus and the clinical disease.
Here’s yet another problem: The primary end point in the COVID-19 vaccine trials is not an actual vaccine trial end point because, again, vaccine trial end points have to do with immunity and transmission reduction. Neither of those was measured.
Entire article:
https://www.theepochtimes.com/covid-19-vaccines-a-case-of-false-advertising_4321714.html
\\][//
Bill Gates’ Relationship With Jeffrey Epstein Played Part in Divorce: Melinda Gates
Melinda Gates has said that billionaire Bill Gates’ relationship with “evil personified” Jeffrey Epstein played a part in her divorce from the Microsoft co-founder.
Epstein was found dead in a New York federal jail on Aug. 10, 2019, at the age of 66. At the time, he was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges for abusing women and girls in Manhattan and Florida from 2002 to 2005.
He had pleaded not guilty. His death was ruled a suicide by hanging.
In her first public interview since the couple announced their split in May last year, Melinda explained that while a number of things had contributed to her separation from the billionaire businessman, his relationship and meetings with the late financier had also played a part.
Speaking to CBS, Gates explained, “It’s not one thing, it was many things. But I did not like that he had meetings with Jeffrey Epstein.
“I made that clear to [Bill],” she said, adding that she had also met Epstein, whom she described as “evil personified.”
https://www.theepochtimes.com/bill-gates-relationship-with-evil-personified-jeffrey-epstein-played-part-in-divorce-melinda-gates_4320942.html
\\][//
We're on the Brink of WWIII Because the Media Covered Up the Hunter Biden Scandal
FUCK JOE BIDEN!!!
Yesterday afternoon, President Biden rambled about how "everybody knows" someone who has been involved in sexual exploitation online, saying:
"I bet everybody knows somebody, somewhere along the line that in an intimate relationship, what happened was the guy takes a revealing picture of his naked friend, or whatever, in a compromising position and then literally in a sense mortifies that person. Sends it out. Put it online."
Well, I don't know anybody who's had that happen but apparently, this is a dime a dozen to the President.
Later that evening, The New York Times published a comprehensive report about the ongoing federal probe into Hunter Biden's tax filings, in which they inadvertently confirmed (in a middle paragraph) the existence of the First Son's laptop, after having called it "Russian disinformation" for the past 17 months.
The "Laptop from Hell" story was censored on all mainstream media and social media just prior to the 2020 election, in what amounts to coordinated election manipulation and fraud.
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/were-on-the-brink-of-wwiii-because-the-media-covered-up-the-hunter-biden-scandal/
\\][//