quinta-feira, 16 de abril de 2020

Bill Gates’ Vaccine Agenda A Win-Win for Big Pharma, Mandatory Vaccination

Written by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

«(...) A 2015 article from The Scientist describes the concerns scientists had with creating a coronavirus chimera out of a lab, which resulted in a moratorium on gain-of-function coronavirus research in the U.S.

“The only impact of this work is the creation, in a lab, of a new, non-natural risk,” biodefense expert and biologist Richard Ebright said.

This may explain why in 2015, the Obama administration and the National Institute of Health under Dr. Anthony Fauci outsourced to the Wuhan Virology lab by awarding them $3.7 million in research grants for scientific gain-of-function coronavirus experimentation on bats.

It also coincides with the fact that Bill Gates ran a coronavirus pandemic simulation in October, called Event 201, which resulted in a death toll of 65 million people over 18 months.

The exercise concluded that vaccines and global government are the only solutions to the pandemic.

And remember that Dr. Fauci warned in 2017 that President Trump would likely face a deadly “surprise outbreak” during his presidency.

Congressman Matt Gaetz expressed his “disgust” upon learning the U.S. government’s role in China’s coronavirus research.

“I’m disgusted to learn that for years the US government has been funding dangerous and cruel animal experiments at the Wuhan Institute, which may have contributed to the global spread of coronavirus, and research at other labs in China that have virtually no oversight from US authorities,” Gaetz said Sunday.

Bioweapons expert Dr. Francis Boyle confirmed most of these points in an interview on The Alex Jones Show last month, arguing that the likelihood of the novel coronavirus outbreak originating from a biolab in Wuhan, China, was extremely high, also warning that COVID-19 was probably a bioweapon leaked from that lab.

The novel coronavirus outbreak that’s resulted in a global pandemic, over 110,000 dead, and the economic devastation of the United States came from a Wuhan laboratory funded by the NIH, the organization whose director, Fauci, is spearheading the U.S. response to the coronavirus his institute helped fund.

The individuals and institutions who helped China develop its coronavirus gain-of-function research are the same people telling us to stay locked in our homes, prepare for mandatory vaccines and implantable microchips, and accept a national ID “immunity” card to participate in society.»


«Back in 2017 at forum on pandemic preparedness at Georgetown University Dr. Fauci made an interesting statement. Fauci told the audience the Trump administration will not only be challenged by ongoing global health threats such as influenza and HIV, but also a surprise disease outbreak

Jim Oft («WHOA! Dr. FAUCI in 2017: President Trump Will Be Challenged By a "Surprise Global Disease Outbreak" (VIDEO)», April 3, 2020).

«The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation co-hosted a pandemic exercise in late 2019 that simulated a global coronavirus outbreak.

They also just happen to fund the group who owns the patent to the deadly virus and are working on a vaccine to solve the crisis.

On June 19, 2015, the UK government-funded Pirbright Institute filed an application for a patent for the live coronavirus, which was approved on Nov 20, 2018.

Suspiciously, a Pirbright Institute “primary funder” is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Specifically, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donated $189,232 to the Pirbright Institute in a 2013 grant looking “to improve our understanding of, and effective use of, current control tools and measures (including vaccines) against peste des petits ruminants and foot and mouth disease, two serious diseases affecting livestock that are widespread in developing countries.”

Then, in November of 2019, the Pirbright Institute’s website published an article focusing on the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s funding of “a Livestock Antibody Hub” to the sum of $5.5 million.

“The ambitious programme of work will see extensive collaboration between multiple UK research organisations in order to utilise research outcomes in livestock disease and immunology to support human health as part of the ‘One Health’ agenda,” the Pirbright Institute wrote last November.

Professor John Hammond, the lead researcher on the program, said, “New technology has given us the opportunity to utilise these detailed antibody responses to make the next generation of vaccines and therapies, which will improve animal health and ultimately human health, as well as ensuring the security of our food supply.”

Pirbright Institute Hires Coronavirus Expert To Work With Livestock Antibody Hub 

Additionally, at the same time the Pirbright Institute announced the Livestock Antibody Hub program, they posted a job opening for a 4-year Postdoctoral Scientist position on LinkedIn.com.

The advertisement for the job opening explains, “The post-holder will report to the Heads of the Coronavirus Group and the Viral Oncogenesis Group work and will work closely with a multidisciplinary team to advance the aims of the overall Pirbright Livestock Antibody Hub.”

Keep in mind, this all took place prior to the current Wuhan coronavirus outbreak.

Bill And Melinda Gates Behind Global Pandemic Excercise Focusing On Coronavirus 

Meanwhile, on Oct. 18, 2019, also before the outbreak, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the World Economic Forum co-hosted an event in NYC where “policymakers, business leaders, and health officials” worked together on a simulated coronavirus outbreak.

Titled the “Event 201” pandemic, the high-level pandemic exercise “dropped participants right in the midst of an uncontrolled coronavirus outbreak that was spreading like wildfire out of South America to wreak worldwide havoc.”

“In the simulation, CAPS (the coronavirus) resulted in a death toll of 65 million people within 18 months,” according to John Hopkins University.

A video highlight reel from the event shows fictional newscasters from “GNN” discuss how the hypothetical immune-resistant virus (nicknamed CAPS) was crippling trade and travel, sending the global economy into freefall.

It just so happens that a professor from Imperial College London recently warned the coronavirus has the same kill rate as the Spanish flu, which claimed the lives of 20-50 million people in 1918.

Event 201 Promotes Globalism As Solution To Pandemic 

In the video, Tom Inglesby of the John Hopkins Center For Health Security promoted globalism as a solution, saying, “there are problems emerging that can only be solved by global business and governments working together.”

Further promoting globalism as an antidote to the hypothetical outbreak, participants in Event 201 proposed the following:

1: Governments, international organizations, and businesses should plan now for how essential corporate capabilities will be utilized during a large-scale pandemic.

2: Industry, national governments, and international organizations should work together to enhance internationally held stockpiles of medical countermeasures (MCMs) to enable rapid and equitable distribution during a severe pandemic.

3: Countries, international organizations, and global transportation companies should work together to maintain travel and trade during severe pandemics.

4: Governments should provide more resources and support for the development and surge manufacturing of vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics that will be needed during a severe pandemic.

5: Global business should recognize the economic burden of pandemics and fight for stronger preparedness.

6: International organizations should prioritize reducing economic impacts of epidemics and pandemics.

7: Governments and the private sector should assign a greater priority to developing methods to combat mis- and disinformation prior to the next pandemic response.

Once again, remember that all of this took place prior to the first documented report of the illness in late December of 2019.

The Wuhan Institute of Virology (pictured) is one of the two major virus labs in Wuhan. See here

Outbreak Emanates From Chinese City With Controversial Lab 

The deadly virus, called the Wuhan coronavirus based on the Chinese city it emanated from, comes just years after a controversial lab was opened in Wuhan to work with the world’s most dangerous pathogens.

As of January 15, the virus made its way to America with a man carrying the illness from Wuhan, China to Washington state.

Now, a report out of Texas on Thursday claims officials at the Brazos County Health District are investigating a suspected case of the coronavirus.

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Look To Develop Coronavirus Vaccine 

But don’t worry, the same globalists who own the patent to the virus and predicted its rise are “scrambling to develop vaccines for the deadly Wuhan coronavirus.”

According to Business Insider, “A coalition backed by Bill Gates is funding biotechs” who are attempting to develop a coronavirus vaccine.

Is this illness being intentionally spread so governments worldwide can join forces in the name of stopping the virus, or so groups like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation can step in and become saviors, or is it all just a massive coincidence?»

Kelen McBreen («Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation & Others Predicted Up to 65 Million Deaths Via Coronavirus - In Simulation Run 3 Months Ago!», in NEWSWARS, January 23, 2020).

«The White House COVID-19 response team is made up of Big Pharma and Bill Gates operatives who are collaborating to destroy the U.S. economy in an effort to usher in the globalist agenda.

Infowars’ Greg Reese dives into the members of the response team and what the future could look like if they get their way.»

Greg Reese («MEDICAL TYRANNY 2020 - WATCH», in INFOWARS, April 10 2020).

«Here's what they are planning: A national health ID. This has been under development by international agencies along with Gates Foundation for several years. Planning for this is being done by ID2020, an organization supported by Accenture, the Rockefeller Foundation, Microsoft Corp., and others. Of note, among the others is Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, whose support of ID2020 demonstrates the interest of would-be global population managers in tying vaccination to identification.

A first step toward implementing this goal is conditioning people to accept the idea that they will need to prove their vaccination and health status before being allowed by government to engage in any activities that, heretofore, were exercised without restriction by a free people. To that end, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and key member of the Trump Administration’s coronavirus task force, admitted that the federal government is considering forcing citizens to use coronavirus immunity cards.

“You know, that's possible,” Fauci told CNN. “I mean, it's one of those things that we talk about when we want to make sure that we know who the vulnerable people are and not,” he continued. “This is something that's being discussed. I think it might actually have some merit, under certain circumstances.”

The idea was also floated by Bill Gates, former head of Microsoft and current international supporter of digital ID schemes tied to vaccination. During an “Ask Me Anything” session on the social media site Reddit, Gates said he supported using immunity IDs. “Eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered or been tested recently or when we have a vaccine who has received it,” Gates remarked.

The constellation of efforts Gates has been making around digital identity and vaccination includes funding research at MIT on encoding health and identity data into a quantum-dot based system that can be embedded in the skin. Described by researchers in the journal Science Translational Medicine, the researchers said they had developed an “approach to encode medical history on a patient using the spatial distribution of biocompatible, near-infrared quantum dots (NIR QDs) in the dermis. QDs are invisible to the naked eye yet detectable when exposed to NIR light.”

The journal translated this into less technical terminology:

McHugh et al. developed dissolvable microneedles that deliver patterns of near-infrared light-emitting microparticles to the skin. Particle patterns are invisible to the eye but can be imaged using modified smartphones. By codelivering a vaccine, the pattern of particles in the skin could serve as an on-person vaccination record.... These results demonstrate proof of concept for intradermal on-person vaccination recordkeeping.

Records in scientific journal research databases reveal sources of funding for studies like this one. In this case, funding was provided by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation along with the National Science Foundation, the National Cancer Institute, and the National Institutes of Health here in the United States. Funding sources also included the Youth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the China Scholarship Council, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China.

Fauci and the NIAID have a history of working with the Gates Foundation on worldwide vaccination programs. In 2010, the World Health Organization launched the “Global Vaccine Action Plan to guide discovery, development and delivery of lifesaving vaccines.”

See here

“The World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have announced a collaboration to increase coordination across the international vaccine community and create a Global Vaccine Action Plan,” said the WHO press release announcing the plan.

It continued: “The collaboration follows the January 2010 call by Bill and Melinda Gates for the next ten years to be the Decade of Vaccines. The Global Vaccine Action Plan will enable greater coordination across all stakeholder groups — national governments, multilateral organizations, civil society, the private sector and philanthropic organizations — and will identify critical policy, resource, and other gaps that must be addressed to realize the life- saving potential of vaccines.”

The leadership council for this initiative included:

— Margaret Chan, Director General of WHO

— Anthony Fauci, Director of NIAID, part of the National Institutes of Health

— Anthony Lake, Executive Director of UNICEF

— Joy Phumaphi, Chair of the International Advisory Committee and Executive Secretary, Adrian Leaders Malaria Alliance

— Tachi Yamada, President of Global Health at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Among these names, readers of The New American may be familiar with Anthony Lake, who previously served as National Security Advisor to President Bill Clinton. Lake, who had been nominated by Clinton to head the Central Intelligence Agency, infamously wasn’t sure if notorious Soviet spy Alger Hiss was actually a spy.

In its documentation, the Global Vaccine Action Plan called for numerous steps, including the use of ID technologies to track those vaccinated. According to the Global Vaccine Action Plan 2011-2020 summary available as a PDF from WHO:

Reaching every community will call for an understanding of the barriers to access and use of immunization; it will also require the underserved to be identified, and micro-plans at the district and community levels to be reviewed and revised in order to ensure that these barriers can be overcome. The rapid expansion of information technology should be leveraged to establish immunization registries and electronic databases that will allow each individual’s immunization status to be tracked, timely reminders to be sent when immunization is due and data to be accessed easily to inform actions. The introduction of unique identification numbers could be a catalyst for the establishment of such systems.

As if tracking and controlling people isn’t bad enough, there may be a more sinister population control plan afoot. Speakiing at a TED conference in 2010 on the subject of cutting carbon emissions to prevent global warming, Bill Gates pointed to population control as one area where an impact could be made. Among other things, he singled out vaccination as having a role in population control.

“First we’ve got population,” Gates began. “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

Now, most people make the reasonable conclusion that vaccines, making people less prone to disease and, therefore, healthier, promote population stability, if not outright growth. But Gates, quite curiously, tied vaccines to population control in this talk.

Subsequently, Melinda Gates has attempted to explain his counterintuitive philosophy on vaccines for population control. In the couple’s 2017 Annual Letter, she wrote: “Saving children’s lives is the goal that launched our global work. It’s an end in itself. But then we learned it has all these other benefits as well. If parents believe their children will survive — and if they have the power to time and space their pregnancies — they choose to have fewer children.”

Credible but also creditably disputed claims, especially in Kenya, that some Gates-related vaccines intervened in human reproduction, aside, Gates and his organization are interested in population control. Their work for a decade or more on tying vaccination to identification is clearly part of this agenda. Even taking the generous position of assigning to Gates the possibility that he is attempting to simply improve childhood health and reduce poverty does not negate concerns about using vaccination and health IDs to track the world’s population. After all, such a scheme creates a system of control for population technocrats to direct the lives of billions of people in a power grab of unimaginable proportions — and consequences.

See here

(...) Opposition aside, if technocrats such as Gates achieve their aims, Americans will not be able to shop, work, travel, or do anything else without their vaccine/health ID, which will almost certainly end up in some sort of technological and possibly injectable form. This likely would then be combined in the future with your credit score and other social scores, becoming an all-encompassing tracking and management technology for the world's population.»

Dennis Behreandt («Fauci: Mandatory Coronavirus Immunity Cards Under Consideration», in The New American, 11 April 2020).

«(…) “World Health Organization executive director Dr. Michael Ryan said surveillance is part of what’s required for life to return to normal in a world without a vaccine. However, civil liberties experts warn that the public has little recourse to challenge these digital exercises of power once the immediate threat has passed,” reads a recent VentureBeat article titled “After coronavirus, AI could be central to our new normal”.

“White House senior adviser Jared Kushner’s task force has reached out to a range of health technology companies about creating a national coronavirus surveillance system to give the government a near real-time view of where patients are seeking treatment and for what, and whether hospitals can accommodate them, according to four people with knowledge of the discussions,” reads a recent article by Politico, adding, “But the prospect of compiling a national database of potentially sensitive health information has prompted concerns about its impact on civil liberties well after the coronavirus threat recedes, with some critics comparing it to the Patriot Act enacted after the 9/11 attacks.”

“Mass surveillance methods could save lives around the world, permitting authorities to track and curb the spread of the novel coronavirus with speed and accuracy not possible during prior pandemics,” The Intercept’s Sam Biddle wrote last week, adding,

“There’s a glaring problem: We’ve heard all this before. After the September 11 attacks, Americans were told that greater monitoring and data sharing would allow the state to stop terrorism before it started, leading Congress to grant unprecedented surveillance powers that often failed to preempt much of anything. The persistence and expansion of this spying in the nearly two decades since, and the abuses exposed by Snowden and others, remind us that emergency powers can outlive their emergencies.”

As we discussed recently, it’s an established fact that power structures will seize upon opportunities to roll out oppressive authoritarian agendas under the pretense of protecting ordinary people, when in reality they’d been working on advancing those agendas since long before the crisis being offered as the reason for them. It happened with 9/11, and we may be certain that it is happening now.»


«Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, PhD exposes the role of Big-Pharma, Dr. Anthony Fauci, and the World Health Organization's promotion of "Fake Science" to push false Big Government solutions at the expense of people's lives and health.»

TNA Video («Dr. Shiva Exposes Dr. Fauci's "Fake Science" and the WHO», in The New American, 10 April 2020).

«Former Representative Ron Paul of Texas, speaking on his Ron Paul Liberty Report program on Thursday, called for President Donald Trump to fire Dr. Anthony Fauci as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Paul, a physician himself, was responding to Fauci’s lowering of his estimates of coonavirus deaths in the United States down from his previous estimates of between 100,000 and 200,000 to 60,000. But Fauci did not explain how he arrived at the estimate of 60,000.

Paul said, “He should be fired, but if you don’t do it in the literal sense, the people have to fire him. They have to fire him by saying he’s a fraud.”

The main concern of Paul is that the virus was being used by the government to infringe on the liberties of Americans. “The plan that they [government officials] have is when things are getting back to normal, people can return to work, and they do things, and go to the golf course if they get a stamp of approval. Your liberties are there if you get a proper stamp from the government.”

“It’s an excuse to have total control over the people,” Paul added.

Appearing on the Today television program on Thursday, Fauci credited the measures that he and other health experts recommended to government officials in both the national and state governments for the downward revision. “The real data are telling us that it is highly likely that we’re having a definite positive effect by this mitigation things that we’re doing — this physical separation — so I believe we are gonna see a downturn in that,” Fauci said on Today.

He added, “And it looks more like the 60,000 than the 100,000 to 200,000.”

Rush Limbaugh, on his radio program this week, also addressed the changing estimates by individuals such as Fauci. He said that those such as Fauci can’t lose. If the numbers of deaths are less than their initial estimates (some as high as over two million), then they will say it is all because the government enforced and the public complied with their draconian standards that we escaped such grim predictions. And, of course, if the predictions proved accurate, then they claim they were right in their predictions.

So far, the virus has been blamed for 15,674 deaths. Even those numbers are somewhat inflated because many deaths have been attributed to COVID-19, despite the deceased not having ever been tested for coronavirus. And if someone is the last stages of cancer, for example, and contracts COVID-19, the death is then chalked up as yet another coronavirus death, when clearly had they not had cancer, the virus would most likely not have killed them.

Fauci has never been elected to anything, and yet he has made “suggestions” that have been adopted by governmental officials from the White House to governors and even mayors across the country. The reality is that government policy on how to respond to the pandemic has been driven almost entirely by a media that is driven by ratings and by a desire to damage the reelection chances of Trump. Any positive developments have either been downplayed by the media, or not even reported at all.

For example, when Trump mentioned the possibility that the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine (sold under the brand name Plaquenil) could greatly mitigate the symptoms of COVID-19, the mainstream liberal media immediately denounced it and Trump along with it. One reporter even said that Trump was giving the American people “false hope.” (One wonders how that reporter, who probably had never even heard of the drug before, was such an immediate “expert.”)

The numbers of persons who have been infected with COVID-19 and who have recovered are simply not reported at all. But considering that there are 436,500 confirmed cases of the virus (and no doubt hundreds of thousands more cases that are extremely mild), this would mean that probably many more than 400,000 Americans have recovered.

Were Trump to actually follow Dr. Paul’s call to fire Fauci, the media would no doubt go into a frenzy of denunciation, arguing that Trump should simply defer to “experts” and to “science.”

(…) A president has to consider the total ramifications of his executive decisions, not just a subset of consequences, such as those in the area of an underling’s expertise. Fauci’s recommendations have led to depression-like conditions in the United States, with over 16 million unemployed, on the heels of the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years. Many other experts note that such grim economic conditions led to an increase in the suicide rate. Of course, that and other such considerations is outside Fauci’s bureaucratic domain.

In November, Anthony Fauci will not be on the ballot, but President Donald Trump will. We elect presidents to gather information from all types of experts, then make decisions. At the end of the day, the Constitution gives the president of the United States the power and the authority to make all executive decisions, not Anthony Fauci.

As such, Trump probably should, if he does not outright fire Fauci as Dr. Ron Paul advocates, begin to consider the negative consequences of Fauci’s suggestions on the economy — and on liberty — going forward.» 
Steve Byas («Ron Paul Calls for Fauci's Ouster as a Fraud», in The New American, 10 April 2020). 

«(...) Savage might say that Fauci has never done science. Fauci mishandled the AIDs crisis in the 1980s, Savage pointed out, as he preferred political correctness to medical correctness and wouldn’t characterize the disease as what it was: Something afflicting mainly homosexuals. Instead, Sky is Falling Fauci made the ridiculous claim that the disease would break out into the general population, which never happened.

Fauci has also said that life could return to normal when there are no more Wuhan virus hospitalizations/deaths, which he knows, Savage stated, is an impossibility (we can’t prevent the tens of thousands of yearly flu deaths, either). In other words, Sky is Falling was essentially saying life can never return to normal.

(And they wonder why conspiracy theories arise.)

Savage in addition pointed out, based on his analysis of comprehensive April 6 disease data, that while Wuhan virus deaths were rising, flu-related deaths had supposedly dropped almost to zero.

Implication: Flu deaths are being counted among the Wuhan virus deaths.

Of course, it was already known that the latter numbers are inflated, as the authorities are counting anyone dying, from any cause, with the Wuhan virus in his system as a Wuhan virus death. As Savage put it, you can be hit by a bus and they’ll thus categorize you if you harbor the virus.

(...) It is time to fire Fauci and fire up the economy before we thrust ourselves into a great depression that could lead to millions more deaths from other causes. For the Fauci strategy seems to be that we’ll destroy the disease alright, yes sir — by burning its host to ashes.»

Selwyn Duke («Epidemiologist Michael Savage: Lockdowns "Ridiculous"; "Dr. Virus" Fauci Is a "Madman"», in The New American, 13 April 2020).

«A Montana based physician has blown the whistle on how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is exaggerating the COVID-19 death toll by manipulating Coronavirus death certificates. Dr. Annie Bukacek, MD, is a longtime Montana physician with over 30 years of experience practicing medicine. Signing death certificates is a routine part of her job.

In a brief video presentation, Dr. Bukacek blows the whistle on the way the CDC is instructing physicians to exaggerate COVID 19 deaths on death certificates:

Few people know how much individual power and leeway is given to the physician, coroner, or medical examiner, signing the death certificate. How do I know this? I’ve been filling out death certificates for over 30 years. 

More often than we want to admit, we don’t know with certainty the cause of death when we fill out death certificates. That is just life. We are doctors, not God. Autopsies are rarely performed and even when an autopsy is done the actual cause of death is not always clear. Physicians make their best guesstimate and fill out the form. Then that listed cause of death… is entered into a vital records data bank to use for statistical analysis, which then gives out inaccurate numbers, as you can imagine. Those inaccurate numbers then become accepted as factual information even though much of it is false.

So even before we heard of COVID-19, death certificates were based on assumptions and educated guesses that go unquestioned. When it comes to COVID-19 there is the additional data skewer, that is –get this— there is no universal definition of COVID-19 death. The Centers for Disease Control, updated from yesterday, April 4th, still states that mortality, quote unquote, data includes both confirmed and presumptive positive cases of COVID-19. That’s from their website.

Translation? The CDC counts both true COVID-19 cases and speculative guesses of COVID-19 the same. They call it death by COVID-19. They automatically overestimate the real death numbers, by their own admission. Prior to COVID-19, people were more likely to get an accurate cause of death written on their death certificate if they died in the hospital. Why more accurate when a patient dies in the hospital? Because hospital staff has physical examination findings labs, radiologic studies, et cetera, to make a good educated guess. It is estimated that 60 percent of people die in the hospital. But even [with] those in-hospital deaths, the cause of death is not always clear, especially in someone with multiple health conditions, each of which could cause the death.

Bukacek refers to a March 24 CDC memo from Steven Schwartz, director of the Division of Vital Statistics for the National Center for Health Statistics, titled “COVID-19 Alert No. 2.”

“The assumption of COVID-19 death,” she says, “can be made even without testing. Based on assumption alone the death can be reported to the public as another COVID-19 casualty.” 

There is a question-and-answer section on the memo.

One question is, “Will COVID-19 be the underlying cause?” 

The answer is:

“The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID-19 being the underlying cause more often than not.”

Another question is, “Should ‘COVID-19’ be reported on the death certificate only with a confirmed test?” 

The answer is:

“COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.” 

“You could see how these statistics have been made to look really scary when it is so easy to add false numbers to the official database,” Bukacek says. “Those false numbers are sanctioned by the CDC.”

“The real number of COVID-19 deaths are not what most people are told and what they then think,” she says.

“How many people have actually died from COVID-19 is anyone’s guess… but based on how death certificates are being filled out, you can be certain the number is substantially lower than what we are being told. Based on inaccurate, incomplete data people are being terrorized by fear-mongers into relinquishing cherished freedoms.”

The CDC’s role in the way it is handling the Coronavirus crisis has come under a lot of suspicion. Earlier the CDC was caught covering-up a contamination of its lab when Health officials who paid a flying visit were blocked entry into the lab. The matter is now under investigation.

Watch the full presentation [here]:

As GreatGameIndia reported earlier, currently the world finds itself in the state of a deadlock. Entire nations have been brought under lockdown with no exit strategy. Constant fear-mongering by the media and vested organisations ensure the lockdowns are extended as long as possible. This serves the interest of the vaccine lobby who want the lockdowns to continue until their vaccines have been developed.

Although, an emerging body of evidence suggest shutting down an entire nation may not be a good idea after all to combat such a virus. As Ariel Pablos-Mendez, M.D., MPH a professor of Medicine at Columbia University Medical Center, New York and former head of global health at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) explains:

At the end of the day, super-spreader COVID-19 is likely to infect a majority of the population, no matter how far apart we stay from one another in the coming weeks. The good news is that once immune, most people can go back to work. Our containment efforts must focus on the most vulnerable: the elderly and patients with underlying cardiopulmonary diseases.

We need to flatten the curve for the elderly but accelerate herd immunity for the healthy so that we don’t kill the economy trying to outrun the pandemic in lockdown. While home isolation for one month might stop an outbreak, it merely sets the clock back as the virus may return if it is not globally defeated


«During an appearance on former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s radio program, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo bemoaned that the models and projections provided by scientists and statisticians throughout the coronavirus pandemic have been completely wrong.

In a polite 9-minute interview on Giuliani’s program, Cuomo discussed the challenges currently faced by New York, and noted that every model provided by scientists has been completely wrong, and seemingly as a result, virtually useless.

“All of the projections, by the way, all those statisticians have been 100 percent wrong at this point,” said Cuomo. “And we’ve been following the models because that was the only blueprint, but they haven’t turned out to be correct.

“Sort of like the old days when we tried to predict a storm by listening to the weather forecasts,” he added.

Cuomo noted that the city is seeing less cases, people who need ventilators, and deaths from coronavirus. The governor noted that the greatest number of deaths came from patients who “came in very sick two weeks ago” and needed ventilators. Current research estimates that the majority of those who need ventilators will die from the virus.

The models used by Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx have been repeatedly proven wrong and readjusted, leaving some to wonder about the utility of such models for predicting the spread and severity of the Chinese coronavirus.

Former New York Times journalist Alex Berenson has appeared on various news programs, including Tucker Carlson Tonight, to discuss his reporting of the dreadfully incorrect model that has predicted, in order, 2 million American deaths, 200,000 American deaths, and now 60,000 American deaths from the coronavirus.

Berenson also noted that mainstream media outlets, including his former employer, is still using the outdated models predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths.

It remains unclear when, if ever, the models will receive enough data to accurately predict the spread and severity of the Chinese coronavirus.»


«(...) Technology allows for the monitoring of individuals to better regulate stay at home orders. However, this opens up new possibilities for authoritarian regimes. Israelis who violate quarantining are now subject to up to seven years in prison, and location data could be used against individuals. It would be something to be sent to jail because your phone ratted on you talking a walk. Furthermore, given the country’s history of racist law enforcement, the law has the potential for serious abuse.

Google’s move is merely the latest in a long line linking big tech companies ever more closely with the government and the security state. In their book titled, “The New Digital Age: Reshaping the Future of People, Nations and Business,” Eric Schmidt and fellow Google executive Jared Cohen wrote, “What Lockheed Martin was to the twentieth century…technology and cyber-security companies [like Google] will be to the twenty-first.”

In 2018 Facebook announced it was partnering with the Atlantic Council to help them weed out fake news on its platforms. An offshoot of NATO, the Council is run by dozens of senior former government officials, including Henry Kissinger, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, and numerous former heads of the CIA, including Michael Hayden, Leon Panetta, and Michael Morell. Since working with the Council, Facebook has moved quickly to suppress information and views emanating from Washington’s enemies, including the governments of Russia and Venezuela. And when Trump assassinated Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, Facebook banned all messages of support for the slain statesman, despite the fact that he was popular with over 80 percent of his countryfolk. Facebook explained the decision, noting they were not a neutral service provider but an American company that operates under American laws, and when Trump declares anyone a terrorist, they will comply.

Although Google’s latest use for our data is arguably the only occurrence of it being used to help humanity rather than relentlessly advertising to it, it still has worrying ramifications. Snowden warned that new laws infringing on civil liberties tend to be “sticky,” i.e. very hard to get rid of. Funding both political parties and paid billions by the government and the security state for military contracts, it is increasingly difficult to see where big tech companies like Google end and the government begins.»


«Under the guise of “saving” Europe from the coronavirus and economic calamity, European Union leaders are calling for an enormous “Marshall Plan” that would supposedly stimulate the continent's bruised economies and transform the EU. The goal: “a new Europe.” Basically, the plan calls for bribing people with their own money. This includes extracting enormous amounts of money from taxpayers by saddling them with more debt, then spending that money on EU-backed schemes. However, if the proposed plot is anything like the original U.S.-funded Marshall Plan for Europe after World War II, it will be used primarily to advance globalism and socialism — not economic recovery.

EU President Ursula von der Leyen, who leads the European Commission that acts as a sort of hybrid legislative and executive branch, has been leading the charge to weaponize the upcoming budget as a transformative “Marshall Plan.” Supposedly, taking enormous amounts of money from taxpayers to spend on schemes selected by EU bureaucrats will help Europe deal with the catastrophic effects of shutting down the continent’s economies under the guise of fighting the virus. At least that is what EU leaders are telling the public.

(...) The original Marshall Plan, named after the subversive Secretary of Defense (and later State) George Marshall who helped deliver China to the mass-murdering butcher Chairman Mao, actually had its roots in the globalist Council on Foreign Relations. In particular, as recounted in James Perloff’s important book Shadows of Power, it was developed by a CFR “study group” cabal with banker and globalist architect David Rockefeller serving as secretary. Even though CFR bigwigs and toadies had been so instrumental in helping communists seize control over Eastern Europe and the Far East, the cabal chose to dishonestly market the Marshall Plan by telling Congress and the public that it would help Europe resist communism. That was a PR hoax.

In reality, the Marshall Plan’s enormous sums of money, $13 billion (nearly $140 billion in 2020), would be used to entice sovereign European nations and peoples into accepting more socialism and globalism. The 1948 bill authorizing the scheme, for instance, demanded that the money be used for “facilitating and stimulating the growth of international trade of participating countries with one another ... by appropriate measures including reduction of barriers.” Some members of Congress even fought to include language spelling out the fact that the goal of the Marshall Plan was to encourage the “economic unification and political federation of Europe.”

The year after that, the “political federation” amendment was pursued again, with the result being the addition of the sentence: “It is further declared to be the policy of the people of the United States to encourage the unification of Europe.” By 1951, Congress finally came out and said it openly, with a clause included in the 1951 Mutual Security Act stating that the goal was “to further encourage the economic unification and the political federation of Europe.” The groundwork laid by all that U.S. taxpayer funding, then, would eventually culminate in the imposition of the “European Union” superstate on the continent. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) played a key role in the process as well.

Faith in the EU is crumbling. In fact, awareness is spreading that this faith was misplaced to begin with. Across the continent, citizens and nations inspired by Brexit are now longing for a way out of the trap, too. But Deep State globalists running the EU cannot allow that to happen. And so, they are hoping to literally bribe citizens with their own money through this grand new “Marshall Plan” for Europe. Think of the money as cheese in a mouse trap — it may look delicious and free, but the costs will be enormous, if not fatal. Europeans and Americans would be wise to avoid these globalist traps.»

Alex Newman («Citing COVID 19, EU Seeks "New Marshall Plan" for "New Europe"», in The New American, 10 April 2020).

«(...) in one of the two churches targeted, the King James Bible Baptist Church, Pastor James Hamilton was told by one uniformed police officer that his “rights are suspended,” related Kelly Shackelford of the First Liberty Institute, which is representing the church.

Shackelford told Fox News host Tucker Carlson Friday night (video below) that Greenville’s action is “massively unconstitutional” and “targets churches in a way that it targets no other group.”

The church leadership had said that it planned to hold drive-in services Easter Sunday as well, in defiance of Greenville and its mayor, Democrat Errick Simmons — even if it means jail time.

Meanwhile, the other church targeted, Temple Baptist, is suing the city of Greenville for First Amendment violations. It’s being represented by Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom.

On a brighter note, Mississippi’s Republican governor, Tate Reeves, just signed an executive order banning prenatal infanticide, aka abortion, for two weeks.

But this is not the case in Virginia, whose official state motto is, ironically, “Sic semper tyrannis” (“Thus always to tyrants”). While a pastor there was just issued a summons for holding a church service for 16 social-distancing people in a building seating 300 — and now faces up to a year in jail, a $2,500 fine, or both — the state has also explicitly protected prenatal infanticide clinics from being locked down.

Then there’s Kentucky. While its Democrat governor, Andy Beshear, has suspended prenatal infanticide, liquor stores remain open. This would be fine, except that Beshear has also “ordered state surveillance of any in-person church services conducted in Kentucky over Easter,” Christians’ highest Holy Day, reports the Federalist. The authorities will record the license plates of cars in church parking lots and then issue 14-day quarantine orders to all who attend. 

One could wonder if all these officials would be as heavy-handed if Muslims insisted on attending mosque services. While I’ve not heard of such defiance in the United States, Muslims in many parts of the world have resisted “lockdown” orders, sometimes stating that Allah would protect them or that the Wuhan virus was his wrath against non-Muslims.

In reality, the virus situation has led to much irrational behavior, with our response governed more by sensationalism than science. For example and apropos here, there’s every reason to believe that responsible church attendance (proper spacing) is less risky than going to grocery stores, where there’s constant, random movement.

Then there’s the scientifically- and law-illiterate cop (video below) in Rotherham, England, who told a father he couldn’t play with his kids on his own front lawn.

The officer was wrong and the police department later apologized to the man. But note that Rotherham is the same place where the police ignored Muslim rape gangs — and the torture and abuse of 1,400 native British girls — for 14 years due to political correctness.

As for the aforementioned safety of churches vs. that of grocery stores, the obvious response is that the authorities are trying to limit people’s exposure to pathogens by only allowing patronage of “essential” establishments. Yet what does it say about our age that only businesses tending to our material needs, important though that is, are deemed essential?

Sure, obtaining food is important, but the wise understand that “man does not live on bread alone.” There are Muslims who’ve recently said, in response to lockdown requests overseas, that they cannot stop worshiping God. Now, say what you will about their theology, one thing is for sure: They believe.

If American public officials really believed — that God and His will and grace are real and not just a “perspective,” comforting illusion, or even a crutch — their conception of what’s “essential” might be a tad different.»

Selwyn Duke («Kevin Sorbo on Covid-19: Abortion Clinics Open While Churches Are Closed Reflects "Morbid" Culture», in The New American, 12 April 2020).

«“I believe that art of the future is art without objects. It’s just pure transmission of energy between the viewer and the artist,” Abramovic says.

“To me, mixed reality is this answer.”»



Vaccines, for Bill Gates, are a strategic philanthropy that feed his many vaccine-related businesses (including Microsoft’s ambition to control a global vaccination ID enterprise) and give him dictatorial control of global health policy.

Gates’ obsession with vaccines seems to be fueled by a conviction to save the world with technology.

Promising his share of $450 million of $1.2 billion to eradicate Polio, Gates took control of India’s National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI) which mandated up to 50 doses (Table 1) of polio vaccines through overlapping immunization programs to children before the age of five. Indian doctors blame the Gates campaign for a devastating non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) epidemic that paralyzed 490,000 children beyond expected rates between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian government dialed back Gates’ vaccine regimen and asked Gates and his vaccine policies to leave India. NPAFP rates dropped precipitously.

In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) reluctantly admitted that the global explosion in polio is predominantly vaccine strain. The most frightening epidemics in Congo, Afghanistan, and the Philippines, are all linked to vaccines. In fact, by 2018, 70% of global polio cases were vaccine strain.

In 2014, the Gates Foundation funded tests of experimental HPV vaccines, developed by Glaxo Smith Kline (GSK) and Merck, on 23,000 young girls in remote Indian provinces. Approximately 1,200 suffered severe side effects, including autoimmune and fertility disorders. Seven died. Indian government investigations charged that Gates-funded researchers committed pervasive ethical violations: pressuring vulnerable village girls into the trial, bullying parents, forging consent forms, and refusing medical care to the injured girls. The case is now in the country’s Supreme Court.

In 2010, the Gates Foundation funded a phase 3 trial of GSK’s experimental malaria vaccine, killing 151 African infants and causing serious adverse effects including paralysis, seizure, and febrile convulsions to 1,048 of the 5,949 children.

During Gates’ 2002 MenAfriVac campaign in Sub-Saharan Africa, Gates’ operatives forcibly vaccinated thousands of African children against meningitis. Approximately 50 of the 500 children vaccinated developed paralysis. South African newspapers complained, “We are guinea pigs for the drug makers.” Nelson Mandela’s former Senior Economist, Professor Patrick Bond, describes Gates’ philanthropic practices as “ruthless and immoral.”

In 2010, Gates committed $10 billion to the WHO saying, “We must make this the decade of vaccines.” A month later, Gates said in a Ted Talk that new vaccines “could reduce population”. In 2014, Kenya’s Catholic Doctors Association accused the WHO of chemically sterilizing millions of unwilling Kenyan women with a “tetanus” vaccine campaign. Independent labs found a sterility formula in every vaccine tested. After denying the charges, WHO finally admitted it had been developing the sterility vaccines for over a decade. Similar accusations came from Tanzania, Nicaragua, Mexico, and the Philippines.

A 2017 study (Morgenson et. al. 2017) showed that WHO’s popular DTP vaccine is killing more African children than the diseases it prevents. DTP-vaccinated girls suffered 10x the death rate of children who had not yet received the vaccine. WHO has refused to recall the lethal vaccine which it forces upon tens of millions of African children annually.

Global public health advocates around the world accuse Gates of steering WHO’s agenda away from the projects that are proven to curb infectious diseases: clean water, hygiene, nutrition, and economic development. The Gates Foundation only spends about $650 million of its $5 billion dollar budget on these areas. They say he has diverted agency resources to serve his personal philosophy that good health only comes in a syringe.

In addition to using his philanthropy to control WHO, UNICEF, GAVI, and PATH, Gates funds a private pharmaceutical company that manufactures vaccines, and additionally is donating $50 million to 12 pharmaceutical companies to speed up development of a coronavirus vaccine. In his recent media appearances, Gates appears confident that the Covid-19 crisis will now give him the opportunity to force his dictatorial vaccine programs on American children. (in INFOWARS, April 10, 2020). See here

See here

See here

See here

Nenhum comentário:

Postar um comentário