Much has been touted in the name of expert knowledge on coronavirus, but most of them have been mostly speculative - if not altered with updated info at a later time.
Global Research, August 14, 2020
“Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less.”
Those words, uttered by two-time Nobel Prize-winning chemist and physicist Marie Curie,
are as relevant today as they were in her era (1867–1934). With most of
the planet under some form of medical martial law, we would do well to
follow her advice: understand more and fear less about the pandemic. The
way to do that is to establish the verifiable, scientific facts about
the SARS-CoV-2 virus and separate those facts from the fiction being
touted by a fear-mongering news media. Only then will we stop
surrendering our inherent freedoms to COVID-19 propaganda.
Fiction #1: Wearing a face mask will protect you and others from the coronavirus.
Fact #1:
Contrary to what many medical and government officials tell us, there
is no evidence to support the claim that face masks—whether N95,
surgical, or cloth—protect the wearer from any virus. These so-called
“medical experts” usually reference a purportedly scientific publication
to support their claim. However, when the studies they point to—namely,
in The Lancet and from the Mayo Clinic—are
put under closer scrutiny, they fail to pass one crucial test: they
never used a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). Reputable scientists
consider the RCT the Holy Grail when it comes to conducting a study on a
large group of people, because it eliminates the possibility of any
population bias in the testing.
When we look at trials that have used the RCT method to analyze the efficacy of face masks, we find starkly different results from those that have not.
For instance, an exhaustive dental study
conducted in 2016 revealed that disposable surgical face masks are
incapable of providing protection from respiratory pathogens.
Then there was the study
conducted this past February by Long Y, Hu T, Liu, et al., titled
“Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against
influenza.” It involved a total of six RCTs and 9,171
participants. The study concluded that “the current meta-analysis shows
the use of N95 compared with surgical masks is not associated with a
lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza. It suggests that N95
respirators shouldnot
be recommended for general public and nonhigh-risk medical staffs those
are not in close contact with influenza patients or suspected
patients.”
Even the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has done studies on face masks by correctly using RCTs. In one report,
titled “Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol.26, No.5” and published in
May 2020, the CDC did ten Randomized Controlled Trials before
concluding, “Disposable medical masks (also known as surgical masks) are
loose-fitting devices that were designed to be worn by medical
personnel to protect against accidental contamination of patient wounds,
and to protect the wearer against splashes or sprays of bodily fluids.
There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing
influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for
source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure.
Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on
transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
As for those people who wear a cloth mask in the belief that “it’s better than wearing nothing,” a RCT conducted in 2015 showed that cloth masks do not work at all. In actuality, a cloth mask puts the wearer at increased risk of respiratory illness and viral infections.
In light of
the plethora of available science on face masks, it is heartening to see
that some governments are making rational decisions based on that
science. In the Netherlands, for example, officials are refusing to mandate mask-wearing in public.
In the end,
the face mask should be viewed as a device used by authoritarians to
control the masses and enforce compliance to lawless edicts. The mask
lulls wearers into feeling protected from biological harm. Meanwhile,
the real harm being done to them is psychological and spiritual. By
submitting to mandatory face-covering orders based on flawed science and
imposed by either unelected-but-politicized medical officials and
technocrats or elected-but-compromised politicians who hold positions in
all levels of government—these mask wearers don’t realize that they’re
handing over their precious liberties, their individuality, and even,
one might say, their very souls to soulless tyrants.
Fiction #2: Scientists have isolated and purified the SARS-CoV-2 RNA virus.
Fact #2: To date, not a single team of scientists has isolated and purified the SARS-CoV-2 RNA virus. Some researchers claim
to have done so. But when their findings are scrutinized, they fall
short. Just as Randomized Controlled Trials are required to do accurate
studies of the efficacy and safety of medical devices like face masks or
products such as prescription drugs, so, too, is there a major
benchmark that must be satisfied if one is to prove that he has indeed
correctly identified and isolated a virus. That benchmark has been,
since 1890, a set of principals known as the Koch postulates,
named after famed German physician and bacteriologist Robert Koch. All
researchers must apply his four postulates if they are to prove or
disprove a cause-and-effect relationship between a pathogen and a
particular clinical disease.
For example,
in February 2020, Chinese and Dutch researchers published studies
purporting to show that they had isolated the SARS-CoV-2 virus by
satisfying all of the Koch postulates. Four months later, however,
freelance writer Armory Devereux and molecular biologist and researcher
Rosemary Frei revealed the truth about those studies in an Off-Guardian article. Their heavily investigated and well-documented piece confirms that the Chinese and Dutch researchers did not
fulfill Koch’s third postulate, which involves replicating or cloning
the DNA to form a new copy of the virus and then injecting that new copy
into a significant number of living hosts (usually lab animals) with
the intent to reproduce the same discrete diagnostic symptoms associated
with the virus. In fact, Frei discovered, after reviewing numerous
research papers from all over the world, that not a single group of
scientists was able to replicate or clone the DNA to form a new copy of
the virus. In short, they failed to meet Koch’s third postulate.
Another team
of investigative journalists, Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin
Demeter, wrote an equally comprehensive article on the same subject for Off-Guardian.
They, too, concluded that there is not a single research paper out
there demonstrating that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been successfully
isolated and finally purified. In addition, Engelbrecht and Demeter
discovered that “there is no scientific proof that those RNA sequences
are the causative agent of what is called COVID-19.”
In other
words, by not successfully fulfilling all of Koch’s postulates,
scientists have thus far not proven the existence of any new
coronavirus. This is why molecular biologist Dr. Andrew Kaufman has
suggested in numerous interviews—on The Highwire and The Last American Vagabond and elsewhere—that the current coronavirus is not
a new disease. Dr. Kaufman submits, moreover, that the particles
scientists say they are looking at through their electron microscopes
are perhaps not the virus at all but are, rather, exosomes being
produced by the body. These exosomes, containing the same genetic
material as a virus, are naturally produced by the human body as a
defense mechanism in response to an external attack by a toxin emanating
from our polluted environment. This would be a possible explanation as
to why the “pandemic” started in China’s Wuhan province. This area of
China is one of the most polluted places on earth. In Wuhan, the
ecosystem in all its glorious biodiversity has been utterly destroyed by
man-made pollutants and the heavy use of glyphosate in industrial
farming.
Besides
pollution, there is yet another plausible explanation as to why this
particular coronavirus (if it exists, which some reputable experts
highly doubt) may have possibly started in Wuhan. The internationally
funded Wuhan Institute of Virology, which has proven financial tiesto the US government and is known for its poor safety standards, was involved in dangerous gain-of-function research
to make bat viruses more lethal to humans. Several disturbing studies
conducted by the lab “successfully” combined animal and human virus
traits in ways that made them more dangerous to humans. This description
of the institute’s research raises many questions. At present, there is
not enough evidence to prove whether a pathogen was either
intentionally released by the lab or was accidentally leaked into the
environment. And, even if a virus was intentionally released into the
environment as a bioweapon, the developers of this weapon did not do a
good job. As we will see in the last fiction versus fact (below), this
coronavirus has had virtually the same global infection fatality rate as
the average seasonal flu. If anything, the influenza virus of 2017 was far more lethal than this year’s coronavirus.
Finally,
this brings us to the multi-billion-dollar question on the virus
isolation issue: If scientists have not properly identified the virus or
the RNA gene sequences associated with the virus, how on earth are the
vaccine companies developing a mRNA vaccine against a novel coronavirus,
and what exactly will be in this vaccine? Perhaps this is why
the initial vaccine trials conducted by biotech company Moderna, the US
vaccine front-runner, and AstraZeneca, which leads the British Oxford
Vaccine Group, have been unsatisfactory.
Fiction
#3: The Reverse Transcriptase quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction
(RT-qPCR) test is the best way to diagnose a patient with COVID-19.
Fact #3:
The PCR test, which is currently being used by every nation to test for
COVID-19, was initially designed by Nobel Prize-winning biochemist Kary Mullis.
From its inception, the PCR was, and still is, a thermal cycling method
used to replicate billions of copies of a specific DNA sample. Simply
put, the PCR makes the DNA large enough so that scientists can study it.
Although Mullis unexpectedly passed away in August 2019, we know what
his thoughts were when it came to using his test as a diagnostic tool,
thanks to an invaluableinterview he did in 1994 with investigative journalist Celia Farber. The interview leaves no doubt that Mullis argued against using the PCR as a diagnostic tool for detecting viruses.
Granted, the
PCR test is capable of detecting even the minutest piece of DNA or RNA,
but this is meaningless if scientists have not determined what specific
RNA sequences they are actually searching for. And, in light of Fact
#2, which established that no correct isolation and purification of the
presumed virus has been executed, the PCR test is scientifically
illogical.
That the PCR
test is being misused, either unwittingly or wittingly hence
fraudulently, on COVID-19 diagnoses cannot be overstated. According to
the aforementioned Off-Guardian article
by Torsten Engelbrecht, “it is worth mentioning that the PCR tests used
to identify so-called COVID-19 patients presumably infected by what is
called SARS-CoV-2 do not have a valid gold standard to compare them
with. This is a fundamental point. Tests need to be validated to
determine their ‘sensitivity’ and ‘specificity’—by comparison to a ‘gold
standard,’ meaning the most accurate method available.” Engelbrecht
makes clear that, to date, there is no valid gold standard for the PCR
test because, thus far, no one has isolated and purified the alleged
virus. Only unequivocal proof of the existence of a new SARS-CoV-2 can
be considered the gold standard.
Therefore,
it should come as no surprise when we find that the PCR test is plagued
with outcomes that can indicate “false negatives” of up to 20 percent or “false positives” of up to an outrageous 70 percent!
Both the US CDC and the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) are
well aware that the PCR test has some major pitfalls. The CDC, for
instance, states
that “this test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or
viral pathogens.” Meanwhile, the FDA has reviewed and summarised, for
Accelerated Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) purposes, Laboratory
Corporation of America’s LabCorp COVID-19 RT-PCR test
and has slapped on it a warning label: “This test has not been FDA
cleared or approved.” In the same summary, the FDA explains that “the
agent detected may not be the definite cause of the disease.”
Given
everything we now know about the inaccuracy of the PCR test, why is the
World Health Organization (WHO) still insisting that every nation
continue testing as many people as possible with this method?
Could it be because the entire narrative about the “pandemic” is riding on the distorted PCR test results?
Could it
also be that the very high “false positive” rate perfectly fits an
agenda of inflating the infection case numbers (not the mortality
numbers) so as to instill fear into the minds and hearts of as many
people as possible?
Could it be
that injecting fear into the population enables the technocrats and
their pawns to continue the draconian stay-at-home lockdowns and
economically devastating business shutdowns and the ridiculous
containment measures (such as physical distancing) and other punitive
restrictions (e.g., fourteen-day quarantines after travel, even when the
travel is a simple car trip between adjoining US states)? Could it be
that they are purposely placing the lives of millions of people under
enormous stress and in precipitous poverty?
Is this all
part of a behavior modification process that will make it easier for
social engineers (technocrats) to completely redesign society so that
the distribution of all goods and services to the entire population and
the consumption of energy by that population will be orchestrated by a
select few self-appointed “experts”?
Technocracy News & Trends’ researcher/writer Patrick Wood lays out a plausible explanation for this scenario in his recent interview
withDr. Joseph Mercola. In it, Wood notes that the technocracy
movement, which started in the early twentieth century, “was always an
economic movement, not a political system.” The destruction of the
global economy, the removal of everyone’s inherent freedoms, the
elimination of national sovereignty, and the accumulation of layers and
layers of rules and regulations based on unsubstantiated science are
ingredients that constitute the perfect recipe for any technocrat whose
goal is to completely redesign society and implement an entirely new
economic system.
Fiction #4: A “second wave” of new COVID-19 cases has already started in the United States.
Fact #4: There is no “second wave” of COVID-19 cases, nor will there be a “third wave.”
Sure, at
first glance, it would appear that states like South Carolina, Nevada,
Florida, Texas, Arizona, and California are indeed experiencing a huge
surge in new COVID-19 cases. Upon second glance, though, we find two
factors that explain this unnatural phenomenon.
First, what
the media assiduously avoids mentioning is that in June these very same
states undertook major campaigns to screen a vast swath of their
populace with the PCR test—a viral assay that is employed not as an
accurate diagnostic tool but, rather, as a means of inflating positive case counts.
While it is
true that not all of the positive cases fall into the category of “false
positive,” it is equally true, as Fact #2 makes clear, that the PCR
assay detects even the minutest particle of RNA associated with any
virus. Thus, the test can detect people who have developed antibody
T-cells to any previous coronavirus or who are asymptomatic. Either way,
these individuals are automatically classified as COVID-19 cases. How
convenient for the pandemic-pushers! Such a generous classification
means that even those patients undergoing elective surgery who happen to
test positive during the hospital admission process are categorised as
“hospitalised with COVID-19.”
John Thomas Littell, MD, a family physician in Ocala, Florida, wrote an astute letter to the editor of the Orlando Medical News, in which he perfectly summarises the COVID-19 data manipulation:
“So, in essence, any person with an influenza-like
illness (ILI) could be considered a ‘case’ of COVID-19, even WITHOUT
confirmatory lab testing. The CDC has even advised to consider any
deaths from pneumonia or ILI as ‘COVID-related’ deaths—unless the
physician or medical examiner establishes another infectious agent as
the cause of illness.
“Now perhaps you see why the increasing number of cases, and even
deaths, due to COVID-19 is fraught with misinterpretation and is NOT in
any way a measure of the ACTUAL morbidity and mortality FROM COVID-19.”
Second, the
news media rarely, if ever, mentions the all-important point that,
although cases may be on the rise, the rates of mortality allegedly
caused by the supposed new coronavirus are actually decreasing in the US, just as they are in the rest of the world.
How could
that be? Because this non-novel, run-of-the-mill virus is on its way
out. In reality, the states that were hit first at the start of the
year—predominantly northern states like Washington, Ohio, and New York—were
also the first to experience a consistent downward trend in mortality
rates, commencing around mid-to-late April. (See the Worldometers
website, which, despite its bloated fatality numbers, is nevertheless a
good source for interpreting trends in mortality rates.) States in
warmer climates, such as California, Arizona, Texas, and Florida,
are only now, in mid-to-late-summer months, reaching their peak daily
death rates. Soon they, too, will begin to show a decline in mortality
rates.
Why is there
a difference in the timing of these peaks and descents among the
states? It just means that for any number of reasons—for instance, a
variation between individuals in their susceptibility to infection and
their propensity to infect others—different regions of the country have
reached the Herd Immunity Threshold (HIT) at different times. The HIT is
the percentage of the population that needs to be immune in order to
prevent the disease from spreading. This value varies among not only
regions but nations as well. It is usually around the 10 percent to 20
percent mark for the seasonal flu—meaning that once the HIT value passes
20 percent, the rate of new infections starts to decline until the
virus is extinguished.
In January
2020, health officials and scientists originally thought that the HIT
value for COVID-19 was going to be over 60 percent. But after five
months a very different picture emerged. From a team of international
research scientists who released a paper on herd immunityin
late July, we learn that the global HIT this year was in the
aforementioned 10–20 percent range. And thanks to the intrepid research
done by J.B. Handley, a frequent contributing writer to the Children’s
Health Defense website, we now know that the HIT value for COVID-19 in the US this year has also been in the 10-20 percent
range, just like any seasonal flu. Hence, we can conclude from this
data that over 70 percent of the population has already developed a
natural immunity to the virus from previous exposure to corona-type
viruses.
All of this
proves that our complex and beautifully designed immunity system, which
produces killer T-cells and antibodies to fight off all viruses for the
purpose of building herd immunity, is doing exactly what it has been
doing for the past 200,000 years. Not incidentally, most of those years
were before vaccines were dreamed up, developed, and brought to market.
Had this not been the case, the human species would have vanished off
the face of the earth long ago.
Despite the
empty rhetoric of our politicians, we now know that the draconian,
counterproductive lockdown measures (read: the shutdown of the global
economy) imposed by local, state, provincial, and national governments
(read: and their technocrat handlers) have nothing to do with defeating
the spread of the virus. If anything, the mandatory lockdowns only
postpone the day when herd immunity is inevitably reached. Even New
Zealand, which completely closed itself off from the rest of the world
at the start of the fake pandemic, was simply delaying its day of
reckoning.
If one
wanted to delay a society from reaching herd immunity from the flu for
as long as possible, one would do the following to everyone (including
healthy people, who have no comorbidities): impose strict, lengthy
quarantine measures after travel, isolate even non-travelers in their
homes for most hours of the day, enforce physical distancing rules,
require the use of face masks, close everything from beaches and
amusement parks and stadiums to restaurants and hair salons and, God
forbid, churches and temples and mosques! Oh, and shut down schools. As
we have seen, this is exactly what the political and medical
“rulers”—including fake philanthropists—of most countries did, to their
barely suppressed delight and to everyone else’s dismay.
A country
that stands in stark contrast to this stalling tactic is Sweden. It has
refused to participate in the total lockdown strategy. Instead, from the
first, it allowed herd immunity to build up naturally. Yet Sweden’s HIT
value is at 14 percent—in the same range as the nations that did
impose lockdowns. By keeping its economy open and isolating only its
vulnerable citizens (the elderly and people with comorbidities), Sweden
was the only major economy in the world that grew in the first quarter of the year. Meanwhile, according to the data collected by the Bureau of Economic Analysis,
the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for the US decreased 34.3 percent, or
$2.15 trillion, in the second quarter, to a level of $19.41 trillion.
This is the most devastating collapse in GDP ever recorded.
The GDP drop
doesn’t take into account the incalculable human losses—the slide into
poverty, the despair, the mental breakdowns, the suicides—that the
cruelly counterproductive lockdown has created. Commenting on these
detrimental effects, Stanford University’s 2013 Chemistry Nobel Laureate
Dr. Michael Levitt said in an interview:
“There is no doubt in my mind that when we come to look back on this,
the damage done by the lockdown will exceed any saving of lives by a
huge factor.”
Fiction #5: The Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) for COVID-19 is far greater than the seasonal influenza.
Fact #5:
The IFR is the ratio of deaths attributed to a disease divided by the
number of actual infections. Unique to COVID-19, the IFR includes both
confirmed and undiagnosed cases, as perversely directed by the CDC.
Family physician Dr. Scott Jensen, who is also a Minnesota state senator, explains in an interview on Fox News
that this practice of combining both diagnosed and undiagnosed cases is
simply a tool to “game the numbers” so that the government can
conveniently inflate the death toll and scare the public into believing
COVID-19 is more deadly than it actually is.
(Aside:
Jensen’s refreshing candor stands in stark contrast to the apparent
go-along-to-get-along mentality of the many doctors who remained silent
when he sounded the alarm over the health authorities’
suspicious-sounding instructions. Not that Jensen is without equally
courageous colleagues. In fact, he belongs to a new group of more than
600 physicians who call themselves America’s Frontline Doctors and who
are calling out US authorities for suppressing information about and
access to the coronavirus-slaying drug Hydroxychloroquine. Their July 27th press conference video from the steps of the US Supreme Court went viral before being banned across all social media platforms.)
In the developed world, the Infection Fatality Rate for a seasonal influenza is 0.1–0.2 percent. Bizarrely, the WHO’s initial estimate
in March 2020 pegged the IFR for COVID-19 at 3.4 percent. We have since
learned, from the meticulous serological studies done by Stanford
University epidemiologist and professor of medicine Dr. John Ioannidis
(and from many other equally scrupulous scientists around the world),
that the global average for COVID-19 is actually about 0.2 percent—in
line with the seasonal flu and vastly lower than the WHO’s 3.4 percent
gross overestimate. In light of this scientific fact, we must ask the
obvious question: Why do we need a global vaccine regimen imposed on
everyone for a virus that has the same low fatality rate as the seasonal
flu?
Though Dr.
Ioannidis’ study was published in late May, he had determined as early
as April—after analyzing twelve separate IFR studies conducted by
researchers around the world—that the IFR for COVID-19 was in the range 0.07 to 0.2 percent. In addition, one month after his conclusion was published, the US CDC admitted that the overall IFR rate is just 0.26 percent. Yet even this number is slightly high. For when the CDC calculates
the mortality rate, it includes both confirmed and presumptive positive
cases of COVID-19. The CDCannouncement should have caused every
government to pause and rethink their restrictive, hurtful strategies.
But nothing changed. Instead, this desperately needed perspective from
the world’s leading scientists never even made headlines. Why?
Apparently it fit neither the official narrative of COVID-19’s dangers
nor the promises being made by “public health expert” Bill Gates of the wonders of the coming anti-COVID-19 vaccine.
Cui Bono?
From the
inception of this manufactured crisis, way back in January 2020—which
now feels like a lifetime ago!—the stated purpose for the lockdown
measures was to “flatten the curve” so that hospitals everywhere would
not be overwhelmed by the inevitable wave of incoming COVID-19 patients.
Governments around the world did exactly that: they flattened the curve
to the point of destroying the lives of millions of people and ruining
their own national economies.
Strange,
isn’t it, that apparently very few hospitals, including in big cities,
have been overrun by patients. Take for example, the Berlin hospital
that a German journalist walked through at the height of the pandemic, only to discover, to his surprise, that no one was there. Or check out what citizen journalists
were video recording in supposedly maxed-out-with-patients hospitals
around the US. Incidentally, this Dana Ashlie video, which can be seen
on BitChute, was banned from YouTube for purportedly violating Terms of
Service. (Translation: Facts that contradict the pandemic propagandists’
fakery mustn’t be seen or heard by the general public, lest their fear
of a virulent, fatal disease be deflated like a popped balloon.)
Strange, too, that many so-called COVID-19 cases were anything but. Consider, for example, the situation in Italy,
where “only 12 per cent of the death certificates have shown a direct
causality from coronavirus, while 88 per cent of patients who have died
have at least one pre-morbidity—many had two or three.”
Strange,
too, that in New York State, all the cases deemed to be COVID-19 were
elderly patients who were removed from hospitals and dumped in nursing homes,
where neglect and overcrowding and even the emotional toll produced by
loneliness and fear resulted in many sickeningly sudden and sad deaths.
And isn’t it
especially strange that one of the most obvious outcomes of flattening
the curve was the loss of everyone’s constitutional, civil, medical,
parental, and religious rights? It was as if there had been a plan all
along to dispense not only with lives, but also with rights—including
the right to dissent!
Now here we
are, months later, still being bombarded by scary scenarios. Every major
news outlet pounds us with fear-mongering predictions of second and
third waves. The engineered-to-skyrocket cases of COVID-19 in the US are
dominating the headlines. Some state governors and state and county
health authorities and privately owned establishments are imposing
ever-more-onerous rules regarding face masks and physical
distancing—rules they realize would never pass the legal smell test in
normal times, much less in a court of law. Meanwhile, the same dictators
are doubling down on their innocent-sounding “let’s all get tested”
message.
As the above
five facts have shown, all of these public health measures are based on
unsubstantiated science. Moreover, we have not even begun to feel the
long-lasting economic effects of the “pandemic.” In the coming months
and years, our national economies will become much more precarious. Is
it possible that we already cash-strapped citizens will be ordered to
pay back the billions of dollars that have been divvied out to us by our
Big Brother governments?
In some
places, lockdowns may be gradually easing. But the relief measures being
implemented have not helped the countless mid-sized and small business
owners who have, one by one, decided to board their doors and close up
shop forever. They are suffering twice-over: they must watch their own
families be penalized and at the same time feel guilty for having to bid
farewell to their employees, who by the millions are looking for
non-existent jobs and standing in long unemployment lines. As layoffs
keep mounting, nations are facing a massive fiscal crisis at the very
time when their badly needed tax revenues are disappearing. In the near
future, national governments will be forced to hand over entire sectors
of the economy to their creditors, such as Goldman Sachs and BlackRock.
In the end, private financial oligarchies will literally own the US and
other nations, further eviscerating the concept of national sovereignty.
So, why are
we being forced to travel down this rocky road? One possible explanation
could be that many governments may consider it political suicide to
admit that their approach has been wrong. Thus, instead of immediately
correcting their course of action, they are incrementally shifting
gears. But could there be something far more sinister at play here?
Could this entire “pandemic” be a gigantic smokescreen designed to
conceal the diabolical actions of the globalist technocrats, whose
agenda is to literally create, possess, and control a single worldwide
economy and a single worldwide government?
If we follow the money trail, we can determine who some of the possible beneficiaries of such a fiendish agenda could be.
To begin,
let’s look at the financial sector. Since the US mortgage and market
crash of 2008, none of the mechanisms that allowed the crash to occur
have been removed. True, for the past twelve years, the stock market has
appeared to recover. In reality, though, the market is the opposite of
healthy. It has been surviving mainly on stock buybacks by companies
that have been using some of their profits to buy their own stocks in
order to prop up prices. This scheme has provided the illusion that the
economy is thriving. But the stock market’s action is not an absolute
indicator of the real economy’s production and consumption.
Indeed, by
the summer of 2019 it had become evident that not even the stock buyback
strategy was going to keep the lumbering economy alive. Thus, as a
short-term solution, the New York Federal Reserve last September started
injecting billions of dollars into the stock market in the form of
short-term loans (repos). While the intent was to keep the stock market
chugging along, the effect was more like kicking an empty tin can down
the road for as long as possible until finally the road ends.
Eventually, a long-term solution would have to be found to reset the
entire world economy. Enter the “shadow bank” BlackRock, the world’s
largest asset manager with over $7 trillion dollars in assets under
direct management and another $20 trillion managed through its Aladdin
risk-monitoring software.
In a statement
released in August 2019 on Bloomberg News, BlackRock observed that “the
current policy space for global central banks is limited and will not
be enough to respond to a significant, let alone a dramatic, downturn.”
To solve this problem, BlackRock hired former central bankers from the
US, Canada, and Switzerland. Their orders were to devise a plan
that would enable BlackRock to expand its role in the global fiscal and
monetary policy arena by blurring the lines between government fiscal
policy and central bank monetary policy. The plan was due by the end of
August.
Are we
surprised that the COVID-19 crisis precipitated the very dramatic
downturn to which BlackRock alluded mere months earlier? Hardly. Both
the pandemic and the ensuing stock market crash have presented the
perfect opportunity for BlackRock and other central banks to take full
control of global monetary policy. The economic reset that the
globalists have been talking about since 2014, both at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS)—and, more recently, in June 2020, at the World Economic Forum (WEF)—is now well underway.
After the
market crashed in late February, the Federal Reserve came out with a $10
trillion USD bailout package, of which $454 billion is to be
administered by BlackRock under the Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic
Security Act (CARES Act). In other words, this money from taxpayers to
the government will be used to directly buy stocks, bonds, junk bonds,
mortgages, and junk mortgages from Wall Street investment firms. These
purchases are designed to inflate the value of stock market assets. In
the US, some 85 percent of these assets are held by the richest 10
percent of Americans. BlackRock has also been hired by the Bank of
Canada and Sweden’s central bank, Riksbank, to implement their
respective stimulus plans.
Keep in mind that none of this money will be fueling real economic
activity. None of it will be used to help millions of people revive
their small businesses and improve their living standards. It is, pure
and simple, a bailout package for the players in the global stock
market. It provides the illusion that the Main Street economy is on the
mend. Governments claim the stimulus money will be used to build the
means of production and help small business. Truthfully, the exact
inverse is occurring: the largest redistribution of wealth in human history is taking place, which will only increase the gap in income inequality throughout the world.
Although
there is no “smoking gun” to definitively prove that the COVID-19
pandemic was the preplanned pretext for launching the much-vaunted
“Great Reset,” the timing is nonetheless too coincidental to ignore.
Now, let’s
look at another group that could massively gain from this supposed
pandemic: the pharmaceutical industry. If this industry, with Bill Gates
at its helm, successfully launches its campaign to vaccinate every
person on the planet against SARS-Cov-2, the drug-and-vaccine-makers
could potentially rake in tens of billions of dollars.
Big Pharma holds tremendous sway in the political realm—both internationally and domestically. In mid-April, President Donald Trump announced
that the US would be ending its financial support for the World Health
Organization, which he accused of “severely mismanaging and covering up
the spread of the coronavirus.” In previous years, the top funder for
WHO had been the US government, followed by the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation. The third-biggest donor to WHO was Gates-founded-and-funded
GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance. Thus, if Trump’s move to defund that
international body goes through, it will elevate both the Gates
Foundation and Gates’s GAVI to the top of the global health pyramid.
This would further tighten Bill and his wife Melinda’s already firm grip
on WHO and thus strengthen their ability to formulate global “health”
policy.
As if
further signaling its disdain for WHO, in early June the Trump
administration boosted its support for GAVI with a donation of a $1.16
billion USD (again, taxpayer dollars) via the first-ever virtual Global Vaccine Summit. That huge sum stands in stark contrast to the US government’s modest contributions to WHO of $401 million in 2017 and $281.6 million in 2018.
During the
same summit, GAVI received from many other nations large contributions
that totaled $8.8 billion USD. (The Rockefeller Foundation, which has
numerous ties to the vaccine agenda, kicked in $5 million of that sum.)
These injections of liquidity—ominously reminiscent of the injections of
liquid that are known as vaccines—will provide GAVI with all of the
funding it needs for the purpose of pushing the global vaccine agenda on
governments and for maintaining its role in “public-private
partnerships” with governmental bodies and private companies.
For those of
us who may not be conversant with the lobbying process, here’s how it
works across national borders. Because neither Bill Gates nor his
foundation can directly lobby a foreign government, being a founding partner of GAVI enables Gates to seek out and hire representatives in targeted nations who will lobby on behalf of his interests.
In Canada, for instance, GAVI has hired Crestview Strategy,
an Ottawa-based lobbying firm that specialises in shaping government
policy by speaking directly to the Canadian government’s key
decision-makers and opinion leaders. The government relations page on
Crestview’s website defines its mission thusly:
“Crestview
Strategy effectively represents the interests of corporations,
not-for-profits and industry associations to achieve results with
governments around the world.”
While
representing “the interests of corporations, not-for-profits and
industry associations” in pushing the vaccine message on behalf of GAVI,
has Crestview crossed an ethical threshold? In other words, has there
been any collusion between Gates proxy Crestview and the Canadian
government? Or is it pure coincidence that Prime Minister Trudeau shares
Bill Gates’s view that only a mass vaccination program will allow
populations to return to lives of normalcy?
It depends who you ask and what they know. Journalists at Canuck Law,
an independent media outlet that investigates political corruption in
Canada, answer “yes” to collusion and “no” to pure coincidence. Canuck
Law researchers dug up the fact that Crestview Strategy employs two
former Liberal Party associates, Jason Clark and Zakery Blais, to lobby
the Canadian government on behalf of GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance. These
two Liberal Party operatives-turned-lobbyists met with the Prime
Minister’s Office (PMO) staff—the chief of staff, the director of policy
and planning, a policy advisor, and a special assistant—as well as with
members of Parliament on at least nineteen occasions between March 2018
and January 2020 to push the GAVI vaccine message. Records show that a
third Crestview employee, Jennifer Babcock, who has since left the firm,
lobbied the government for GAVI just one time.
Canuck Law
explains: “These are just 20 reports that are on file with the Office of
the Lobbying Commissioner. It’s fair to assume that there have been
many, many more talks that aren’t documented.” It therefore comes as no
surprise that Ottawa has thus far shelled out some $800 million for
Gates’s global vaccine agenda and that PM Justin Trudeau constantly
refers to society as living in “the new normal until a vaccine is
found.”
In the US
government, the level of corruption among vaccine promoters is more
entrenched and insidious. Big Pharma far outpaces all other industries
in spending on lobbying in Washington, D.C. In 2019, for instance, it
spent twice as much on lobbying as the oil and gas industry and almost three times more than the defense
industry. There are more pharmaceutical industry lobbyists than the 435
representatives in the House and the 100 US senators combined.
Drug-and-vaccine-makers and their industry associations and paid
corporate lobbyists aim to influence any and all related legislation and
regulations. They also seek preferential treatment through campaign
contributions. No wonder the State of Tennessee has already mandated
that students are required to get the COVID-19 vaccine when it becomes
available. No wonder, too, that the Trump administration on July 31st handed over $2.1 billion in taxpayer money to GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Sanofi to expedite further COVID-19 vaccine development.
The Total Surveillance Grid is Forming
Now that we
have seen who some of the financial winners are in this orchestrated
pandemic, let’s examine how the know-it-all technocrats and parasitic,
predator globalists plan to monitor and track our every move.
Their total
surveillance grid, hiding in plain sight behind the COVID-19 scamdemic,
is being tested in West Africa before it is rolled out in the rest of
the world. Here, the Gates-tied GAVI and Mastercard and the AI-powered
“identity authentication” company Trust Stamp have joined forces in the effort to link a biometric digital identity system, vaccination records, and a “cashless” payment system all into a single platform.
Under this alliance, Mastercard’s Wellness Pass program
will be integrated into Trust Stamp’s biometric identity platform. The
Wellness Pass will thus be capable of providing biometric identity
information on any person, even in areas of the world lacking internet
access or cellular connectivity. Moreover, the Wellness Pass will also
be linked to an individual’s cashless payment system. This could
potentially provide authorities with the ability to block a person’s
account if he does not abide by certain mandates regarding health
measures. Such massive surveillance and control are eerily similar to
China’s “social credit” system.
This
entirely new Trust Stamp platform will be coupled with the COVID-19
vaccination program, if and when a vaccine becomes available, through a COVI-PASS,
the brand name for a digital health passport, which authorities will
automatically download (push) to your device. The COVI-PASS, which was
developed by British cybersecurity company VST Enterprises in
partnership with several other tech firms, is slated to be rolled out in
fifteen countries across the world, including Canada, Italy, Portugal,
France, Spain, Panama, South Africa, Mexico, United Arab Emirates, and
the Netherlands. The pass will contain a person’s COVID-19 test results
and vaccination history plus any relevant health information. A truly
Orwellian prospect!
Gates’s
funding is not strictly limited to the field of global health. The Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation, in cooperation with GAVI, is also deeply
tied to ID2020—a global digital ID system that will combine both birth
registration records and vaccination records to create a digital
identity for every person on planet Earth.
At first
glance, ID2020 may seem like it’s the same concept as the COVI-PASS, but
it is actually far more. The COVI-PASS, as mentioned above, relates
more to one’s health record, whereas ID2020 is a complete identification
record of your entire life. It is your driver’s license, passport, work
identification pass, building access card, debt and credit cards,
transit passes, police record, health records, and more—all wrapped up
in one identification system. It is being sold to us by the statists as a
new and improved means of “protecting our civil liberties and personal
data,” when in reality the exact inverse is true: as with any electronic
device, it can and will be used by the-powers-that-shouldn’t-be to
monitor a person’s every move, and if necessary, restrict a person’s
movements.
Although
ID2020 was originally formed in 2019, when GAVI joined forces with the
Rockefeller Foundation, Microsoft, Accenture, and IDEO.org, it was put
into motion by the globalists at the onset of the supposed pandemic. And
it is now being tested in Bangladesh. Once again, as we have already
seen in the above-mentioned economic reset, the COVID-19 crisis presents
the perfect opportunity to launch the ID2020 system.
The Path Forward
We must now
ask ourselves: Is it merely coincidence that these measures—the economic
reset, the implementation of ID2020, the creation of Trust Stamp, and
Mastercard’s Wellness program—are all being put into motion,
simultaneously, on the heels of the fabricated pandemic? We may never
find out if their joint appearance is a coordinated effort by just a few
top technocrats or by all the participants in these schemes—the usually
compartmentalization of information and tasks keeps the lower-level
actors from knowing the real purpose and the high-up players in any
scheme of this sort.
What is
certain, though, is that all of the medical martial law edicts that have
been issued in united fashion have been based on unsubstantiated
science. Equally clear is that the drive for a global COVID-19 vaccine
regimen and the global surveillance grid are moving ahead in concert to
transform the world as we know it—if we allow it to happen. As
Professor Michel Chossudovsky and others have often said, we need mass
movements, such as the #ExposeBillGates movement, to counter and
dismantle the technocrats’ diabolical designs on us.
When and if our governments ever signal—presumably post-mass vaccination— that it is time to return to normal, beware. We must nevergo
back to the old normal. For it is this old normal—based on a corrupt
and broken paradigm—that landed us in pandemic prison in the first
place. We must move forward with the new knowledge we have acquired in
recent months, and we must build a better paradigm—one based on truth
and compassion for all of humanity.
Madame Curie
was right. Nothing is to be feared, it is only to be understood. We
must fearlessly speak out and share this information.
