Virus

The inability of the Germ Theory to satisfy the POSTULATES OF KOCH… the Virus Theory can’t survive the basic requisites of scientific scrutiny to remain a theory, much less become a LAW. Dorland’s Illustrated Medical Dictionary tells us that a VIRUS is a minute, infectious agent not resolved (distinguished separately by the light microscope). It is without independent metabolism and can only replicate (reproduce itself) within a living host cell. A virion is defined as a complete viral particle found outside of host cells and can survive in crystalline form and can infect a living cell. In other words, the most intelligent virus (no brain or nervous system) outwits a cell membrane (the guardian of the cytoplasm), passes into the cells interior, sneaks by the lysosomes that normally ingest and digest intracellular decayed or foreign matter, trick the ribosomes and polysomes into believing that the virus is a friendly amino acid, enters into the amino acid polypeptide chain of amino acid residues, takes over the ribosomal control (coup d’etat), reproduces itself many times over and then kicks out a virion (crystalline) to attack the adjoining cell!

Russian bacteria hunter Dimitri Iwanowski, who gathered fluid from diseased tobacco plants, achieved the first isolation of a virus in 1892. He passed this liquid through a filter fine enough to retain bacteria; yet to Iwanowski’s surprise, the bacteria-free filtrate easily made healthy plants sick. In 1898, a Dutch botanist, Martinus Willem Beijerinck, repeating the experiment, also recognized that there was an invisible cause and named the infectious agent “tobacco mosaic virus.” In the same year as Beijerinck, report, two German scientists purified a liquid containing filterable viruses that caused foot-and-mouth disease in cattle (viruses were at one time called filterable viruses, but eventually came to apply only to viruses, and was dropped). Walter Reed followed in 1901 with a filtrate responsible for yellow fever, and soon dozens of other “disease-causing” viruses were found. In 1935, another American, Wendell M. Stanley, went back to the beginning and created pure crystals of tobacco mosaic virus from a filtered liquid solution. He affirmed that these crystals could easily infect plants, and concluded that a virus was not a living organism, since it could be crystallized like salt and yet remains infectious. Subsequently, bacteriologists all over the world began filtering for viruses, and a new area of biology was born–virology. Historically, medical science has vacillated on the question of whether a virus is alive. Originally it was described as nonliving, but is currently said to be an extremely complex molecule or an extremely simple microorganism, and is usually referred to as a parasite having a cycle of life. Commonly composed of either DNA or RNA cores with protein coverings, and having no inherent reproductive ability, viruses depend upon the host for replication. They must utilize the nucleic acids of living cells they infect to reproduce their proteins, which are then assembled into new viruses like cars on an assembly line. Theoretically, this is their only means of surviving and infecting new cells or hosts.

Underlying the birth of virology was the doctrine of monomorphism–that all microorganisms are fixed species, unchangeable; that each pathological type produces only one specific disease; that microforms never arise endogenously, i.e., have absolute origin within the host; and that blood and tissues are sterile under healthy conditions. Theoretically, under ideal health conditions, the blood might be sterile, though it has the inherent potential to develop morbid microforms, as discussed earlier. Long and repeated observation of live blood in the phase-contrast, dark-field microscope, however, shows that the blood can contain various microforms in an otherwise asymptomatic host, or in a condition, or in a condition defined as normal or healthy in orthodox terms. Monomorphism was the cornerstone of developments in 20th-century medical research and treatments. Refusal by the mainstream to examine fairly, much less accept, the demonstrated facts of pleomorphismthat viruses and bacteria, yeast, fungi and mold, are evolutions from microzyma; that microforms can rapidly change their form (evolve and devolve) in vivo, one becoming another, dependent upon conditions in the biological terrain (environment); that blood and tissues are not necessarily sterile; and that there are no specific diseases, but only specific disease conditions–was the foundation of the debate. It is so called because those who wore the “robes” of scientific authority would not be swayed from folly when resented with its contrary proofs. These proofs began in earnest with Antoine Béchamp in the nineteenth-century.

In the early third of the 20th-century, the heated debate took place over filterable bacteria versus non-filterable. This was a major battle concerning micromorphology. The orthodox view prevailed: bacterial forms were not small enough to pass, or did not have a smaller, earlier stage. What passed through “bacteria-proof” filters was something else, i.e., viruses. Standard medical textbooks long made this filtering distinction between bacteria and viruses. Subsequently, however, the cellular nature of many filterable forms originally thought to be viruses, such as some mycoplasmas, rickettsias, and various other groups, has been established. With the victory of the monomorphic view, deeper understanding of infectious “disease” was lost, setting the stage for cancer, degenerative symptoms and AIDS.

A typical bacterium is about 1 micron in size. Most filterable forms now called viruses range in size from 0.3 micron to 0.01 micron–partially in the colloidal range. Most of the larger viruses are a third to a quarter the size of the average bacterium. Size is critical because 0.3 microns is the resolution limit of modern-day light microscopes. Thus, as viruses were discovered, they required an electron microscope to be seen, especially given the fact that Royal Rife’s microscope technology and career were destroyed by vested interests. Unfortunately, electron microscopes and the process of chemical staining disorganize all specimens, whereas Rife’s technology allowed life to proceed and thus evolve under its lens. As viruses became visible to advancing technology, the ramification was that the technology revealed, to minds infected with monomorphism, protein structures deemed foreign to the body. What is really known about viruses is that they are, according to Biochemistry, Lubert Stryer, 2nd Edition, 1981…”the most efficient of the self-reproducing intracellular parasites.” Yet, in the next sentence: “Viruses are unable to generate metabolic energy or to synthesize proteins.”–It’s a paradox! Maybe someday soon, with improvements in the electron microscope, we will find out that what are now being called and classified as viruses will prove to be intracellular crystallizations of protein catabolism–meaning the destructive process by which complex substances are converted into simple compounds.

The 7th edition of Russell L. Cecil’s A Textbook Of Medicine (1947), said then, what is still the case today: “The nature of viruses is not yet definitely known, but certain facts appear well established. At the present time it is convenient to think of viruses as though they were obligate intracellular parasites of extremely small size.” From whatever cause, when the proteinaceous structure of cellular cytoplasm is damaged, the bags of enzymes inside the cell, called lysosomes, release proteolytic enzymes that digest the dead protein of the cytoplasm. With death of the cell and disintegration of the cell nucleus, ribonuclease and deoxyribonuclease enzymes catalyze the depolymerization of RNA and DNA–providing the free strands of nucleoprotein which “mimic viruses” when viewed with the electron microscope. Volumes could be written about the assumptions, theories and hypothesis associated with immunology, the germ theory and the virus theory. Virologists today will state that the “virus” remains dormant and hidden in the body and some leading authorities reveal that these little trick-or-treaters are actually hiding in the nerve sheaths.

Exosomes are particles released from the cell; they carry RNA, toxins and cellular debris in response to various insults (toxins, stress including fear, cancer, ionizing radiation, infection, injury, many diseases, immune response and asthma). A number of virologists agree with conclusions of Dr. Andrew Kaufman that viruses are exosomes; they are the same size, the same shape, both carry RNA and both attach to the same receptors. These exosomes/viruses are the result and not the cause of illness, with primary roles of coagulation, intercellular signaling and excretion of waste materials. If 5G, by overloading the body’s electrical circuitry and by high-jacking oxygen, causes injury to the lung cells, then an increased production of exosomes (wrongly called viruses) is sure to be the result—and thank goodness!

No wonder the anti-viral medications—given in the early days of the pandemic, but now abandoned—caused such terrible side effects (allergic reactions, fever, nausea, vomiting, bleeding, diabetic lactic acidosis, damage to the kidney, liver and pancreas. . . and breathing problems). These drugs suppress the body’s efforts to protect itself against the poisonous effects of 5G and other toxins.

If you do a bit of surfing on the Internet, you will find that exosomes are the latest thing for diagnosis and therapy, with many medical uses—from cancer treatment, to wound healing, to hair restoration!

It’s clear that we are making the same mistake with viruses that we have made with cholesterol and saturated fat—blaming a substance that is essential to life for causing disease. Just twenty years ago the medical profession “knew” that bacteria were killers—now we recognize that bacteria are essential to health. How long will it take us to learn that so-called viruses are our friends?

It’s interesting to note that each wave of influenza has its own constellation of symptoms—during the Spanish flu epidemic the main problem was bleeding, the inability of the blood to coagulate; the main victims were healthy people in the prime of life, between the ages of twenty-five and forty. Today’s victims are older, usually with pre-existing conditions. The main symptom of today’s outbreak seems to be hypoxia, akin to high altitude sickness.

Please watch this video by Dr. Cameron Kyle-Sidell, working on the front lines in New York City. Says Kyle-Sidell, “We’ve never seen anything like it!” The afflicted are literally gasping for air. In fact, the ventilators that the hospitals have scrambled to obtain do more harm than good and may be accounting for the high mortality rate. These patients don’t need help breathing—they need more oxygen when they take a breath. This is not the sign of a contagious disease but of a disruption of our mechanisms for producing energy and getting oxygen to the red blood cells.

So is corona virus a contagious bad guy? Remember that researchers could not show that the dreadful Spanish flu was contagious. The fact that viruses are actually helpful exosomes, and that many who test positive are symptom-free, makes their role as a perpetrator highly unlikely.  To settle this question once and for all, we need to do the same contagion studies that proved non-contagion in 1918.  I’d be happy to be the first volunteer.

See also:

  • WATCH: MASSIVE LIES Regarding VIRUSES Including HIV- AIDS & Covid-19 – Inventor of PCR Test Exposes Fauci – This Is A Shocking Medical Revelation {Mirror}
  • WATCH: The Viral Misconception, by Alana Fournet
  • The Contagion Myth – Buy the Book
  • WATCH: Origin of Viruses; AIDS by Injection
  • WATCH: The history of viruses and bacteria from German virologist Dr. Stefan Lanka.

Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement

An Alex Jones’ documentary released on November 13, 2007 that charts the history of the elite blueprint for social domination and control, outlining the ultimate plans that those who consider themselves the anointed have for our planet. The first section of the film documents the rise of the banking cartels, who since 1800 have funded both sides of almost every war. Endgame charts the usurpation of the British economy by the Rothchild family who went on to bankroll all factions during the first world war providing armaments companies through banks in France, Austria, Germany and England.

Endgame then documents the fallout of the great war and the attempts to form a controlling League of Nations, which was ultimately blocked by Congress. Such frustration on the part of the elite led to the rise of two factions, fascists and Fabian socialists. Endgame documents how bankers again funded both sides during WW2 which ultimately led to the creation of the UN and the beginning of the movement to implement three power blocs via incremental globalism.

The second section of the film covers the Bilderberg group and Alex’s documentation of the elite group at the 2006 meeting in Ottawa. It covers Alex’s detention on the Canadian border at the behest of Bilderberg insiders themselves. Alex and his crew describe how they were interrogated for nearly twelve hours before finally being allowed entry into the country.

Featuring extensive interviews with Jim Tucker and Daniel Estulin, veteran reporters who have been covering the meetings for 27 and 15 years respectively, Alex reveals how it is an offence for any member of the federal or state government to meet with foreign power brokers without the express authority of the president or Congress.

Endgame then shifts focus to the impending movement towards a North American Union, presenting reports and documentation relating to the efforts toward regional harmonization between the US Mexico and Canada at the secretive Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) summits, which refer to an “evolution by stealth” agenda.

The later parts of the film deal firstly with the hijacking of the environmental movement. Experts and former insiders describe how there has been a long term goal spanning back decades to use an exaggerated threat from mother nature in order to control energy markets, regulate the progression of lesser economies and increase the rich poor divide by pricing out the middle classes.

This then dovetails with the ultimate endgame, the depopulation agenda. The film’s gripping climax delves into the history of eugenics mindset. Endgame lays out the evidence that humans are being portrayed as a virus upon the earth, as we are increasingly being told to believe by cultural and academic kingpins.

From the teachings of “Dr Death” Eric Pianka, to German film fest cartoons, to New York Times best selling books, we are being saturated with the idea that humanity itself must be culled in order to save mother earth.

Endgame reveals how The eugenics movement never went away, it simply re-packaged itself to be more palatable to an increasingly skeptical public.

Looking more slick and professionally produced than ever with an intense soundtrack and filmed in super quality high definition, Endgame is a must watch for anyone seriously concerned with the world we live in today.

Source: https://documentaryheaven.com/endgame-blueprint-for-global-enslavement/

Endgame Bibliography

Operation Lockstep

An inital scenario of four narritives in a 2010 Rockefeller Foundation report officially titled ‘Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development’ which was a scripted blueprint for the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic scare in order to bring about martial law and achieve “a world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback. Essentially, the scenario was that a global pandemic unlike the world had ever seen would emerge and call for authoritarian measures to curb it, even after it had been contained. A new normal of mandatory masks, screening tests, monitoring and industry lockdowns to produce only essential foods and products would be implemented for years, only increasing with unrest and defiance.

Here’s the hypothetical scenario in the 2010 report:

In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit.

Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain – originating from wild geese – was extremely virulent and deadly.

Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of them healthy young adults.

The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies:

international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains.

Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.

The pandemic blanketed the planet – though disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central America, where the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official containment protocols. But even in developed countries, containment was a challenge.

The United States’ initial policy of “strongly discouraging” citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders.

However, a few countries did fare better – China in particular.

The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post- pandemic recovery.

China’s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets.

Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems – from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty – leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.

At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval.

Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty – and their privacy – to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit.

In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms:

biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests. (essential vs. non-essential businesses)

In many developed countries, enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly, economic growth.

Across the developing world, however, the story was different – and much more variable.

Top-down authority took different forms in different countries, hinging largely on the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their leaders. In countries with strong and thoughtful leaders, citizens’ overall economic status and quality of life increased. In India, for example, air quality drastically improved after 2016, when the government outlawed high-emitting vehicles.

In Ghana, the introduction of ambitious government programs to improve basic infrastructure and ensure the availability of clean water for all her people led to a sharp decline in water-borne diseases.

But more authoritarian leadership worked less well – and in some cases tragically – in countries run by irresponsible elites who used their increased power to pursue their own interests at the expense of their citizens.

There were other downsides, as the rise of virulent nationalism created new hazards: spectators at the 2018 World Cup, for example, wore bulletproof vests that sported a patch of their national flag. Strong technology regulations stifled innovation, kept costs high, and curbed adoption.

In the developing world, access to “approved” technologies increased but beyond that remained limited:

the locus of technology innovation was largely in the developed world, leaving many developing countries on the receiving end of technologies that others consider “best” for them.

Some governments found this patronizing and refused to distribute computers and other technologies that they scoffed at as “second hand.” Meanwhile, developing countries with more resources and better capacity began to innovate internally to fill these gaps on their own.

Meanwhile, in the developed world, the presence of so many top-down rules and norms greatly inhibited entrepreneurial activity.

Scientists and innovators were often told by governments what research lines to pursue and were guided mostly toward projects that would make money (e.g., market-driven product development) or were “sure bets” (e.g., fundamental research), leaving more risky or innovative research areas largely untapped.

Well-off countries and monopolistic companies with big research and development budgets still made significant advances, but the IP behind their breakthroughs remained locked behind strict national or corporate protection.

Russia and India imposed stringent domestic standards for supervising and certifying encryption-related products and their suppliers – a category that in reality meant all IT innovations.

The U.S. and EU struck back with retaliatory national standards, throwing a wrench in the development and diffusion of technology globally.


“IT IS POSSIBLE TO DISCIPLINE AND CONTROL SOME SOCIETIES FOR SOME TIME,

BUT NOT THE WHOLE WORLD ALL THE TIME.”
GK Bhat, TARU

Leading Edge, India


Especially in the developing world, acting in one’s national self-interest often meant seeking practical alliances that fit with those interests – whether it was gaining access to needed resources or banding together in order to achieve economic growth.

In South America and Africa, regional and sub-regional alliances became more structured.

Kenya doubled its trade with southern and eastern Africa, as new partnerships grew within the continent. China’s investment in Africa expanded as the bargain of new jobs and infrastructure in exchange for access to key minerals or food exports proved agreeable to many governments. Cross-border ties proliferated in the form of official security aid.

While the deployment of foreign security teams was welcomed in some of the most dire failed states, one-size-fits-all solutions yielded few positive results.

By 2025, people seemed to be growing weary of so much top-down control and letting leaders and authorities make choices for them. Wherever national interests clashed with individual interests, there was conflict.

Sporadic pushback became increasingly organized and coordinated, as disaffected youth and people who had seen their status and opportunities slip away – largely in developing countries – incited civil unrest. In 2026, protestors in Nigeria brought down the government, fed up with the entrenched cronyism and corruption.

Even those who liked the greater stability and predictability of this world began to grow uncomfortable and constrained by so many tight rules and by the strictness of national boundaries.

The feeling lingered that sooner or later, something would inevitably upset the neat order that the world’s governments had worked so hard to establish.

ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN LOCK STEP

Philanthropic organizations will face hard choices in this world.

Given the strong role of governments, doing philanthropy will require heightened diplomacy skills and the ability to operate effectively in extremely divergent environments. Philanthropy grantee and civil society relationships will be strongly moderated by government, and some foundations might choose to align themselves more closely with national official development assistance (ODA) strategies and government objectives.

Larger philanthropies will retain an outsized share of influence, and many smaller philanthropies may find value in merging financial, human, and operational resources.

Philanthropic organizations interested in promoting universal rights and freedoms will get blocked at many nations’ borders. Developing smart, flexible, and wide-ranging relationships in this world will be key; some philanthropies may choose to work only in places where their skills and services don’t meet resistance.

Many governments will place severe restrictions on the program areas and geographies that international philanthropies can work in, leading to a narrower and stronger geographic focus or grant-making in their home country only.

TECHNOLOGY IN LOCK STEP

While there is no way of accurately predicting what the important technological advancements will be in the future, the scenario narratives point to areas where conditions may enable or accelerate the development of certain kinds of technologies.

Thus for each scenario we offer a sense of the context for technological innovation, taking into consideration the pace, geography, and key creators. We also suggest a few technology trends and applications that could flourish in each scenario.

Technological innovation in “Lock Step” is largely driven by government and is focused on issues of national security and health and safety.

Most technological improvements are created by and for developed countries, shaped by governments’ dual desire to control and to monitor their citizens. In states with poor governance, large-scale projects that fail to progress abound.

Technology trends and applications we might see:

  • Scanners using advanced functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technology become the norm at airports and other public areas to detect abnormal behavior that may indicate “antisocial intent.”
  • In the aftermath of pandemic scares, smarter packaging for food and beverages is applied first by big companies and producers in a business-to-business environment, and then adopted for individual products and consumers.
  • New diagnostics are developed to detect communicable diseases. The application of health screening also changes; screening becomes a prerequisite for release from a hospital or prison, successfully slowing the spread of many diseases.
  • Tele-presence technologies respond to the demand for less expensive, lower-bandwidth, sophisticated communications systems for populations whose travel is restricted.
  • Driven by protectionism and national security concerns, nations create their own independent, regionally defined IT networks, mimicking China’s firewalls. Governments have varying degrees of success in policing Internet traffic, but these efforts nevertheless fracture the “World Wide” Web.

LIFE IN LOCK STEP

Manisha gazed out on the Ganges River, mesmerized by what she saw.

Back in 2010, when she was 12 years old, her parents had brought her to this river so that she could bathe in its holy waters. But standing at the edge, Manisha had been afraid. It wasn’t the depth of the river or its currents that had scared her, but the water itself: it was murky and brown and smelled pungently of trash and dead things.

Manisha had balked, but her mother had pushed her forward, shouting that this river flowed from the lotus feet of Vishnu and she should be honored to enter it. Along with millions of Hindus, her mother believed the Ganges’s water could cleanse a person’s soul of all sins and even cure the sick.

So Manisha had grudgingly dunked herself in the river, accidentally swallowing water in the process and receiving a bad case of giardia, and months of diarrhea, as a result.

Remembering that experience is what made today so remarkable.

It was now 2025. Manisha was 27 years old and a manager for the Indian government’s Ganges Purification Initiative (GPI). Until recently, the Ganges was still one of the most polluted rivers in the world, its coliform bacteria levels astronomical due to the frequent disposal of human and animal corpses and of sewage (back in 2010, 89 million liters per day) directly into the river.

Dozens of organized attempts to clean the Ganges over the years had failed. In 2009, the World Bank even loaned India $1 billion to support the government’s multi-billion dollar cleanup initiative. But then the pandemic hit, and that funding dried up.

But what didn’t dry up was the government’s commitment to cleaning the Ganges – now not just an issue of public health but increasingly one of national pride.

Manisha had joined the GPI in 2020, in part because she was so impressed by the government’s strong stance on restoring the ecological health of India’s most treasured resource.

Many lives in her home city of Jaipur had been saved by the government’s quarantines during the pandemic, and that experience, thought Manisha, had given the government the confidence to be so strict about river usage now:

how else could they get millions of Indian citizens to completely shift their cultural practices in relationship to a holy site?

Discarding ritually burned bodies in the Ganges was now illegal, punishable by years of jail time. Companies found to be dumping waste of any kind in the river were immediately shut down by the government.

There were also severe restrictions on where people could bathe and where they could wash clothing. Every 20 meters along the river was marked by a sign outlining the repercussions of “disrespecting India’s most treasured natural resource.” Of course, not everyone liked it; protests flared every so often. But no one could deny that the Ganges was looking more beautiful and healthier than ever.

Manisha watched as an engineering team began unloading equipment on the banks. Many top Indian scientists and engineers had been recruited by the government to develop tools and strategies for cleaning the Ganges in more high-tech ways.

Her favorite were the submersible bots that continuously “swam” the river to detect, through sensors, the presence of chemical pathogens.

New riverside filtration systems that sucked in dirty river water and spit out far cleaner water were also impressive – especially because on the outside they were designed to look like mini-temples.

In fact, that’s why Manisha was at the river today, to oversee the installation of a filtration system located not even 100 feet from where she first stepped into the Ganges as a girl. The water looked so much cleaner now, and recent tests suggested that it might even meet drinkability standards by 2035.

Manisha was tempted to kick off her shoe and dip her toe in, but this was a restricted area now – and she, of all people, would never break that law.


The Rockerfeller Foundation hypothesize a simulated global outbreak required steps, various phases, overall timelines, and expected outcomes. The 2020 COVID-19 was an opportunity and they rolled out their plans following Event 201 in something like the following blueprint:

  • Create a very contagious but super low mortality rate virus to fit the needed plan. Using SARS, HIV, Hybrid Research Strain created at Fort Dietrich Class 4 lab from 2008 to 2013 as part of a research project to find out why corona viruses spread like wildfire in bats but have an extremely hard time infecting humans. To counteract that, they added 4 HIV inserts into the virus. The missing key to infect the human is the Ace-2-Receptor.
  • Create a weaponized version of the virus with a much higher mortality rate as a backup plan. Ready to be released in Phase 3, but only if needed. SARS, HIV, MERS, Weaponized Tribit Strain created at Fort Dietrich Class 4 lab in 2015.
  • Transport the Research Strain to different Class 4 lab, the National Microbiology Lab in Winnipeg Canada, and have it “stolen and smuggled out by China”, Xi Jang Lee, on purpose and taken to China’s only Class 4 lab which is Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan China. For added plausible deniability and to help cement the wanted backup public script as something to fall back on if needed. The primary script being its natural. Backup script being that China created it and released it by accident.
  • Fund all the talking heads: Fauci, Birx, Tedros and agencies, World Health Organization, NIAID, the CDC and also the UN, that would be involved with pandemic response prior to the planned release of the Research Strain to control the wanted script throughout the operation.
  • Create and fund the vaccination development and roll out plan so it’s capable of being rolled out on a global scale. Gates: A Decade of Vaccines and the Global Action Vaccine action plan, 2010 to 2020.
  • Create and fund the vaccination, verification and certification protocols, Digital ID, to enforce/confirm the vaccination program after the mandatory roll out is enacted. Gates: ID2020.
  • Simulate the lockstep hypothesis just prior to the planned Research Strain release using a real-world exercise as a final war game to determine expected response, timelines, and outcomes, Event 201 in Oct 2019.
  • Release the Research Strain at the Wuhan Institute of Virology itself and then blame its release on a natural scapegoat as the wanted primary script. Wuhan wet market, Nov 2019. Exactly the same as the simulation.
  • Downplay the human-to-human transmission for as long as possible to allow the Research Strain to spread on a global scale before any country can lock down respond to avoid initial infection.
  • Once a country has seen infection in place, lock down incoming/outgoing travel. Keep the transmission within the country spreading for as long as possible.
  • Once enough people in a country/ region are infected, enact forced quarantines/isolation for that area and expand the lockdown regions slowly over time
  • Overhype the mortality rate by tying the Research Strain to deaths that have little to nothing to do with the actual virus to keep the fear and compliance at a maximum. If anyone dies for any reason and is found to have Covid, consider it a Covid death. And if anyone is thought to of maybe had symptoms of Covid, assume they have Covid, and consider it as a Covid death.
  • Keep the public quarantines for as long as possible to destroy the region’s economy, create civil unrest, break down the supply chain, and cause the start of mass food shortages. As well as cause people’s immune system to weaken due to a lack of interaction with other people’s bacteria, the outside world, aka the things that keep our immune systems alert and active.
  • Downplay and attack any potential treatments and continue to echo that the only cure that is viable to fight this virus is the vaccine.
  • Continue to drag out the quarantine over and over again in “two-week intervals” [There is that two weeks spell casting again. It is a CIA program.] causing more and more people to eventually stand up and protest. Defy them.
  • [And here is the key part to now:] Eventually end Phase 1 quarantine once they get enough public push back and publicly state that they think it’s “too early to end the isolation, but I’m going to do it anyways.”
  • When the deaths become too low to manufacture fear, change to talking about ‘cases’ that are now higher due to CDC and WHO changes in how cases are defined. Previously always required illness, now only a positive test from anon-test PCR test.
  • Eventually, enact Phase 2 quarantines, Oct through Nov 2020, on an even more extreme level and blame the protesters, mostly people who don’t trust their governments already, as the cause of the largest second wave whereby the media will say ‘we told you so. It was too early. It’s all your own fault because you needed a haircut. Your freedoms have consequences.’ [Should this all unfold in this manner, the US election will be cancelled delayed or suspended. My opinion. How can you vote with Phase 2 quarantines? You can’t.]
  • Enforce the Phase 2 quarantines at a much more extreme level increasing the penalty for defiance. Replace fines with jail time. Deem all travel as non-essential. Increase checkpoints, including military assistance. Increase tracking/tracing after population via mandatory app. Take over control of food, gas, and create large scale shortages so that people can only get access to essential products or services if they are first given permission. Confiscate personal emergency food storage.
  • Keep the Phase 2 lockdown in place for a much longer period of time than the Phase 1 lockdown, continuing to destroy the global economy. Further degrade the supply chain and further amplify the food shortages and the like. Quell any public outrage using extreme actions or force and make anyone who defies them appear as public enemy #1 to those who are willing to submit.
  • After a rather long Phase 2 lockdown of 6 months plus, roll out the vaccination program and the vaccine certification and make it mandatory for everyone, giving priority access to those that submitted from the start and have those that are for it attack those that are against it, saying ‘they are a threat and the cause of all the problems’ by using words like “We can’t go back to normal until everyone takes the vaccine.” And people defying them are “hurting our way of life and therefore are the enemy.” [In other words they are going to turn the people against each other.]
  • If the majority of people go along with the agenda, then let those people enter the new system, the new normal, while limiting the minority that defied the agenda’s ability to work, travel and live.
  • If the majority of people go against the agenda, then release the Weaponized SARS/HIV/MERS Tribit Strain as a Phase 3 operation. A virus with a 30+% mortality rate as a final scare to punish the minority to quickly become the majority and give a final “We told you so” to those that didn’t listen.
  • Enact the new economy model. Microsoft patent 060606 crypto currency system using body activity data which is based on human behavior and willingness to submit. It is a tweaked version of the black mirrors 15 million merits program using food, water, shelter, and other essentials as a weapon of enforcement of the new economic system. Basically, do what we want and get rewarded. Gain credits score and gain more access to things you need to survive. Or go against what we want and get penalized. Lose credits score and lose access to things you need to survive.

And that is your New World Order: technology on steroids where you have no option but to comply. And if anyone thinks that this isn’t true, then go and check out some parts of China because they’ve already started some of the crypto currencies system in place in certain areas.

So, this is the outline of their plan. And what we have to stop by outing it in as many places as possible. And also calling out Q and Trump and asking them: Are you going to stop this? Mass arrests are irrelevant. This is essential and this has to be blocked.

West Nile Virus

(WNV) arrived in New York City in 1999 and soon grew into an “epidemic” characterized by a sea of contradictions.54 Medical press agencies proclaimed the “first arrival of the West Nile virus to the Western Hemisphere”55 but a more accurate description of the situation would be the “first testing of the West Nile virus in the Western Hemisphere.” Mayor Giuliani personally announced the epidemic. He also announced the immediate commencement of a six-week pesticide spray campaign over the city, dispensed by helicopters. Meanwhile, the TV and newspaper headlines chanted, “The Deadly Virus.” The disease was at first attributed to the St. Louis encephalitis virus (SLE) but a few weeks later blame shifted to West Nile virus. The aerial pesticide spraying occurred in dozens of cities.

The United States Geological Survey (“USGS”) issued a press release one year later “confirming” the pathological effect of WNV on crows. This was hyped and widely distributed. Having read many other virological studies, I found the USGS results incredibly odd. The crows were injected intramuscularly with a virus extract and a few days later all met death. The filter used to separate the virus from tissue extract was nearly six times the diameter of the virus.56 Nearly all non-injected crows in the same cage also died. The success of the experiment was too convincing to be true, especially for a study that did not employ the common, harsh, intracranial injection method. The study outcome was also odd because WNV had been considered a mild virus and not especially dangerous to birds. The USGS laboratory ignored my repeated inquiries for the published details. After going through another scientist, who contacted the USGS, I received an emailed response from the USGS indicating low confidence for their study. The agency indicated their study would not be published or discussed and they expressed an intention to perform a better experiment in the future.

SLE and WNV epidemics occur annually in air-polluted petrochemical regions (such as eastern New Jersey and St. Louis) during the warm spring and summer months, with an apex in July and August. The incidence correlates daily with air pollution brought to ground level by warm air and loss of convection efficiency for exhaust sources.  SLE epidemics have a long history in the US (in petrochemical regions) and these epidemics don’t spread infectiously to other regions. The two great epicenters for WNV/SLE disease are the two great petrochemical industrial regions in the US–southern Louisiana and New Jersey.

During the summers of 1999 and 2000, air pollution levels reached record levels, correlating with the incidence of “West Nile virus” cases, both human and avian. The gasoline additive MTBE represents perhaps the greatest production volume for any industrial poison in the US, yet it has received little publicity. The public became aware of its dangers only when the EPA suggested that MTBE be phased out on July 27, 1999. That date also represents the apex of the West Nile virus avian epidemic for 1999.63

Like so many widely dispensed industrial poisons, the physiological effects of MTBE have only become known through usage on the public. However, Dr. Peter Joseph correlated MTBE with neurological disease in his 1997 study, “Changes in Disease Rates Following the Introduction of Oxygenated Fuels.” Neurological symptoms also characterize West Nile virus disease. Avian mortality further distinguishes this “viral” disease. Yet, avian mortality is an early warning system for human air pollution disease, as evidenced by the traditional air assay test, the “miners’ canary.”

HERE ARE THE FACTS ON THE WEST NILE VIRUS FACTS:

  1. There is no such thing as a WEST NILE VIRUS. It has never been demonstrated to exist.
  2. The bird experts at the Audubon society examined thousands of birds and concluded that they were dying of pesticides.
  3. There is a big difference between a parasitic “infection” and what is called a viral “infection” – there is no such thing as a viral “infection”. A virus is a piece of dead meat. A cell fragment. Anything containing DNA or RNA can only be sourced from a living cell. The term “live virus” is an oxymoron. No virus has life. No virus can reproduce itself. The two basic requirements of life is metabolism and reproduction. The virus possesses neither. Most life on earth is a single cell, non nucleated bacteria that possess the basic requirements for life, metabolism and reproduction. To Quote my good friend, James Pershing Isaacs, MD, author of Complementarity in Biology – Quantization of Molecular Motion. John Hopkins Press 1969, “Viruses and rickettsia do not seem to be free-living bions….Viruses may be about the size of bions, but possess no plasma membrane. Even for replication ability, they depend upon the environment of cellular hosts or artificially supported metabolism. Viruses are analagous to subatomic particles, and rickettsiae to chemical free radicles trapped in a matrix. We suggest that viruses may be considered as sub-bionic particles and ricketsiae as “parasitic” bions, entrapped in cells.”

SARS (2003)

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome” which is a wide-open definition that encompasses many diseases common in the affected regions. Symptoms range from flu-like to pneumonia.8 Dr. Frank Plummer, director of the National Microbiology Laboratory in Canada stated, “Of course, the case definition of SARS is a little loose.”9 On March 15, 2003 the World Health Organization (WHO) issued a global alert warning of a new virus spreading through Asia and causing Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), a potentially fatal disease, similar to pneumonia. Photos from China depicting ballet dancers and bridal parties wearing white masks appeared in western newspapers while health departments across the country issued notices to hospitals detailing the symptoms of the new virus and asking for immediate notification of suspect cases. Until the global alert, reports referred to an “unknown virus” first striking in Guangdong Province, China, although some reports placed the origin in the Philippines. With the March 15 WHO report, the SARS virus became official and reports of new cases came flooding in.

By late May, officials had reported over 8,000 cases worldwide, with almost 700 deaths.1 Of the 65 suspected SARS victims in the US, all but a few had traveled by airplane to areas where the outbreak has been most severe, including mainland China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Hanoi and Toronto. The Chinese economy took a hit and some Chinese airline routes were virtually empty due to SARS fear.2

The SARS outbreak revived discussion of forced quarantine. According to a study by the American Public Health Laboratory Association and quoted by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, few cities had enough hospital space to quarantine patients in the event of a large-scale outbreak of an infectious disease like SARS. According to Lawrence O. Gostin, director of the Center for Law and the Public’s Health at Georgetown University’s Law Center, public health laws date back to the 19th century and are “wholly inadequate to deal with an emergency.”

The need for public health law reform is urgent,” said Mr. Gostin. “It should have provisions for surveillance, vaccination, treatment, isolation and quarantine in a way that gives decisive powers to health authorities while respecting the Constitution.” All but one of the SARS victims submitted to voluntary isolation. The one exception, a New York man, was involuntarily contained until his symptoms passed. Federal quarantine law now includes SARS among its disease guidelines.

Mr. Gostin was the author of the draconian Emergency State Health Powers Act, which has been adopted (fortunately in softened form) by 22 states. According to Gostin, “The need for effective state compulsory power is beyond doubt. But that’s not a given in our country, which is now so tied to the rhetoric of individual rights. It seems we’ve lost the tradition of the common good.3

Continue reading…