There may be something fishy going on in Africa. A few days ago, you might recall that I blogged about the President of Tanzania, John Magufili, sending faked data to the World Health Organization because of his suspicions it was – to coin a pun – “doctoring” statistics to promote its various agendas on the Fauci-Lieber-virus. You might recall that he sent them samples from a goat, a papaya, and a quail for testing, and sure enough, they all came back positive, including the papaya.
Well, there’s been a rather strange incident that may, or may not, be related; I’ll leave it to the reader to decide. That said, I don’t mind saying that my suspicion meter is in the red zone, as apparently are the suspicion meters of a lot of people in Burundi. V.T. spotted this one, and it’s short, direct, and to the point:
The questions begin in the first paragraph: fifty-five year old President Pierre Nkurunziza died suddenly of a heart attack, after recently being examined and pronounced as fit as a fiddle:
President of Burundi Pierre Nkurunziza, 55, has died “following a cardiac arrest”. The sudden death comes as a surprise as he had been evaluated recently as being in good overall health.
But then the plot immediately thickens:
Less than a month ago, the Burundian government ordered the expulsion of experts from the World Organization of Health (WHO) responsible for ‘advising’ on the false pandemic COVID-19.
Needless to say, this has “local pundits” suggesting “that his death could have been the consequence of poisoning.” Perhaps the poisoning was administered in the form of a WHO-approved “vaccine”; we’ll get back to that in a moment.
The article concludes with two short paragraphs, one of which raises an interesting question: Are leaders who oppose the WHO and its vaccines being deliberately “offed”?
The President and his Ministry of Foreign Affairs had declared that the WHO representatives would henceforth be ‘persona non grata’, that is not welcome on Burundian territory. For information, to date, and despite its courageous opposition to the WHO, Burundi officially declared only one COVID death. This is compared against around 30,000 dead in France, who are largely enslaved by the ‘recommendations’ of the WHO.
The unexpected death of Nkurunziza is reminiscent of the mysterious plane crash of Polish President Lech Kaczyński in 2009, in which he was killed shortly after he refused the vaccine made by the WHO against the H1N1 flu.
It’s one of those “heads we win, tails you lose” sorts of things; either take our “vaccines”, which may kill you, or we’ll kill you. And speaking of “vaccines” and poison and killing, there’s this recent interview by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which raises a few other unpleasant, disturbing, and diabolical implications:
Now, I don’t know about you, but it seems pretty plain and clear to me that if the ghouls in Big Pharma are willing to slaughter babies in order to stuff their “vaccines” with fetal tissue, they won’t hesitate to off the odd African president or two, or three, or n leaders not going along with the agenda. And one wonders, have any long term studies on such “vaccines” containing such “ingredients” been done to see what the effects might be? Might such effects include the “cannibalism” disease kuru, a neuro-degenerative disease with effects similar to mad-cow (Creutzfeldt-Jacobs) disease? I doubt it. And come to think of it, can one really call these diabolical concoctions “vaccines” at all? I doubt it; whatever they are, they’re not vaccines in any normal sense I can think of. What they are is a kind of “cannibalism by IV drip” or “cannibalism by injection,” but they’re not “vaccines.”
And while we’re talking about kuru and mad cow and such, imagine whole populations being forcibly injected with this crud, and one has a real zombie apocalypse and a lot of dead people. Could this be why Baal Gates is interested in “over-population” and “vaccines” all at the same time? It does make one wonder.
As for the “local pundits” in Burundi, go ahead with your suspicions. I, for one, share them.
And so it begins with the first Congressional effort to codify what may be the first of many unconstitutional legislative attempts to create a totalitarian One World Government under the guise of attacking the coronavirus COVID 19.
Some weeks ago the UN’s World Health Organization recommended house to house searches for family members infected with COVID 19 and the removal of those infected into a mandatory quarantine. The American reaction was mostly ‘it could never happen here’ but that has not stopped House Democrats from introducing HR 6666 also known as the TRACE (Testing, Reaching and Contacting Everyone) Act .
Introduced by Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill) on May 1, the TRACE Act would establish a nation wide contact and quarantine program, has been referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee for a yet to be scheduled hearing before the Health Subcommittee.
HR 6666 grants $100 billion to the CDC (Center for Disease Control) to establish a local mobile health unit in each community to conduct a diagnostic door to door COVID 19 testing program. With the ACLU nowhere in sight, there is no doubt of HR 6666’s unconstitutionality as the Act states that such testing will take place “at individuals’ residences.”
The bill goes on to establish the effort to ‘trace and monitor the contacts of infected individuals and to support the quarantine of such individuals.’
In other words, TRACE not only allows a massive dragnet type effort to seek and find those infected in what may amount to enforced home invasions but to force compliance by requiring the names of all individuals an infected person has had contact with – all of which raises the constitutionality of the entire CV effort with the ultimate goal being mandatory worldwide vaccinations.
HR 6666 is unconstitutional as it violates the Fourth Amendment which guarantees every American citizen the right to be secure in their own home.
Dr. Rashid Buttar has said that Ventura, California will be the first test location to initiate the TRACE program.
In addition, Microsoft was recently granted Patent #060606 for a “crypto currency system using human body activity data.” In other words, Gates, a maniacal control freak, now owns the patent to conduct global surveillance via a quantum tatoo inserted as a chip into the human body. Gates has been advocating for digital surveillance system for some time.
Reminiscing about how British children were evacuated to the countryside during the WW II bombing of London, The Queen says it all:
”…evacuated from their homes and sent away for their own safety. Today, once again, many will feel a painful separation from their loved ones but now, as then, we know, deep down, it is the right thing to do.”
Presumably the royal family will line up for public inspection to allow its children to be tested and quarantined, ‘away from home’ if necessary. Belated kudos to Harry and Meghan for making their break to freedom – they got out just in time.
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Renee Parsons has been a member of the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and President of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, an environmental lobbyist with Friends of the Earth and staff member in the US House of Representatives in Washington, DC. Renee is also a student of the Quantum Field. She may be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Featured image is from rouzer.house.gov
The original source of this article is Global Research
Now here’s one for the “what next?” category, if we had one. It was spotted by W.M. who kindly sent it along, and I received it just as I was scheduling blogs for the coming week. Normally I do that on Sundays, when I go through all that previous week’s assorted emails and articles, gradually narrowing things down to what I want to blog about. Well, this one bumped my originally-planned Wednesday blog to the “honorable mentions”, and jumped right to the top.
It seems that Tanzania’s President John Magufili pulled a fast one on the World Health Organization:
Now, to be sure, the Zero Hedge folks are urging some caution with the story, for Magufili is not without his own questionable actions:
Magufuli has garnered plenty of controversy himself over the past few weeks. He recently requested stockpiles of an ‘herbal tea’ that has been falsely branded as a COVID-19 cure, and has launched investigations impacting domestic labs and even frontline medical workers as he’s claimed the number of positive tests in his country is too high. The reality is that Tanzania doesn’t have much of a outbreak: It has recorded only 503 cases and 21 deaths. Though its mortality rate of 4% would suggest that the true number of cases likely numbers in the thousands.
Following the results, Magufuli fired the head of Tanzania’s national lab, sparking a political firestorm. Of course, though Magufuli has been criticized for trying to play down the impact of the virus, the government has so far refused to answer questions about where its test kits were manufactured, as Al Jazeera points out. On Thursday, the head of the Africa Center for Disease Control and Prevention rejected claims of faulty tests by Tanzania’s president.
The unreliability of COVID-19 tests manufactured in China has been a major problem for the US, and for Europe, as countries and states have been forced to discard PPE purchased in China – often after purchasing it at inflated prices – because only one-third of the masks actually work, and many of the tests have been found to produce positive and negative results more or less at random.
With that on the record, however, here’s what Magufili allegedly did:
He played what the local press described as “a trick” on the organization: He sent the WHO samples of a goat, a papaya and a quail for testing.
All three samples reportedly tested positive. When the president heard the news, he reportedly confronted the WHO, then kicked the organization out of the country. Though, to be sure, the WHO has yet to comment on the situation.
That would suggest one of two conclusions: either the strain of SARS-CoV-2 running amok in Tanzania is much, much more infectious than scientists understand, or the WHO has been reporting incorrect results either on purpose (as an attempt to bolster its credibility in the face of President Trump’s attacks) or via error (yet another indication that the WHO truly is “badly brokem” – as Vox described it back in 2015).
Most rational people would probably accept the latter scenario as the most accurate one.
Well, you can count me as one of those who thinks WHO is badly broken. The sad news there is, the U.S. Senator from South Carolina, Lindsey Grahamcracker, thinks it would function a whole lot better with Bill Gates at the helm….
…no, quit laughing! He really said that!
Anyway, I for one think the story is probably true, and that Magufili may be sensing a whole lot more than he’s letting on, because it strikes me that there’s a not-so-subtle eugenics aspect to the whole Fauci-Lieber-Wuhan virus story, namely, that it seems to have a higher infection and mortality rate among blacks than other populations. And let’s face it, with China’s influence at the WHO, and with them perhaps therefore providing a great deal of the WHO’s tests, and given that China’s tests – like pretty much everything else the Chinese Communist party does – are not to be trusted, it wouldn’t surprise me one little bit.
And let’s hope that other African leaders have sent similar samples to the WHO, and are willing to catch them out. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised either, if they already had.
ER Editor: How the Globalist Media Do It. In this case, Canadian.
Dr. Joel Kettner (pictured), a Manitoba doctor, professor and top health administrator and veteran of 30 years and 30 pandemics, expresses a number of concerns not only with the puzzling position taken by WHO, but also the deleterious social, psychological and economic consequences for the public currently underway. And provides some statistics from Hubei Province in China, which completely undercuts the whole fear-panic narrative. He is finally cut off by CBC interviewer Duncan McCue, who then completely changes tack by talking about … Trump.
Note that one of the invited doctors onto this radio broadcast is pushing for more ‘flu vaccines, as is the public health agency of Canada, which are correlating with higher rates of the very disease that they’re supposed to PREVENT. This doctor is also ‘terrified’ of COVID. That seems to be the narrative we’re supposed to accept everywhere: immense fear and Big Pharma solutions. It is certainly the case here in France.
The relevant part of the radio program runs for about 6 or so minutes (linked to below), and is worth listening to. A transcription is provided.
LISTEN: CBC Radio cuts off expert when he questions Covid19 narrative
A phone interview with a respected physician appears to have been cut short by CBC Radio when the Doctor went off-script
Dr Joel Kettner phoned into the March 15th episode of CBC’s Cross Country Checkup podcast to discuss the Canadian (and international) reaction to the Covid19 pandemic. He was in the middle of making a point about statistics when the host abruptly cut him off.
While the two invited guests were very much taking the governmental line on the threat of Covid19, Dr Kettner was striking a different tone.
Duncan McCue (DM, Host):Dr Joel Kettner is on the line from Manitoba. Hi, Dr Kettner welcome to Checkup. You teach at the University of Manitoba and are former Chief Medical Officer of Manitoba, I understand. So what do you think of how we are coping right now?
Dr Joel Kettner (JK): Well I don’t know what to think, frankly, but I’ll tell you what I do think. First, I wanna say that in 30 years of public health medicine I have never seen anything like this, anything anywhere near like this. I’m not talking about the pandemic, because I’ve seen 30 of them, one every year. It is called influenza. And other respiratory illness viruses, we don’t always know what they are. But I’ve never seen this reaction, and I’m trying to understand why. I have to say that I really feel for my colleagues that are in public health practice. it is easy for me to sit in the armchair of my office and look at this and observe it, and be critical and have ideas. But I really feel for them for three reasons.
One is that the data they are getting is incomplete to really make sense of the size of the threat. We are getting very crude numbers of cases and deaths, very little information about testing rates, contagious analysis, severity rates, who is being hospitalised, who is in intensive care, who is dying, what are the definitions to decide if someone died of the coronavirus or just died with the coronavirus.
There is so much important data that is very hard to get to guide the decisions on how serious a threat this is.
The other part is we actually do not have that much good evidence for the social distancing methods. It was just a couple of reviews in the CDC emerging infectious disease journal, which showed that although some of them might work, we really don’t know to what degree and the evidence is pretty weak.
The third part is the pressure that is being put on public health doctors and public health leaders. And that pressure is coming from various places. The first place it came from was the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) when he said “This is a grave threat and a public enemy number one”.I have never heard a Director-General of WHO use terms like that.
Then when he announced the pandemic, he said he was doing it “because of a grave alarming quick spread of the disease and an alarming amount of inaction around the world” that puts a huge pressure on public health doctors and leaders and advisors and huge pressure on governments, and then you get this what seems like a cascade of decision making that really puts pressure on the countries and governments– provincial, state – to sort of…to keep up with this action that Dr Hoffman [an earlier guest on the programme] said that we are trying to avoid, or should avoid, which is an overreaction. I don’t know what is an appropriate reaction, but I do know that I am having trouble trying to figure this out and I…
[INTERRUPTED BY HOST]
DM: …So I’m sure that your medical colleagues across the country are probably nodding their heads when you say they don’t have enough data, that they lack data. I suspect health professionals around the world wish they had more data, whether it is testing rates, severity rates, all that kind of thing. So it’s probably a valid concern. But you mentioned that you are not confident with some of the literature with regard to social distancing and its effectiveness […] What is the basis of your concern then? If social distancing is debatable in your mind, what do you worry about then?
JK: I worry about the consequences of social distancing. I worry about people who are losing their jobs. I worry about interruptions with the healthcare system itself. There are many doctors in Manitoba in quarantine right now, because they have returned from other countries. I worry about the message to the public, about the fear of coming into contact with people, being in the same space as people, shaking their hands, having meetings with people. I worry about many, many consequences related to that.
If you look at the data for what we are actually dealing with, I want to give this example. In Hubei, in the province of Hubei, where there has been the most cases and deaths by far, the actual number of cases reported is 1 per 1,000 people and the actual rate of deaths reported is 1 per 20,000.So maybe that would help to put things into perspective, as to the actual rate and risks of this condition, because it is a lot lower in any other part of the world, including Italy, and certainly in Canada and the United States…
[INTERRUPTED BY HOST AGAIN, INTERVIEW OVER]
Many thanks to Cory Morningstar for bringing this to our attention. She is doing great work collating dissident voices on the coronavirus, follow her on twitter if you don’t already.
Correction 18/03/20 – The original version of this article incorrectly suggested Kettner was an invited guest of the programme, when in reality he phoned in of his own volition.
While COVID-19 meets the technical definition of a pandemic, the death toll is nowhere near that of earlier serious pandemics that would legitimately justify the extraordinary measures being deployed by the U.S. government
An estimated 75 million to 200 million people in Eurasia and as much as 60% of the European population in rural areas were wiped out by the Black Death (bubonic plague) between 1347 and 1351
The Spanish flu (swine flu), which hit during World War I in 1918, infected 500 million people worldwide, killing an estimated 50 million, or 2.7% of the global population
Using the higher of two prominent COVID-19 trackers, 238,950 people had died, globally, from COVID-19 as of the afternoon on May 2, 2020. Based on a global population of 7.8 billion, 238,950 deaths amount to 0.003% of the global population
Mid-March predictions said COVID-19 would kill 2.2 million Americans if allowed to run its course. April 8, 2020, the Murray Model downgraded the threat to 60,000 dead by August, which is lower than the death toll for the seasonal flu of 2017/2018
While COVID-19 meets the technical definition1 of a pandemic (i.e., “an epidemic occurring worldwide, or over a very wide area, crossing international boundaries and usually affecting a large number of people”), the death toll is nowhere near that of earlier serious pandemics2 that would legitimately justify the extraordinary measures being deployed by the U.S. government and others around the globe.
The Black Death
For comparison, the “Black Death,” which swept through Europe between 1347 and 1351 and kept resurfacing at intervals for the next 300 years, decimated up to one-third of the population with each recurrence.3,4
While the Black Death was long thought to be the same as the bubonic plague, in more recent years, researchers have questioned this assumption,5 and at least some of the evidence suggests they were not the same disease.
Either way, the plague killed 75 million to 200 million people in Eurasia, with deaths peaking in Europe from 1347 to 1351.6 As much as 60% of the European population in rural areas were wiped out by the Black Death in the first four-year-long pandemic wave. People died within days of having symptoms.7 This horrific lethality is typically what people think of when they hear the word “pandemic.”
The Spanish Flu
Similarly, the Spanish flu (aka, swine flu), which hit during World War I in 1918, infected 500 million people worldwide, killing an estimated 50 million, or 2.7% of the global population.8
It killed 675,000 in the U.S. alone — more than died in combat during World War I, World War II, the Korean, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined, according to the historical documentary above.
Like the bubonic plague, the Spanish flu was a very rapid killer, causing death in as little as 12 hours. Like the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, the virus also spread very easily and rapidly. Unlike COVID-19, however, people between the ages of 20 and 40 were most susceptible to the infection.
With COVID-19, it’s the elderly and immune compromised that are at greatest risk, but even in these high-risk groups, the mortality rate is nowhere near that of the Spanish flu.
Data points vary, and mortality statistics differ widely depending on the country and area you’re looking at, but using the higher of two prominent COVID-19 trackers — Worldometer,9 opposed to Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center10 — 238,950 people had died, globally, from COVID-19 as of the afternoon on May 2, 2020.
Based on a global population of 7.8 billion,11 238,950 deaths amount to 0.003% of the global population. Even if this tally is off by hundreds of thousands, we’re still only looking at a fraction of a percent of the global population succumbing to COVID-19 in three and a half months.
April 15, there were also 1,403,420 active cases, 96% of which were mild and only 4% of which were serious or critical,12 so clearly, a vast majority of people who are infected make it through and end up having antibodies that will confer long-term immunity.
I for one could see shutting down the global economy for a true plague or something much like the Spanish flu, but COVID-19 simply doesn’t warrant the draconian elimination of personal freedom and liberty we’re currently seeing. Nor is it serious enough to warrant the kinds of long-term surveillance strategies suggested by Bill Gates
Understand What’s Happening Right Now
The Corbett Report above is well worth listening to if you’re still on the fence and think the way we’re going is a good idea to safeguard the vulnerable. Remember, infectious diseases have been with us since the dawn of mankind, and are not going to stop. Ever.
Right now, we’re being told that we have to forgo our civil liberties because we might spread a virus to a potentially vulnerable individual, and if that happens, we’re culpable in their death. So, to prevent “mass homicide” from occurring by people moving about freely, we’re told we have to isolate ourselves and stop living.
Yet every single flu season throughout history, people have moved about, spreading the infection around. Undoubtedly, most people who have ever left their house with a cold, stomach bug or other influenza at any point in the past has unwittingly spread the infection to others, some of which may have ended up with a serious case of illness and some of which may ultimately have died from it.
There is simply no way to prevent such a chain of events in perpetuity. Giving up our civil liberties in an effort to prevent all future deaths from infectious disease is profoundly misguided, and ultimately will not work anyway.
From my perspective, the only mitigating factor in this analysis is that there appears to be solid, well-documented evidence that this is an engineered virus, one that was constructed in biosafety level 3 and 4 labs that are focused on offensive biological weapons research. This may result in unprecedented adverse biological adaptions that impair innate immunity. But at this time, I seriously doubt it.
Mortality Predictions Fall Apart
Mid-March predictions said COVID-19 would kill 2.2 million Americans if allowed to run its course.13 By the end of March, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, downgraded the projected death toll, saying we were probably looking at 100,000 to 240,000 Americans dying.14
April 8, 2020, a new model referred to as the Murray Model15 downgraded the threat further, predicting COVID-19 will kill 60,000 in the U.S. by August16 — a number that is still 20,000 lower than the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s death toll numbers attributed to the seasonal flu the winter of 2017/2018.17
In the Liberty Report video above, Dr. Ron Paul, former GOP congressman, also points out that Fauci’s “doom and gloom predictions” have completely collapsed, “with the new official prediction coming in under the normal flu numbers for 2018.”
If COVID-19 is not causing any greater death toll than the regular flu season two years ago, why are we now asked to end society as we know it well into the foreseeable future? There’s no doubt in my mind that there will be far more deaths attributable to the financial collapse and isolation than there will be from the actual infection.
H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic Response Was a Gift to Big Pharma
The H1N1 swine flu of 2009 was the most recent pandemic of note, and considering Fauci and Gates are both saying we won’t be able (read, allowed) to go back to any semblance of normalcy until or unless we have a vaccine and enforce mandatory vaccination of the global population, it’s worth remembering what happened during the 2009 swine flu pandemic.
The CDC estimates that from April 12, 2009, to April 10, 2010, there were 60.8 million cases of H1N1 infection, 274,000 hospitalizations, and 12,469 deaths (0.02% infection fatality rate/mortality rate) in the United States.
June 11, 2009, the World Health Organization declared a global pandemic of novel influenza A (H1N1).18 A vaccine was rapidly unveiled, and within months, cases of disability and death from the H1N1 vaccine were reported in various parts of the world.
In the aftermath, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) questioned the WHO’s handling of the pandemic. In June 2010, PACE concluded “the handling of the pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), EU health agencies and national governments led to a ‘waste of large sums of public money, and unjustified scares and fears about the health risks faced by the European public.’”19
Specifically, PACE concluded there was “overwhelming evidence that the seriousness of the pandemic was vastly overrated by WHO,” and that the drug industry had influenced the organization’s decision-making.20 As reported by the Natural Society in 2014:21
“… a joint investigation by the British Medical Journal (BMJ) and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (BIJ) has uncovered some serious conflicts of interest between the World Health Organization (WHO), who proposed … heavy vaccinations, and the pharmaceutical companies which created them.
The joint-investigation’s report explains that the WHO profited immensely22 from the scare tactics they utilized to promote the use of a swine flu vaccine.
Creating mass hysteria was the WHO’s emergency advisory committee’s goal … The WHO told the world that up to 7 million people could die without the vaccines they were pushing … The advisory panel was choked with individuals highly connected to the pharmaceutical companies with vested interests in both antiviral and influenza vaccines.
An over $4 billion stake was invested in developing these vaccines, and without a pandemic there would be no use for them. Utilizing propaganda and fear, the drugs were pushed on unsuspecting people, and the money was made.”
Disturbingly, while the WHO was found to have had serious conflicts of interest with the drug industry, nothing has actually changed since then, which makes one wonder whether the WHO’s COVID-19 pandemic response can actually be trusted.
White House Halts Funding to WHO
To Read the rest of the article and get links that may not have been included, go to: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/05/02/how-does-covid-19-compare-to-the-spanish-flu.aspx
Lockdowns: looks like an op, smells like an op, walks six feet apart like an op
by Jon Rappoport
May 6, 2020
We don’t need Rahm Emanuel to tell us a crisis shouldn’t go to waste. It’s a strategy that probably got off the ground a hundred thousand years ago. The other half of it is, create the crisis to begin with. Then don’t waste it.
The Bill Gates plan involves a mother of all vaccines for COVID, mandated across the globe, before the lockdowns end. That’s his psychopathic wet dream. Then, coming in behind that, his lackey, the World Health Organization, along with the professional liars at the CDC, will add—“we must mandate EVERY vaccine…”
To pull off a mandated global vaccine for eight billion people takes a manufactured crisis.
Fake virus plus real lockdown is the crisis.
You don’t think that one up overnight. You plan. You drill, and you organize. You put all your ducks in a row. You prepare, in order to become Stalin and Mao.
Then somebody has to break the ice.
In this case, it was the Chinese regime—locking down 50 million people overnight in three cities. Moving quickly to a hundred million.
“If the Chinese did it, we can do it, too. We must.”
Then follow up with a dire prediction. Where will that come from? “Let’s dust off that broken-down hack, Neil Ferguson. He’ll give us what we want. He always does. Tell him to slap together one of his computer models. You know, predictions of lots of deaths up the road. Half a million in the UK, a couple of million in the US. Fauci will salute it like money.”
Drive people back into their homes. Put them out of work. Shut down businesses. Wreck economies.
NOW, hold out the carrot. The vaccine.
Note: A new COVID vaccine could be used to alter the genetic makeup of humans. That’s exactly what the emerging (and as yet unlicensed) DNA technology does. It’s a form of gene therapy, now in clinical trials—and, officially, one of the “competing candidates” for a COVID vaccine.
The New York Times, 3/10/15, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” It describes a frontier of research. Here are key quotes that illustrate the use of synthetic genes to “protect against disease,” while changing the genetic makeup of humans. This is not science fiction:
“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”
“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”
“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.” [That was five years ago.]
“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”
Here is the punchline: “The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”
Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.” Alteration of the human genetic makeup. Permanent alteration.
The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:
“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”
Yes, some people might be leery. If they have two or three working brain cells.
Even if we (falsely) assume this is an epidemic caused by a virus, the official case numbers—as I’ve described in a recent article—do NOT warrant nearly as much concern as annual official flu numbers.
And, of course, NO lockdowns faintly resembling what we have now have ever been recommended, much less enforced, for flu.
And there is no mandated global flu vaccine.
Therefore, a planet-wide, mandated COVID vaccine, as a get-out-of-jail-card, is absurd.
The freedom to reject the vaccine MUST be protected.
The actual conspiracy theorists—Gates, WHO, CDC—who invented the conspiracy, must also be rejected.
As far as I can tell, this is not a top-down single-leader movement. It’s a state by state proposition. That would be a good thing. Groups in each state should run their own operations.
Here is a quote from American Revolution 2.0:
“Governor Executive Orders violate the United States Constitution and negate the responsibility of individual citizens for their ‘Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness’. The precedent set by removing these Constitutional Rights is staggering and to date unheard of.”
Of course, agencies like the CDC and the World Health Organization appoint themselves the “new global governance.” Their job is painting as bleak a picture as possible, making it seem that, without their top-down control, the population of Earth would be decimated.
This is always the way of tyrants. How else can they justify their criminal actions?
The endless invention of enemies is a strategy as old as the hills.
Peace and prosperity are stakes through the hearts of vampires.
For the CDC and WHO and Bill Gates, the idea that someone somewhere might be living free and healthy on his own accord…THAT to them is the virus which must be conquered.
To accomplish this victory, they enlist the help of public and private meddlers and gossipers and snitches and censors, whose only thrill in life is finding “rule-breakers.” Therefore, the more rules the better.
The culture of society is becoming more infantile every day—wash your hands, wash them again, don’t touch your face, stay indoors, wear a mask, wear gloves, stand six feet apart, wait in line, don’t breathe on your neighbor, be polite, watch TV for marching orders—but those people who still understand what freedom means are under no obligation to cater to that “culture.”
Lowest common denominator is not a principle contained in the Constitution. In fact, wherever the principle is found, it’s a cover for dictatorship. For example, the ubiquitous “we’re all in this together” is a massage for the brainless.
Translation: “You’re all one giant cheese glob, and we, the World Health Organization, with Bill Gates money, are pressing the two pieces of toast together and making the sandwich.”
State by state, the protests against unconstitutional insanity are scheduled for May 1.
OPEN THE STATES. GO BACK TO WORK. TURN ON THE ECONOMY.
Email Addresses And Passwords From WHO, NIH, Wuhan Lab, And Gates Foundation Dumped On 4chan
A cache of nearly 25,000 email addresses and passwords allegedly belonging to the World Health Organization (WHO), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Wuhan Institute of Virology, Bill Gates Foundation and several other groups involved with the coronavirus pandemic response were dumped on 4chan before appearing on several other websites, according to the SITE Intelligence Group.
The report by SITE, based in Bethesda, Md., said the largest group of alleged emails and passwords was from the NIH, with 9,938 found on lists posted online. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had the second-highest number, with 6,857. The World Bank had 5,120. The list of WHO addresses and passwords totaled 2,732. –Washington Post
WHO chief information officer Bernardo Mariano told Bloombergthat the organization wasn’t hacked, and that the data was possibly obtained through prior data breaches.
“The employees may have used their work email address to register an account for a particular website, and then that website has been hacked, leaking their password.”
According to Mariano, 400 of the credentials were still active – and he claims that none of the passwords were used to access sensitive information due to the organization’s two-factor authentication system. 4chan users, on the other hand, said that they were able to use the passwords to gain access to a WHO website called “Extranet,” according to Bloomberg.
Mariano added that the organization has been seeing an increasing number of attempted cyber-intrusions since mid-March, and that there had recently been a “sustained attempt” to hack into the computers of four WHO employees in South Korea, along with the organization’s Geneva headquarters.
4chan users said they were using the credentials to download ‘everything’ they could.
An unverified photo posted as part of the dump appears to refer to “Splicing HIV” into “coronavirus,” fueling speculation that COVID-19 was genetically engineered with HIV spike proteins – a theory posted by Indian researchers soon after the virus’s genome was published, and later withdrawn after their findings were refuted.
The Gates Foundation told WaPo “We are monitoring the situation in line with our data security practices. We don’t currently have an indication of a data breach at the foundation.”
If legit, someone named Mararet at the Gates Foundation (last name withheld) is apparently a fan of the dark lord:
Australian cybersecurity expert Robert Potter said he was able to verify the WHO information, and that “their password security is appalling.”
“Forty-eight people have ‘password’ as their password,” he said. Others used their own first names or “changeme.”
Potter said the alleged email addresses and passwords may have been purchased from vendors on the dark Web, a portion of the Internet that is not indexed by most search engines and where hacked information often is posted for sale. He said the WHO credentials appear to have come from a hack in 2016. –Washington Post
Without imposing any lockdowns or draconian restrictions on citizens, Sweden has attained a greater immunity than any other country and is estimated to achieve herd immunity to Covid-19 within three weeks
Swedish officials have recommended since the outbreak began that residents of the country limit contact with others whenever possible and wash their hands regularly. Since then, the virus has mostly affected nursing homes for the elderly, the population that Swedish officials most want to protect.
“In major parts of Sweden, around Stockholm, we have reached a plateau (in new cases) and we’re already seeing the effect of herd immunity and in a few weeks’ time we’ll see even more of the effects of that. And in the rest of the country, the situation is stable.” – Dr. Anders Tengell, Chief Epidemiologist at Sweden’s Public Health Agency [SOURCE]
Although some restrictions have been placed on Swedish citizens such as a ban on gatherings of more than 50 people, Swedes have mostly relied on the voluntary efforts of others to wash their hands and practice social distancing.
However, death tolls have been higher in Sweden than other nearby countries, such as Finland, Denmark, and Norway. It is unclear if this is because of their loose restrictions, immigration policies, or simply bad luck. Most deaths have occurred in nursing homes and among the recent influx of African and Middle Eastern migrants who in just a few years have become about 25% of the total population.
“The death toll is very closely related to elderly care homes. More than half of the people that have died have lived in elderly care homes… It’s the group we said we needed to protect,” said Tengell.
Professor Johan Giesecke, the senior epidemiologist and advisor to the director general of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Swedish government, who originally hired Anders Tengell, argues that worldwide lockdowns are being implemented without any real evidence that they are effective.
“The Swedish government decided early in January that the measures we take against the pandemic should be evidence-based and when you start looking around for the measures that are being taken now by different countries you find that very few of them have a shred of evidence.” – Johan Giesecke [SOURCE]
Pandemic models for the United States originally predicted as many as several hundred thousand deaths by August, but those numbers have been continuously reduced to only 60,145 as their predicted death counts have not happened.
Because of the harm these failed Center for Disease Control (CDC) and WHO models have done to the US economy, the United States coronavirus task force has recently dropped them in favor of real data and as a result are planning to reopen the country in May and June.
“Models for infectious disease spread are very popular… They are good for teaching, [but] seldom tell you the truth… Which model could have assumed that the outbreak would start in northern Italy? … [Models] are based on assumptions, and those assumptions should by highly criticized.” – Johan Giesecke
The current number of deaths from Covid-19 in Sweden is 1,937, or 192 deaths per million people.
About the Author
Phillip Schneideris a student as well as a staff writer and assistant editor for Waking Times. If you would like to see more of his work, you can visit his website, or follow him on the free speech social network Minds.
Microsoft co-founder and philanthropist Bill Gates | Stephen Voss/REDUX
Some billionaires are satisfied with buying themselves an island. Bill Gates got a United Nations health agency in Geneva.
Over the past decade, the world’s richest man has become the World Health Organization’s second biggest donor, second only to the United States and just above the United Kingdom. This largesse gives him outsized influence over its agenda, one that could grow as the U.S. and the U.K. threaten to cut funding if the agency doesn’t make a better investment case.
The result, say his critics, is that Gates’ priorities have become the WHO’s. Rather than focusing on strengthening health care in poor countries — that would help, in their view, to contain future outbreaks like the Ebola epidemic — the agency spends a disproportionate amount of its resources on projects with the measurable outcomes Gates prefers, such as the effort to eradicate polio.
Concerns about the software billionaire’s sway — roughly a quarter of WHO’s budget goes toward polio eradication — has led to an effort to rein him in. But he remains a force to be reckoned with, as WHO prepares to elect one of three finalists to lead the organization.
“All of the candidates are going to have to ally with him in some way,” said Sophie Harman, associate professor of international politics at Queen Mary University of London. “You can’t ignore him.”
Evidence of Gates’ unprecedented influence abounds in ways subtle and showy.
“He is treated liked a head of state, not only at the WHO, but also at the G20” — Geneva-based NGO representative
Already a decade ago, when Gates started throwing money into malaria eradication, top officials — including the chief of the WHO’s malaria program — raised concerns that the foundation was distorting research priorities. “The term often used was ‘monopolistic philanthropy’, the idea that Gates was taking his approach to computers and applying it to the Gates Foundation,” said a source close to the WHO board.
The billionaire was the first private individual to keynote WHO’s general assembly of member countries, and academics have coined a term for his sway in global health: the Bill Chill. Few people dare to openly criticize what he does. Most of 16 people interviewed on the topic would only do so on the condition of anonymity.
“He is treated liked a head of state, not only at the WHO, but also at the G20,” a Geneva-based NGO representative said, calling Gates one of the most influential men in global health.
The member country delegates POLITICO spoke to did not voice particular concern over Gates’ influence and were confident he is well intentioned.
However, his sway has NGOs and academics worried. Some health advocates fear that because the Gates Foundation’s money comes from investments in big business, it could serve as a Trojan horse for corporate interests to undermine WHO’s role in setting standards and shaping health policies.
Others simply fear the U.N. body relies too much on Gates’ money, and that the entrepreneur could one day change his mind and move it elsewhere.
Gates and his foundation team have heard the criticism, but they are convinced that the impact of their work and money is positive.
The opening of the World Health Assembly in 2016 in Geneva | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images
“It’s always a fair question to ask whether a large philanthropy has a disproportionate influence,” said Bryan Callahan, deputy director for executive engagement at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. “When it comes to the priorities that the foundation has identified and that we choose to invest in, we hope that we are helping to create an enabling environment,” he said.
Steve Landry, the Gates Foundation’s director of multilateral partnerships, said the foundation provides “significant funds” to program teams that then decide how to use them best.
The Gates Foundation has pumped more than $2.4 billion into the WHO since 2000, as countries have grown reluctant to put more of their own money into the agency, especially after the 2008 global financial crisis.
Dues paid by member states now account for less than a quarter of WHO’s $4.5 billion biennial budget. The rest comes from what governments, Gates, other foundations and companies volunteer to chip in. Since these funds are usually earmarked for specific projects or diseases, WHO can’t freely decide how to use them.
Polio eradication is by far WHO’s best-funded program, with at least $6 billion allocated to it between 2013 and 2019, in great part because around 60 percent of the Gates Foundation’s contributions are earmarked for the cause. Gates wants tangible results, and wiping out a crippling disease like polio would be one.
But the focus on polio has effectively left WHO begging for funding for other programs, particularly to prop up poor countries’ health systems before the next epidemic hits.
The Ebola crisis of 2014, which killed 11,000 people in West Africa, was a particularly bruising experience for WHO. An emergency program drawn up in the wake of the epidemic has so far received just around 60 percent of the $485 million needed for 2016-2017.
Gates’ influence over the WHO was called into question once again during the race to succeed Chan as its director general.
Outgoing WHO boss Margaret Chan has also had to scale back her attempt to get countries to increase mandatory contributions for the first time in a decade. Chan initially hoped for a 10 percent hike, but WHO will end up asking for just 3 percent more this month after some countries objected.
That makes the Gates Foundation’s input all the more important. “They come with a checkbook, and with some smart ideas,” said Laurie Garrett, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Most of the Gates Foundation’s influence in the WHO is very discreet, she said, adding that it can also decide to take initiatives outside of the organization, as it did with GAVI, which helps the poorest countries buy vaccines in bulk at a discount, or with a recently launched Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, an alliance to develop vaccines for emerging infectious diseases.
But the foundation’s focus on delivering vaccines and medicines, rather than on building resilient health systems, has drawn criticism. And some NGOs worry it may be too close to industry.
In January, 30 health advocacy groups penned an open letter to WHO’s executive board protesting against making the Gates Foundation an official partner of the agency because its revenue comes from investments in companies that are at odds with public health goals, such as Coca-Cola.
The Gates Foundation says it operates as a separate entity from the trust, thanks to a “strict firewall,” and that it remains independent from its investments, which strictly exclude the tobacco, alcohol or arms industries.
Fencing off big money
Worries about the growing role of private money led member nations to agree, after several years of negotiations, on a new policy governing how it engages with entities such as private foundations, companies and NGOs. It is currently being rolled out across the agency.
Despite the criticism, WHO’s board granted the Gates Foundation “official relations” status. In practice, several sources said it does not change much to the relations WHO already had with the foundation.
Gaudenz Silberschmidt, WHO’s director for partnerships, said the new status is based on a three-year collaboration plan: “That means we have a solid planning and we and member states know what we are doing with them.”
The U.N. body also changed four years ago the way its budget is approved, to ensure member countries set its priorities. That means Gates can only put money into projects the 194 members support; the foundation cannot pitch a new one out of the blue and ask WHO to work on it right away just because it is providing the money.
Candidate for the WHO director general position Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images
These changes have calmed some criticism of its growing influence over the health body, Silberschmidt and two sources close to the WHO board said.
The foundation also seems to have got the message. Its representatives meet five to six times a year with other major donors to discuss the WHO’s priorities, and how it can support them, Landry said.
Two representatives of major donor countries confirmed the foundation’s envoys had been very cooperative in recent years. “They’re much more inclusive. They bring in other stakeholders, talk to member states to really try to build consensus,” said one delegate.
With the best intentions
Gates’ influence over the WHO was called into question once again during the race to succeed Chan as its director general.
The final three candidates include Sania Nishtar, a cardiologist from Pakistan who has pledged to take the agency “back to its former glory”; David Nabarro, a British physician and former U.N. special envoy for Ebola; and Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who has served as health minister and foreign minister in the Ethiopian government.
“I don’t think they have any bad intentions. They are just such a big player that as immediately as they put money down they can disrupt things” — Geneva-based diplomat
Tedros, who like many in Ethiopia goes by his first name, is supported by the African Union. He has promised to reform the organization to better deal with crises like Ebola and to push for universal access to health care all over the world.
Last year, a French diplomat suggested that Gates also supports Tedros, having funded health programs in his country when he was health minister. Several foundation officials have denied this, saying that the foundation cannot take a position given that it is not a voting member country and thus has to remain neutral.
The new WHO boss will be selected by the member countries who have paid their membership fees on May 23, at an annual meeting in Geneva.
Still, most country representatives who agreed to speak anonymously on the topic said they were not particularly concerned with the Gates Foundation’s influence on WHO.
“I don’t think they have any bad intentions. They are just such a big player that as immediately as they put money down they can disrupt things,” said one Geneva-based diplomat.
Outgoing WHO chief Margaret Chan | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images
“As far as I can tell, people are really happy with anyone who is giving money,” said another.
One big unknown is what will happen with the foundation’s money once it meets its target of eradicating polio, which started in the late 1980s and now appears to be nearing its goal. Chan has warned that if the polio money dries up in 2019, the global health body will be on the lookout for even more money.
The Gates Foundation’s Landry said his colleagues were working with WHO and its polio team on a “transition plan” to ensure the programs currently funded by the polio effort don’t run into trouble once the money stops flowing. WHO is due to present a report on it to member countries in May.
“The foundation’s impact on the WHO is enormous,” said Garrett, of the Council on Foreign Relations. “If they weren’t there, if they walked away with their money, the deleterious impact would be profound, and everyone is all too aware of that.”