«House of numbers», un documental del canadiense Brent Leung sobre
el SIDA, se ha convertido en un emblema de la comunidad médica
disidente, y cobra dramática actualidad por los asombrosos paralelos
entre el SIDA y el Covid-19.
«House of numbers» es un trabajo de un director que fue dignosticado
como seropositivo en los 90, cuando obtener un positivo en un PCR sobre
el HIV era prácticamente una sentencia de muerte: desarrollar la
enfermedad era sólo cuestión de tiempo, decían los «expertos». Pasaron
los años, y el «portador asintomático» nunca se enfermó. Intrigado,
comenzó a recorrer el mundo entrevistando a los principales referentes
científicos del SIDA, a otros seropositivos y a científicos disidentes
sobre el dogma.
El resultado es un conjunto articulado de testimonios cuyas
conclusiones se desprenden por su propio peso. De las contradicciones en
que caen los propios fundadores del dogma (entre ellos, el francés Luc
Montagnier, y el omnipresente Anthony Fauci), se deduce claramente que
la narrativa oficial sobre el SIDA es fraudulenta y pseudocientífica. Además,
se visualiza que el SIDA fue el primer ensayo para diseminar la noción
tóxica de «portador asintomático». Este concepto es hoy el núcleo
conceptual central de las políticas de aislamiento social.
Hay otras asombrosas similitudes entre ambos paradigmas médicos.
Paralelos entre el SIDA y el Covid-19
«House of numbers» es la radiografía de un fraude médico, y como tal expone:
El retrovirus HIV jamás fue aislado, lo que implica que se trata de
un virus teórico. Es decir, no se pudo demostrar su existencia como
entidad separada, distinguible, autónoma, y por lo tanto, capaz de
«viajar», propagarse, multiplicarse y tener conductas que «infecten» a
las personas.
Nunca jamás alguien explicó los mecanismos a través de los cuales el HIV provoca el derrumbe del sistema inmunológico que se etiquetó como SIDA.
Los test PCR para diagnosticar HIV pueden dar positivo o negativo
alternativamente si se realizan varios seguidos. El resultado además,
puede variar según los diferentes fabricantes, o los diferentes
criterios para leerlo. Los test PCR, por lo tanto, no tienen ninguna
validez para diagnosticar una enfermedad.
El SIDA, como enfermedad, es una etiqueta-paraguas de definición
difusa, que cambia de país en país. Así, es posible ser rotulado como
«enfermo» en un país, y como «persona sana» en otro. El SIDA es un
concepto engañoso que se aplica a muchas enfermedades diferentes.
Por este motivo, las estadísticas de enfermos y muertes de SIDA son
irrelevantes desde el punto de vista científico: incluyen, dentro de la
misma narrativa fraudulenta, desde trastornos relacionados con el abuso
de ciertas drogas, hasta dolencias relacionadas con la pobreza, la
malnutrición y el consumo de aguas contaminadas.
La noción de «portador asintomático» funcionó como un primer ensayo
para inducir miedo al prójimo como «peligro biológico», pero muchos
«seropositivos» nunca se enfermaron.
La medicación contra el SIDA (retrovirales) que se suministró a
muchos «portadores asintomáticos» (personas sanas) fue en última
instancia la causa de su decadencia y muerte.
La intensa propaganda sobre el SIDA despertó una alarma pública
mundial, y sirvió para justificar la asignación de millones a la
investigación de un falso paradigma, y al bloqueo de cualquier punto de
vista que cuestionara la narrativa oficial.
Usinas de la desinformación global: «negacionista» y «absurda»
El excelente documental de Brent Leung -aplaudido por los miles de
médicos y científicos que son silenciados en su denuncia de las
falsedades del dogma- tiene otro punto de contacto con la narrativa del
Covid-19. Los razonamientos de «House of Numbers» son estrictamente
científicos, y la inconsistencia del fraude se cae por su propio peso.
Pero la película es descalificada como «negacionista» y «absurda» por
las usinas de la desinformación global, «fact checkers» y otras
criaturas de similar pelaje.
Un verdadero honor en estos tiempos, y un indicador claro de que es
una película que vale la pena ver. Todavía está completa en Youtube.
Over
the past two years of the planned pandemic, the billionaires who are
running the international show have only become richer and more
emboldened. The billionaires became richer by at least $5 trillion
according to the news in the image below.
These people are richer than your local/state/provincial government and quite possibly richer and certainly more focused than your national government. Plus, they have cash in hand.
Your politicians are loyal to the people who pay them
To which king are soldiers loyal? To the man who pays them.
The
technocratic-pharmaceutical-billionaire elite have now demonstrated
that they have control of nearly every government (including groups of
governments such as the European Union), every governmental medical and
public health organization of every major country, all of the medical
journals, medical societies, hospital systems and channels of drug
distribution (pharmacies).
You’ll notice the emergence of an entire new group of billionaires all tied to pandemic profiteering.
No one in their right mind can possibly think that this is going to have a benign or beneficent outcome.
Yes
of course everyone’s going to be happy with the lifting of
restrictions, but unless the current systems are dismantled and
protections are put in place to protect the public, then nothing is to
stop this from recurring again in a few weeks or a few months or a few
years but with much more force. Now they have gained experience
and they know how to do a better job the next time. Meanwhile over the
past two years, the entire global population has become fatter, sicker,
weaker, and arguably dumber— America by itself for example has lost up
to 3 million students. For the past two years we haven’t been talking
about philosophy and science and art and culture but we’ve been looking
for our face masks and following lines on the floor; when we do dumb
things, we become dumb—this applies to all of us.
Now
they know they can get their police and military to agree with anything
including using attack dogs against their own populations, as we saw in
Amsterdam. They know that people aren’t going to do much more than
engage in “peaceful protests”, and that’s exactly what they want.
Their
systems are intact, they are stronger and richer than ever, and now
they know their strengths and they know your weaknesses. They have
control of the governments, the media, the entire medical profession,
all channels of distribution of goods and information. Good luck with
that.
May the odds be in your favor… while they control the game, the rules, the board, and the odds.
The
only reasonable action is accountability and punishment, just like we
saw with the Nuremberg trials. Until and unless we see a Nuremberg 2.0
and until and unless we see laws written to protect the public sphere,
this can repeat and it almost certainly will repeat.
Yeah
sure take your mask off and enjoy your freedoms but we all need to get
politically engaged and protect ourselves before they do this again.
Various lines of evidence point to different levels of the Argentine State colluding to hide the serious
damage caused by Covid injections, to deny essential information to the public and to hinder the work of a public official committed to his profession.
The case of the prosecutor Carlos Insaurralde, who had to
excuse himself from a file in which "due to a typing error" ANMAT
recognised that the Covid injections contain graphene, gives the impression of a spontaneous confession by a criminal state.
A particular set of circumstances is pointing to serious collusion between
different levels of the Argentine State. In a chain of events attested
by official documentation, the grave damage inflicted by Covid injections is
being concealed, essential information is being denied to the public, and the work
of a judicial officer committed to his role is being hampered.
We have ascertained a deliberate attack upon the
health of the Argentinian people. On the one hand, highly dangerous
experimental injections are being approved, while, on the other hand, safe and effective therapies such as chlorine dioxide are banned and suppressed. In both
cases, the decisions are arbitrary and not supported by any scientific
evidence.
To complete the picture, lawmakers from the ruling party (with
firm support from the opposition) are trying to pass a law to make Covid
inoculations mandatory.
The Insaurralde case: summary
The prosecutor Carlos Insaurralde gained notoriety as a result of an
audio recording in which he urged the Argentine people to denounce the abuses of Argentina's health tyranny. That is, the deaths and adverse effects of the
inoculation of the population, the disorders of the unconstitutional
“Covid” pass, and the abandonment of people by the sanitary apartheid.
Insaurralde also initiated a legal case resulting from the death of a
woman following an Astra Zéneca vaccine. He asked the ANMAT
for information on the composition of the "vaccines", and the agency
said in an official statement that contain graphene, thus confirming the Campra Report.
El document was quickly denied
in the midst of international controversy. It was explained as
“a typing error”. But ANMAT did not provide any alternative information
on the components of the injection.
After the commotion caused by the case, Insaurralde had to
excuse himself from running the case at the suggestion of the attorney
general. Today he fears for his position. A popular mobilisation rallied in front of the Attorney General's Office to support him.
Video: Act in La Plata asking for the reinstatement of the prosecutor Insaurralde
Confessions of a criminal state
In this succession of events, the Argentine State has incriminated itself, by action or omission:
In an interview with the journalist Verónica Ressia, the
prosecutor Insaurralde narrated his personal condition, which deserves
the attention of his peers and superiors: He has not been "vaccinated"
because he has verified the danger of the injections, since he has
treated many victims, and also has vaccinated relatives inoculated who developed thrombosis.
Therefore, he does not have a "health pass" and cannot enter the bank,
travel on public transport or lead a normal life. None of this seems to
have drawn the attention of the "judicial family", which instead of
acting ex officio and/or supporting the only judicial agent who has
raised his voice, has removed him from the picture.
What was his criminal offense in this situation?
Insaurralde recounts how ANMAT gave him partial, incomplete and contradictory answers to his inquiries about the "vaccines". Nor does it possessinformation on the number of post-vaccine deaths and injuries in Argentina. Qualifying the pharmaceutical giants as "least trustworthy industry" a recent article from the editors of British Mmedical Journalstated that it was "morally indefensible" that
this information remains inaccessible to clinicians, researchers, and
the public. What criminal profile justifies this refusal to provide reliable information to our citizens?
ANMAT has shown that it does not have any information of its own on
the composition of the vials it approved. And, whether deliberately or
accidentally, it responded to the judicial request in a contradictory way:
first YES, then NO. How would a judge interpret that conduct?
Video: The prosecutor Insaurralde interviewed by Verónica Ressia
ANMAT as an organ of control: the case of chlorine dioxide
In a recent video, Marcelo Daniel Otero exposes the other face
of the ANMAT. It is clear, from the agency's contradictory statements
about the Covid injections, that it does not have the resources to
investigate the very products it approves, including the "vaccines". Similarly, a
case initiated in mid-2021 requesting that tests be carried out on the
safety and efficacy of chlorine dioxide was answered with the argument that
there is extensive foreign literature on the substance, but to carry out
tests, a request from a pharmaceutical laboratory was needed.
This implies that the agency banned and criminalised the use of chlorine dioxide without any scientific evidence. What motivated the vehement prohibition, in the midst of a "pandemic", of a product that is legal in most parts of the world, and which was freely sold for years in Argentina?
Due to ANMAT's decision, there were raids, arrests, intense
negative propaganda in the mass media, and refusal to supply the
substance to patients who later lost their lives. The document presented by
Marcelo Daniel Otero shows that ANMAT does not have scientific
evidence to justify its position against chlorine dioxide. How do they justify it then?
Video: Marcelo Daniel Otero, ANMAT and chlorine dioxide
Compulsory vaccination in Argentina? Anatomy of a criminal operation
In this context, the ruling party in the Argentine Parliament pushes for mandatory "Covid vaccination".
The project attempts to circumvent the need for informed consent, the
absence of which has caused vaccination clinics to be closed, and is one
of the indicators of the procedure's illegality.
The legislative's initiative aims to legalise what was illegal
until now, and closes the circle of criminal collusion between the different
levels of the State.
The results of the experimental inoculation in other countries (where, unlike in Argentina, there are official statistics) is devastating:
However, the Argentinian government is even injecting children and now aims to forcibly jab the entire population.
As in the time of the last military dictatorship, we see backdoor illicit deals, manipulated by external powers, and returning now to decimate the
Argentinian people.
Mislav Kolakusic,
a Croatian lawyer and politician who has been a Member of the European
Parliament for Croatia since 2019 recently called out the President of
France, Emmanuel Macron. He did so for taking away the rights and
freedoms of French citizens during the pandemic. This took place at a
meeting of the European Parliament on January 21, 2022, in Strasburg,
France.
Kolakusic brought up that Macron has stated that he is proud there is
no death penalty in Europe. Kolakusic then stated that “tens of
thousands of citizens have died due to vaccine side effects.” It’s not
clear whether he meant EU citizens or just in France alone. He then
stated that “mandatory vaccinations represent (the) death penalty and
its execution for many citizens.” He references data from the European
Health Organization (EMA).
Help Support Our FOI Efforts:
We are holding the Canadian government accountable by submitting
Freedom of Information requests demanding transparency on COVID policy
decisions as we know science is not on the side of policy. Help us fund
these efforts by donating today. Click here to Donate.
You can view his statement below.
Is Kolakusic correct about COVID vaccine injuries?
Government health authorities claim that serious adverse reactions
and deaths from vaccines, including COVID vaccines are extremely rare.
But what is considered rare? COVID vaccines alone are responsible for approximately 50 percent of vaccine injuries reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in the last 30 years.
As of today,
22,193 deaths, 39,150 permanent disabilities, 118,367 hospitalizations
and 25,265 life threatening injuries have been reported to VAERS. U.S.
federal health regulatory agencies have emphasized that there is no way
to prove these injuries are connected to the COVID vaccines in any way.
That being said, VAERS has always been used by them as a surveillance
system to detect ‘red flags’ with regards to vaccine safety the past, so
why is now different?
Over the years VAERS has been quite useful. On July 16, 1999 for
example, the CDC recommended that healthcare providers suspend the use
of the licensed, RotaShield – a rotavirus vaccine – after only 15 cases
of intussusception were reported to VAERS.
The United States also has a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), it has paid out more than $4 billion in taxpayer money to claimants since its inception, while pharmaceutical companies are completely protected from any liability.
It was created
in the 1980s after lawsuits against vaccine companies and health care
providers threatened to cause vaccine shortages and reduce U.S.
vaccination rates. People injured from COVID vaccines however are not entitled to receive compensation while they are under emergency use.
Furthermore, it’s assumed that a large majority of vaccine injuries remain unreported.
A study published
on October 7, 2021 in the Journal Toxicology Reports estimates that
underreporting of deaths as a result of the COVID vaccines may have
resulted in a number 1000 times less than what the actual number is. A Harvard Pilgrim study published
in 2010 estimated that less than 1 percent of vaccine injuries are
probably reported at that time. This includes serious adverse reactions.
Jessica Rose PhD, who studied Immunology at Memorial University in
Newfoundland and Labrador along with statistician Mathew Crawford published a paper in September looking into this specifically for COVID vaccines.
Using the VAERS database and independent rates of anaphylaxis events
from a Mass General study, they computed a 41X under-reporting factor
for serious adverse events in VAERS, leading to an estimate of over
150,000 excess deaths caused by the vaccine.
“The estimates were validated multiple independent ways” the authors
claim. She concluded that at least 150,000 Americans have been killed
by the Covid-19 Vaccines. She was subjected to the criticism of “fact
checkers.” However, “fact checking” have been losing credibility and have even been called out by organizations like the British Medical Journal (BJM).
Here are a few examples of what a VAERS report looks like.
A death involved a 12-year-old girl (VAERS I.D. 1784945) who died
from a respiratory tract hemorrhage 22 days after receiving her first
Pfizer product dose. Another recent death is the case of a 16-year-old
girl (VAERS I.D. 1694568) who died of pulmonary embolism 9 days after a
Pfizer product dose (whether it was the first or second is unknown).
A 15-year-old died six days after receiving his first dose of Pfizer
product. The VAERS report (I.D. 1764974) states that the previously
healthy teen ‘was in his usual state of good health. Five days after the
vaccine, he complained of shoulder pain. He was playing with 2 friends
at a community pond, swinging from a rope swing, flipping in the air,
and landing in the water feet first. He surfaced, laughed, told his
friends “Wow, that hurt!”, then swam towards the shore, underwater as
was his usual routine. The friends became worried when he did not
reemerge.
His body was retrieved by local authorities more than an hour later.’
The autopsy revealed ‘small foci of myocardial inflammation’, an
adverse effect of these COVID products commonly found among children and
youth, particularly young men.
The Therapeutic Goods Administration, a regulatory agency of the Australian Government,has recorded approximately 80,000 adverse events linked to COVID-19 inoculations. So far, more than 10,000 people have registered
to make a claim. The registration for this compensation program opened
up last September. If each claim is approved, as of now the cost of
payout would be at least $50 million. The adverse reactions range from
mild to serious, including deaths.
There are also people all over social media sharing their story. Are these unreported and unverified incidents? Here’s an example from Australia, and instagram account dedicated to sharing the stories of people who believe they’ve suffered severe COVID vaccine injuries.
Previously confidential documents released via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit revealed that
Pfizer was aware of more than 50,000 serious adverse reactions to their
inoculations within the first 90 days of their rollout.
By October 15th, 2021, adverse events reported worldwide passed 2,344,240 for COVID vaccines alone in the World Health Organization (WHO) reporting system VigiAccess.
With all of these numbers, using a vaccine injury database like VAERS, for example, has been deemed useless by the mainstream. They claim that that “anti vax conspiracy theorists” are using VAERS to scare and mislead people.
Sure, VAERS is a flawed reporting system, but it’s what the
government officially created to monitor vaccine issues and it’s all we
have. Why aren’t measures put in place to make the monitoring and
reporting of vaccine injuries easier and more accurate? If there are so
many limitations with regards to VAERS, why not put some effort into
improving the system?
The VAERS system isn’t even designed to determine causality of adverse events. So why isn’t there a system designed to do so? Or at least further investigate?
All this being said, the majority of reports to VAERS do seem to come from health service employees, as they are required to report what they believe to be a vaccine injury to the system.
Why isn’t this issue addressed and focused on? It’s almost as if the
FDA and CDC don’t want to make an appropriate vaccine injury monitoring
system.
Other factors not included are long term consequences. How do we know
vaccine injuries may not occur years after inoculation? There are so
many limitations that we have no choice but to refer to what people are
experiencing and reporting.
With all of these factors and numbers, how can COVID vaccine mandates be justified? Furthermore, vaccines have failed when it comes to stopping the transmission of the virus. This has not been a “pandemic of the unvaccinated” as politicians have claimed. Throughout this pandemic there have been multiple examples of the most vaccinated regions and countries on earth experiencing large COVID outbreaks.
Vaccines that do not stop transmission, as explained by paper that was published in
PLOS BIOLOGY in 2015 titled, “Imperfect Vaccination Can Enhance the
Transmission of Highly Virulent Pathogens” by Penn State biologist David
Kennedy PhD.
All of these factors continue to be ignored, censored and/or labelled as “false news” by “fact checkers.” There is never a proper discussion about vaccine injuries within the mainstream.
Serbia has cancelled a huge deal with Rio Tinto, an Australian firm, following the deportation of Novak Djokovic from Australia.
Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabić revealed
on Thursday that the eastern European country had abandoned a
profitable lithium mining venture with Rio Tinto, only days after
Serbian tennis star Novak Djokovic was kicked out of the Australian Open
for his position on coronavirus vaccines.
In a televised address on January 20, Brnabić declared that the
Serbian government had “fulfilled all the demands from the environmental
protests and have put an end to Rio Tinto in the Republic of Serbia,”
referencing environmental worries highlighted by citizens, including
Djokovic.
“All decisions and all licences have been annulled. As far as the
project Jadar is concerned, this is the end,” the prime minister added.
Rio Tinto’s main venture, the Jadar project in western Serbia near
Loznica, was to become the company’s flagship project, with the mining
behemoth having already invested $450 million. Excavating the reserve
was expected to be worth $2.4 billion, putting the business among the
top 10 lithium suppliers in the world.
Rio Tinto claimed the government’s announcement to abandon the project caught them off guard and they were “blindsided.”
Rio Tinto’s stock dropped 2.2 points when the contract was
terminated, culminating in a $5 billion drop in the valuation within 48
hours of the announcement.
The mining behemoth expressed that they were “extremely concerned” and said it is discussing the situation with its attorneys.
“Throughout our work on the Jadar project, we have always operated in
compliance with the laws of the Republic of Serbia,” the company said
in a statement. “Rio Tinto is reviewing the legal basis of this decision
and the implications for our activities and our people in Serbia.”
Djokovic supported protests against the proposed excavation of the Jadar site in December, posting photographs to his social media pages with the message “clean air and water are the keys to health.”
Brnabić stated Thursday that ministers are “listening to our people
and it is our job to protect their interests even when we think
differently.”
The announcement to scrap the venture comes only days after
Australian officials decided to deport the world’s top tennis player
over a dispute over his COVID-19 vaccination status.
Djokovic went on to win an appeal in the Federal Court Circuit days
after the Australian Border Force (ABF) refused his visa upon entry into
the nation in early January, forcing him to be freed from mandatory
isolation.
As the ABF cancelled the player’s visa, Judge Anthony Kelly remarked
that “rules were not observed,” giving them only 30 minutes to comply
with his ruling.
Although fulfilling the state of Victoria’s and the tournament’s
drastic medical exemption rules and having a court appeal on his side,
Australia immigration minister Alex Hawke decided that sustaining
Djokovic’s visa revocation was “in the public interest to do so.”
Hawke judged that Djokovic’s “ongoing presence in Australia may lead
to an increase in anti-vaccination sentiment generated in the Australian
community,” instead of basing his judgement on medical research.
At the time, both Brnabić and Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić
criticized the Australian authorities, calling it “scandalous” and a
“witch hunt.” Commentators suspected that the suspension of the mining
deal was done in revenge for the hostilities involving Belgrade and
Canberra over Djokovic’s expulsion.
A convoy of truckers and others opposed to public health
restrictions is on its way from British Columbia to Parliament Hill for a
“freedom rally” this weekend against mandatory vaccinations in Canada,
and Transport Minister Omar Alghara is not happy.
“I am concerned about the small number of far-right, vocal opposition
that is polluting the political debate, It’s something that we all need
to be aware of, we all need to call out.
“But at the same time, let’s not lose sight of this, that the vast
majority of Canadians are vaccinated, the vast majority of truckers are
vaccinated. Truckers as you and I are speaking today are delivering
goods for Canadians.” Alghabara said
Alghabra also said the large grocery store chains and other retailers
have assured him they have plenty of goods to provide their customers,
despite some labour shortages and supply chain bottlenecks caused by the
COVID-19 pandemic.
But Alghabra did acknowledge that pandemic-induced supply chain
disruptions and the role truckers play in ensuring the smooth flow of
goods into the country are serious issues deserving of “rational and
meaningful” debate and “even criticism” of government policy.
Even before the Trudeau government brought in a mandate on 15th Jan
that requires truckers crossing the border to be vaccinated, Canada was
short 23,000 truck drivers. The lack of drivers — brought about by tough
working conditions and at times onerous regulations — may have existed
before the mandate, but this mandate is making things worse.
The Canadian Trucking Alliance has estimated that about 15 per cent
of truckers — as many as 16,000 — are not fully vaccinated against
COVID-19, but it has shamefully lost its nerve and denounced any
protests on public roadways, highways, and bridges and has urged all
truckers to get inoculated because the Government said so.
A day after refusing to say whether he supported the truck convoy
heading to Ottawa, Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole appeared in a
Facebook live event Tuesday evening to say he understands why many
truckers, especially independent ones, are upset.
“You can understand why there’s some frustration and why people are protesting,” O’Toole said.
He argued that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is more focused on
dividing people with his policies, putting the country’s supply chain
under greater strain when he could simply allow unvaccinated truckers to
use rapid tests.
“I want to say this: In Canada, people have a right to peacefully
protest, people want to work and are worried, people are tired after two
years of a pandemic,” O’Toole said.
On Monday 24th Jan — even as some of his MPs, including predecessor
Andrew Scheer, praised the convoy for defending freedom and liberty — a
circumspect O’Toole argued it wasn’t up him as leader of the official
Opposition to meet with protesters on Parliament Hill.
The Canadian Chamber of Commerce has urged the government to give
truckers more time to get vaccinated while the Canadian Manufacturing
Coalition hasn’t lost its bottle like the Canadian Turcking Alliance and
has called for the vaccine mandate to be scrapped entirely.
Among the truck drivers in Canada who are slow-rolling in convoys
across the country to protest the COVID-19 vaccine mandate at the U.S.
border, will be Ontario owner-operator Brigitte Belton, who until
recently regularly moved freight between the U.S. and Canada.
Since Saturday 22nd Jan, she and other drivers who haven’t been
vaccinated against COVID-19 have been barred from crossing the border.
“I’m literally going to lose my truck, my house, my car, my savings
and live in a cardboard box,” said Belton, who drives a 2015 Mack
Pinnacle.
Hundreds of trucks set off as part of the Freedom Convoy on the 23rd
Jan, while local protests have already snarled traffic at some border
crossings. Organisers say thousands of drivers have signed on along with
supporters from outside the industry.
For Belton, who questions the safety of the vaccines, the U.S. and Canadian mandates go too far.
“We’re not anti-anything,” she said. “We’re pro-choice. If you want
the vaccine, go get it. I’m not stopping you. But why do you have the
right to tell me what I actually ingest in my body?”
“I’ve got questions all over the place about this shot,” she said.
Belton also blamed World Economic Forum Young Global Leader graduate
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau after the Canada Border Services Agency
earlier this month made statements that unvaccinated Canadian drivers
wouldn’t be subjected to testing and quarantines upon returning from the
U.S. The Canadian government subsequently said those statements were
issued in error.
“If he had just left it as [it is] now — you don’t need to be
vaccinated to cross the border — this probably all never would have
happened,” Belton said of Trudeau. “But when he switched it, he pissed
off truckers and we went, we can’t just fight for us now, we’re fighting
for everybody.”
Trudeau brushed aside anger over the vaccine mandates, claiming that
“90% of truckers are vaccinated” — and blamed Conservative Party
politicians for stirring fears about disruptions to the supply chain.
Peter Smith, Canadian Anti-Hate Network, is identified as the author
of an article containing false and misleading statements regarding both
“COVID-19” and 2 gentlemen who I happen to have a great deal of respect
for.
The gentlemen in question are quite capable of speaking for and
defending themselves, but I wish to address Peter’s damaging and false
claim that the alleged “COVID-19 virus” has been isolated (a necessary
step in proving the existence of an alleged “virus”).
“… Pritchard tells his viewers the familiar line that COVID-19
and the pandemic is a lie, claiming that it has failed to be isolated in
a laboratory, despite this beingpatentlyfalse.”
In this quote, Peter included hyperlinks to 3 resources that he seems
to believe prove that the alleged “virus” has been isolated. These are
the only pieces of “isolation” evidence provided in his article. Let’s
check them out.
The links point to 1) a webpage of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2) a Globe and Mail article attributed to Ivan Semeniuk, published March 13, 2020, and 3) a March 2020 preprint of a “SARS-COV-2 isolation” study.
The “SARS-CoV-2 Viral Culturing at CDC” webpage was last updated Dec. 29, 2020 and claims that:
“SARS-CoV-2,
the virus that causes COVID-19, was isolated in the laboratory and is
available for research by the scientific and medical community“,
and that:
“SARS-CoV-2 strains supplied by CDC and other researchers can be
requested, free, from the Biodefense and Emerging Infections Research
(BEI) Resources Repository“.
CDC explains that “the virus” was “grown” by CDC researchers, and
lists all the fabulous ways that the “strains” are being used to further
the good of humanity.
Wow, so impressive. This is all the evidence we really need, right?
It’s been isolated, end of story! Only a kook would suggest otherwise.
And hey, the CDC even provided a time line of their epic
accomplishment and a link for more details.
“On January 20, 2020, CDC received a clinical specimen collected
from the first reported U.S. patient infected with SARS-CoV-2. CDC
immediately placed the specimen into cell culture…”
Wait a minute. What was that again? They immediately placed the clinical specimen into cell culture. Huh?
Does this mean that the patient sample was immediately placed into a cell culture – a source of genetic contamination? Surely they mean that the virus was placed into a cell culture after it was isolated from the patient. Because if the patient sample
was immediately contaminated with a cell culture, how could it then be
established scientifically that the patient was infected with a new
virus? I’m confused. Let’s keep reading.
“On February 2, 2020, CDC generated enough SARS-CoV-2 grown in cell culture to distribute to medical and scientific researchers.”
Fabulous, but how did they determine that a virus, and specifically
SARS-COV-2, was even present? I’m still confused. Let’s keep reading.
“On February 4, 2020, CDC shipped SARS-CoV-2 to the BEI Resources Repository.”
Woah, talk about putting the cart before the horse. Let’s keep reading and figure this out.
“An article discussing the isolation and characterization of this virus specimen is available in Emerging Infectious Diseases.“
Ok, well we will definitely have to check out that article and get these details sorted out.
So the link for the article takes us to “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States” by Jennifer Harcourt (affiliation: CDC) et al.
Jennifer Harcourt… That is also the name of the first author listed
in the study cited by Peter. They are the same study. Peter cited the
preprint, and the CDC’s webpage links to the final published version.
So let’s focus on the final version, which is published in the CDC’s own
journal Emerging Infectious Diseases.
In the Specimen Collection section of this CDC paper, we find that “clinical specimens from a case-patient … were collected on day 3 postsymptom onset, placed in 2–3 mL of viral transport medium,
used for molecular diagnosis, and frozen. Confirmed PCR-positive
specimens were aliquoted and refrozen until virus isolation was
initiated...”
That’s interesting, because a colleague of mine noticed that the CDC’s Standard Operating Procedure
for viral transport medium includes fetal bovine serum and toxic drugs.
So… this means that the clinical specimens were contaminated with cow
material before the molecular diagnosis (via PCR) and “isolation” procedure even began.
That seems strange. And troubling. And unscientific. But let’s
keep reading and see how they isolated the virus from these contaminated
patient/cow specimens.
The Methods contain a section on Cell Culture, Limiting Dilution, and Virus Isolation. In that order? Hmm. More confusion.
“We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage.”
So, in the CDC’s mind, culturing a patient sample in a cell line and “virus isolation” are the same step. Iiiiiinteresting.
And what are Vero CCL-81 cells?
Google search. First link: a company called ATCC lists Vero CCL-81 as animal cells.
Organism: Cercopithecus aethiops. Morphology: epithelial. Tissue: kidney. Derivation: The Vero cell line was initiated from the kidney of a normal adult African green monkey on March 27, 1962… Passage
history: The cell line was brought to the Laboratory of Tropical
Virology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases,
National Institutes of Health in the 93rd passage from Chiba University
by B. Simizu on June 15, 1964.
And, under Required Products:
“These
products are vital for the proper use of this item and have been
confirmed as effective in supporting functionality. If you use
alternative products, the quality and effectiveness of the item may be
affected. Eagle’s Minimum Essential Medium…; Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS)…”
More fetal bovine serum. Seriously? Fetal bovine serum and kidney
epithelial cells from an African green monkey are necessary to “isolate a
virus”. You can’t make this stuff up.
Back to the supplier, ATCC. Their product sheet states: “This
product is intended for laboratory research use only. It is not intended
for any animal or human therapeutic use, any human or animal
consumption, or any diagnostic use.“
Back to the CDC study:
“We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage. We
cultured Vero E6, Vero CCL-81, HUH 7.0, 293T, A549, and EFKB3 cells in
Dulbecco minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with
heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (5% or 10%) and
antibiotics/antimycotics… We used both NP and OP swab specimens for
virus isolation. For isolation, limiting dilution, and passage 1 of the
virus, we pipetted 50 μL of serum-free DMEM into columns 2–12 of a
96-well tissue culture plate, then pipetted 100 μL of clinical specimens
into column 1 and serially diluted 2-fold across the plate. We then
trypsinized and resuspended Vero cells in DMEM containing 10% fetal
bovine serum, 2× penicillin/streptomycin, 2× antibiotics/antimycotics,
and 2× amphotericin B at a concentration of 2.5 × 105 cells/mL.
We added 100 μL of cell suspension directly to the clinical specimen
dilutions and mixed gently by pipetting. We then grew the inoculated
cultures in a humidified 37°C incubator in an atmosphere of 5% CO2 and
observed for cytopathic effects (CPEs) daily. We used standard plaque
assays for SARS-CoV-2, which were based on SARS-CoV and Middle East
respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) protocols…
When CPEs [Cytopathic effects aka harm to the monkey cells]
were observed, we scraped cell monolayers with the back of a pipette
tip. We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for
confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate
to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.“
Did you see anything in that blurb about isolating a virus? Me
neither. Monkey cells, fetal bovine serum, swab specimens and drugs
mixed together. Harmful effects to poisoned monkey cells irrationally,
unscientifically attributed to “the virus”. Nothing isolated/purified,
not even from the monkey cell mixture.
No virus purified, characterized, sequenced or studied with
controlled experiments. No virus was even looked for in the patient
samples. What the hell?
THIS is what’s passed off as “isolating a virus”?
Hmm, well what about that Globe and Mail article that Peter cited,
the one with the smug photo of Dr. Rob Kozak and Dr. Samira Mubareka of
the University of Toronto, and Dr. Arinjay Banerjee of McMaster
University?
Fortunately I’ve seen that article before, many times, and dealt with that “isolation” claim well over a year ago.
In fact, I even obtained Freedom of Information responses from all 4
of the institutions involved, and the CDC, showing that none of them
have any record of a “virus” having been isolated/purified, from any
patient sample, by anyone on the planet – all of which have been
publicly available on my website for well over a year now.
I’m actually surprised that Peter, who is clearly familiar with the
claim that “the virus” has never been isolated, never came across my
FOIs. Or the ever-growing collection of FOI responses
from institutions (138 of them as I write this) in over 25 countries,
showing that no one on the planet has any record of a “COVID-19 virus”
having been isolated/purified from any patient sample, by anyone,
period.
Despite Peter’s article, and despite the list of further
useless/fraudulent “isolation” studies, and published “virus genomes”
that Peter later emailed to Gabriel (shown at the bottom of this page),
it is 100% clear that the alleged virus has never been isolated/purified
from any patient sample.
And because “it” has never been purified, we also know that “it” has
never been sequenced, characterized or studied with controlled
experiments.
Instead, virologists have always worked with soups of material that they assume contains “the virus”. And wild assumptions have no place in science or logic.
In other words, there is zero proof or compelling evidence that the
alleged disease-spreading virus, allegedly composed of a 30,000 base
pair RNA strand and a spikey protein shell, actually exists.
It is 100% clear that “the COVID-19 virus”, like viruses in general,
is purely theoretical and imaginary, with “genomes” that are fabricated
electronic codes corresponding to nothing in the physical realm.
If Peter actually begins reading the Methods sections
of the “virus isolation and sequencing” studies, instead of relying on
headlines and Abstracts, he will be able to see this for himself. Not
just for the imaginary “COVID-19 virus” (aka “SARS-COV-2”), but
“viruses” in general.
Because virology is not a science.
Whether or not Peter would then admit and report these facts, or
retract his misleading, inaccurate claims, is another matter altogether.
Peter’s list, that he wrongly claimed shows proof of the isolation of “the virus” and that “it” has been fully sequenced multiple times:
Either Peter has, like a lot of people, not read the Methods
used in these “isolation” studies, or he is intentionally playing along
with the unscientific and absurd practice of blaming harm to starved
and poisoned cells on a phantom virus that was never actually shown to
exist.
And, either Peter has not read the Methods used to
conjure up a “virus genome”, or he is playing along with fabricated,
fraudulent “genomes” patched together from zillions of sequences
(allegedly) detected in patient samples and cell cultures.
Yawn. I read Siouxsie’s slanderous, red-herring article long ago.
So you are aware of the FOI collection, interesting.
Well, if you actually read the requests, you should
have noticed that the vast majority of them make no mention of Koch’s
Postulates whatsoever. Because we know that a strict application of
Koch’s would not be possible, even if imaginary viruses existed.
The requests only ask for records of isolation/purification, which,
like it or not, is necessary for proving the existence of a “virus”. No
matter how inconvenient for virologists and all the related indu$trie$.
Aside from being focused almost entirely on this red herring topic of
Koch’s Postulates, Siouxsie’s article relies heavily on ad hominen
attacks and contains zero citations for any studies proving the
existence of “the virus” or any other “virus”.
Not impressed!
ZZZZZZZZ.
For some more insight into what’s really going on:
