HomeUncategorizedSARS-Cov-2 A Novel Coronavirus? Vaccines for Coronavirus – a new thing?

SARS-Cov-2 A Novel Coronavirus? Vaccines for Coronavirus – a new thing?

contributed by Peter Wilberg:

Partial abstract of fully documented interview presentation by Dr. David Martin:


No less than 172 SARS related coronaviruses bearing close relation to the supposed gene sequence for SARS-CoV-2 supposedly identified only in January 2020 have been patented since the year 2000.


The first vaccine specifically targeting the ‘spike’ or S-protein and with full knowledge of binding capacity to the ACE receptor was patented for dogs by Pfizer on January 21, 2000.


This type of ‘vaccine’ was not the miraculous result of ‘warp speed’ research in response to a pandemic.


April 19 2002 – Fauci and the NAID (National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases) patented a deadly coronavirus virus targeting lung cells, supposedly to serve as a vector for HIV vaccine. This artificially created coronavirus became ‘SARS’.


In 2003 the US military had already begun research into potential uses of coronaviridae as a bioweapon.


Before the first alleged ‘outbreak’ of SARS, in which Fauci took a great ‘interest’ the CDC had already applied for a patent for the entire genome, as well as PCR tests for the virus.


The patent application was rejected – before it was overridden by bribery – and a paid promise to keep the application secret until it was finally published in the public domain.


Nevertheless, on the 21st April 2003, just 3 days after the patent was publicly available, a pharmaceutical company filed a patent for the treatment of a new form of coronavirus whose modelled genomic sequence had only just been made public – clearly implying criminal use of ‘insider knowledge’. This company’s research (into the creation of lipid nanoparticle capsules for viral material) was later made use of by Pfizer and other companies.

Summary:
As Dr. Martin stresses – we are not being asked to be injected with a ‘vaccine’ for a ‘novel’ virus that came from bats and was developed on the basis of reports of an unusual outbreak of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China on December 31 2019. Instead we are being asked to be injected with of an artificially synthesised portion of a computerised coronavirus gene sequence and its ‘variants’ that has been in the public domain for DECADES – and was declared a weapon of choice by DARPA (the US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency) in 2005. And as Moderna blatantly declared – if we get the media on our side and the virus is released, ‘the economics will follow’ – and so will the financial investors.


Pandemics are made for and make for big business and Big Money. As Bill Gates answered honestly and directly when asked why he had been pouring so many billions money into vaccine development and paying journalists and government advisors, including even the BBC (British Bullshit Corporation) to promote them: “I will make trillions.”

discussion:

adam:

this new evidence doesn’t mean what people call “covid”—the actual symptoms that started the panic—and the commercial and state interests that mobilized to exploit it, blame it on the patented genetic material, and tie it to a patented test and vaccine technology, have anything to do with each other on the biological level.

Peter:

Did the initial outbreak of pneumonia symptoms in Wuhan need to have any biological connection with the patents for them to be quickly blamed on SARS-CoV-2? Since a CPC member was in on the elite agenda what’s the problem with seeing the outbreak as a timed or opportunistic false flag designed to launch the idea of a pandemic that there was enough knowledge to blame on SARS-CoV-2 and then bring in all the ready to go testing and vaccine technology? In other words Covid was only a MEDIA ‘manufactured’ illness, but one that had real manufactured viruses or viromes to blame on through spreading pandemic panic. So no biological connection needed. That simple. Am I missing something here?

Adam:

These questions about intent and conspiracy are what motivated the in-the-works-essay of mine you recently read, which explores what determines why knowledge gets constructed one way rather than other. We may never know the exact level of intent and centralization of what gets oversimplified in most conspiracy theories, but what is most important in my mind is understanding how the momentum of power and institutional structure determines knowledge creation.

AIDS, for instance, was a byproduct of the explosion of both the legal and illegal drug markets. So much money was being made and power being funded by making Americans drug addicts. One class of drugs that was turning out to be a bad investment was all the drug research into fighting viral cancers. When they couldn’t successfully blame most cancers on viruses, all that was needed was a new symptom cluster that the media could turn into hysteria, as they do all on their own, no conspiracy required.

I have studied AIDS way more than COVID, so I can say with much more confidence what the level of intent and awareness was of people like Gallo in jumping on the opportunity to find a route to create a new viral obsession and market for the drug companies. But it isn’t hard to extrapolate from AIDS, POLIO, etc to COVID, or any other situation where the media jumps on a change in disease patterns. People don’t give a shit about people dying from stable patterns, but a new pattern, especially one that affects more affluent people like it did for POLIO, or specific politically charged groups like it did for AIDS, then we and the media are going to make a big deal and a big opportunity for those ready to push their drug paradigm.

As Nancy Turner Banks argues in AIDS OPIUM DIAMONDS AND EMPIRE, drugs have been a major driving force of history, from the opium wars to vietnam and globalization under the drug-funded CIA. COVID is just the latest important chapter. Which is why when it hit I knew exactly what was happening on the general level even if the details have been slow to emerge. Like the antiviral chemo drugs that were waiting for the next disease hype, and end up getting applied to the very symptoms that they cause (nitrosative stress causes AIDS and is a byproduct of AIDS drugs), so we have COVID vaccines and masks that can trigger or contribute to the very conditions of hypoxia and influenza that started the panic. But in the COVID case, I think John Rappoport is correct to point out that it has never been ONE thing.Hypoxia and an uptick in certain flu symptoms (like loss of taste) are not necessarily the same disease, whatever it means to be “the same disease”.

But what matters is a change in disease patterns and an uptick in certain symptom clusters around certain urban centers that Zach Bush predicted would happen exactly where it did, in Wuhan anyway, without any interest in the lab there, or any gain of function research. I think interested parties were probably waiting around for the next hype of respiratory illnesses, which are pretty much happening every few years. But maybe there was some specific focused intent on Wuhan, given how perfect Wuhan was for starting this whole thing, (air pollution, new increase in electrical pollution, lab right there to blame things on if people start to wonder).

Comments

comments