As per usual, Reuters did not fact-check what they claimed. Almost all their smear jobs are based on this type of text-book straw-man.
But you will learn more than the headline promises here.

‘I CALLED PHARMAFIA AND THEY SAID NO’ – EVERY MEDICAL FACT-CHECK EVER

The claim in the original article, the claims in the fact-check and the verdict are three separate things. Reuters manages to straw-man its own straw-man.

Here’s the article Reuters claims to fact-check:

THE 1918 “SPANISH FLU”: ONLY THE VACCINATED DIED

Original link – By Sal Martingano  May 29, 2020

By Dr. Sal Martingano, FICPA

THIS BLOG IS NOT AN ANTI-VACCINE COMMENTARY. I WISH TO ENCOURAGE READERS TO CAREFULLY READ THE DOCUMENTATION, DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE, AND NOT BLINDLY ACCEPT WHAT WE ARE BEING TOLD.
WOULD YOU BE SURPRISED OR CONCERNED TO LEARN THAT THE 1918 “SPANISH FLU” HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH SPAIN AND MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN A FLU AT ALL? WELL, HANG ON TIGHT, YOU ARE IN FOR A ROUGH RIDE!

WHAT HISTORY TELLS US ABOUT THE 1918 “SPANISH FLU”

History tells us that the 1918 Spanish Flu killed between 50 – 100 million people. At the time, medical and pharmaceutical sources described it as THE MOST horrific disease process since the Black Plague of 1347, which killed an estimated 25-30 million people.

  • Reuters does not dispute this

VACCINATION: “THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM”

In the book, Vaccination Condemned, by Eleanor McBean, PhD, N.D., the author describes, in detail, personal and family experiences during the 1918 “Spanish Flu” pandemic. 

McBean’s coverage of the 1918 “Spanish Flu”, as a reporter and an unvaccinated survivor, requires that the historical basis of the event needs to be revisited, not as a “conspiracy theory” but with evidence that will “set your hair on fire”.  

A few years ago, I came across another book by Eleanor McBean: “Vaccination…The Silent Killer”. McBean provides evidence that not only were the historical events of the 1918 “Spanish Flu” compromised, but also those of the Polio and Swine Flu epidemics.

  • Reuters does not dispute this
  • LET’S TALK “SPANISH FLU” FACTS:

    THE SPANISH SCAPEGOAT

    Spain was neutral during WW1 and did NOT censor its press, unlike the combatting countries. As a result, Spain was the first to report the 1918 Flu epidemic and the world “scapegoated” Spain as the source. Thus, the “Spanish Flu” is born.

    THE FIRST CASE: MILITARY VACCINATION EXPERIMENTS IN FORT RILEY, KANSAS

    In preparation for WW1, a massive military vaccination experiment involving numerous prior developed vaccines took place in Fort Riley, Kansas- where the first “Spanish Flu” case was reported.

  • Reuters CONFIRMS this
  • WW1 DRAFT = HUMAN TEST SUBJECTS

    The fledgling pharmaceutical industry, sponsored by the ‘Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research’, had something they never had before – a large supply of human test subjects. Supplied by the U.S. military’s first draft, the test pool of subjects ballooned to over 6 million men.
    CLICK HERE for more details.

  • Reuters does not dispute this
  • BACTERIAL MENINGITIS VACCINE: THE KILLING FIELD

    Autopsies after the war proved that the 1918 flu was NOT a “FLU” at all. It was caused by random dosages of an experimental ‘bacterial meningitis vaccine’, which to this day, mimics flu-like symptoms. 

    • Reuters simply calls this main claim ‘baseless’ without providing any base for their call, then move on to flog more straw-men of their own:

    So, basically, we have a Pharmafia-licensed doctor’s word vs. a Reuter presstitute’s word, and I bet my ass the Reuter NPC has no medical studies.
    Anyway, to settle the truth here, you have to do your own research, which I did below.

    However, to settle that Reuters faked its fact-check is already adequate at this point.

    The original article follows as below:

    The massive, multiple assaults with additional vaccines on the unprepared immune systems of soldiers and civilians created a “killing field”.  Those that were not vaccinated were not affected.  – Links to the article in the pic below:

    • Reuters claims there is a disagreement between their findings and the article’s, but they both claim the same thing: it was a flu AND a bacteria that ended the lives of those who got a flu in 1918
    Undisputed

    SO… HOW DID CIVILIANS DIE?

    1. WW1 ended sooner than expected, leaving HUGE quantities of unused experimental vaccines.
    2. Fearing that soldiers coming home would spread diseases to their families, The U.S. government pushed the largest vaccine ‘fear’ campaign in history. They used the human population as a research and development lab to field test experimental vaccines.
    3. Tens of millions of civilians died in the same manner as did the soldiers.  
    4. Instead of stopping the vaccines, doctors intensified them, calling it the great “Spanish Flu of 1918”. As a result, ONLY THE VACCINATED DIED.

    “Seven men dropped dead in a doctor’s office after being vaccinated. Letters were sent to their families that they had been killed in action.”

    Eleanor McBean
    Minnesota Wellness Directory
    http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/vaccines/vaccinations_condemned_McBean.htm

    WW1 U.S. soldiers were given 14 – 25 untested, experimental vaccines within days of each other, which triggered intensified cases of ALL the diseases at once.  The doctors called it a new disease and proceeded to suppress the symptoms with additional drugs or vaccines.   

  • Reuters does not dispute this
  • DECEPTION AND SECRECY HAVE A LONG HISTORY

    In the examples given in my previous blog COVID 19: Another Chapter in the History of Deception and Secrecy”, history is replete with intentional lies told to the public to either “save face” or to deceive for nefarious purposes. The 1918 “Spanish Flu” was no exception.

  • Reuters does not dispute this
  • So what did the autopsies really reveal?

    This is the only actual dispute Reuters made to the article, and neither sides backed their claims.

    So I pulled out the crayons again:

    SOURCE

    Predominant Role of Bacterial Pneumonia as a Cause of Death in Pandemic Influenza: Implications for Pandemic Influenza Preparedness

    Abstract

    Background

    Despite the availability of published data on 4 pandemics that have occurred over the past 120 years, there is little modern information on the causes of death associated with influenza pandemics.

    Methods

    We examined relevant information from the most recent influenza pandemic that occurred during the era prior to the use of antibiotics, the 1918–1919 “Spanish flu” pandemic. We examined lung tissue sections obtained during 58 autopsies and reviewed pathologic and bacteriologic data from 109 published autopsy series that described 8398 individual autopsy investigations.

    Results

    The postmortem samples we examined from people who died of influenza during 1918–1919 uniformly exhibited severe changes indicative of bacterial pneumonia. Bacteriologic and histopathologic results from published autopsy series clearly and consistently implicated secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory–tract bacteria in most influenza fatalities.

    Conclusions

    The majority of deaths in the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic likely resulted directly from secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory–tract bacteria. Less substantial data from the subsequent 1957 and 1968 pandemics are consistent with these findings. If severe pandemic influenza is largely a problem of viral-bacterial copathogenesis, pandemic planning needs to go beyond addressing the viral cause alone (e.g., influenza vaccines and antiviral drugs). Prevention, diagnosis, prophylaxis, and treatment of secondary bacterial pneumonia, as well as stockpiling of antibiotics and bacterial vaccines, should also be high priorities for pandemic planning.

    SOURCE

    Autopsy series of 68 cases dying before and during the 1918 influenza pandemic peak

    Zong-Mei Sheng 1Daniel S ChertowXavier AmbroggioSherman McCallRonald M PrzygodzkiRobert E CunninghamOlga A MaximovaJohn C KashDavid M MorensJeffery K Taubenberger

    Abstract

    The 1918 to 1919 “Spanish” influenza pandemic virus killed up to 50 million people. We report here clinical, pathological, bacteriological, and virological findings in 68 fatal American influenza/pneumonia military patients dying between May and October of 1918, a period that includes ~4 mo before the 1918 pandemic was recognized, and 2 mo (September-October 1918) during which it appeared and peaked.

    The lung tissues of 37 of these cases [a little over half – S.m] were positive for influenza viral antigens or viral RNA, including four from the prepandemic period (May-August). The prepandemic and pandemic peak cases were indistinguishable clinically and pathologically.

    All 68 cases had histological evidence of bacterial pneumonia, and 94% showed abundant bacteria on Gram stain.

    Sequence analysis of the viral hemagglutinin receptor-binding domain performed on RNA from 13 cases suggested a trend from a more “avian-like” viral receptor specificity with G222 in prepandemic cases to a more “human-like” specificity associated with D222 in pandemic peak cases. Viral antigen distribution in the respiratory tree, however, was not apparently different between prepandemic and pandemic peak cases, or between infections with viruses bearing different receptor-binding polymorphisms. The 1918 pandemic virus was circulating for at least 4 mo in the United States before it was recognized epidemiologically in September 1918.

    The causes of the unusually high mortality in the 1918 pandemic were not explained by the pathological and virological parameters examined.

    These findings have important implications for understanding the origins and evolution of pandemic influenza viruses.

    SOURCE

    YEAH, BUT WAS IT PNEUMONIA OR…

    …MENINGITIS COMING VIA VACCINES FROM SOME…

    SOURCE

    Dr Frederick Lamont Gates

    (No family connection to the Bill Gates clan)

    Frederick Lamont Gates, born in Minneapolis, Hennepin County, MN, December 17, 1886, married, September 11, 1917 in Duluth, St. Louis County, MN, Dorothy Olcott, born June 20, 1891, daughter of William James and Fannie (Bailey) Olcott.

    His father said he was “born for study and inquiry and disclosed this at an early age”. Ill health disqualified him from athletic activities and his life was centered wholly on activities of the mind. He was accepted at Harvard, Yale and the University of Chicago and, after a year and a half at Chicago, he chose to continue his studies at Yale. He stood at the head of his class, received the Phi Beta Kappa key, and graduated Summa Cum Laude in 1909. The same year, he entered John Hopkins Medical School, and graduated with highest honors four years later. He was recommended for research work at the Rockefeller Institute and took a position on its staff.

    On the declaration of war in 1917, Mr. Gates volunteered for the U.S. Army Medical Corps, was accepted and commissioned a first lieutenant. He was assigned to duty on the Rockefeller Institute staff where he gave lectures to military groups selected to attend training there. He was also assigned to visit training camps, in the interest of preventive medicine, and traveled widely. He continued at the institute after the war and his researches, especially those on influenza, received worldwide recognition. His health failed in 1927 and he was required to undertake a less demanding schedule. He continued his research at Harvard and moved his family to Cambridge, MA where he died, June 17, 1933, at age forty-six, after suffering a concussion from a fall.
    SOURCE

    Frederick Lamont Gates was the son of Frederick Taylor Gates (1853-1923) was the principal business and philanthropic advisor to the major oil industrialist John D. Rockefeller, Sr., from 1891 to 1923.

    In 1901, Frederick T. Gates designed the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research (now Rockefeller University), of which he was board president. 

    Yale Obituary Record
    Frederick Lamont Gates, B.A. 1909*
    Born December 17, 1886, in Minneapolis, Minn.
    Died June 17,1933, in Boston, Main
    Father, Rev. Frederick Taylor Gates (B. A. University of Rochester
    1877, M.A, 1879; Rochester Theological Seminary 1880$ ULD. University of Chicago 1911); a Baptist minister; business and benevolence manager for John D. Rockefeller; president of Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research; chairman of General Education Board;
    son of Rev. GranviUe Gates and Sarah Jane (Bowers) Gates, of
    Maine, N. Y. Mother, Emma Lucia (Cahoon) Gates; daughter of
    Lyman Hall and Cordelia Lucinda (Teague) Cahoon, of Racine, Wis.
    Montclair (N. J.) High School; attended University of Chicago
    1905-06 as member of Class of 1909. Entered Yale as a Sophomore;
    Andrew D. White prize in history Sophomore year; philosophical
    oration appointment and honors in physical sciences Senior year;
    member University Orchestra, Alpha Delta Phi, Sigma Xi, and Phi
    Beta Kappa.
    M.D. Johns Hopkins 1913 (member Alpha Omega Alpha); connected with Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York
    City, 1913-1929^ as fellow 1913-14, assistant in Department of
    Physiology and Pharmacology 1914-17, associate 1917-1921, and
    associate member 1921-29; had since been research fellow and lecturer in Department of Physiology at Harvard; member China
    Medical Board of Rockefeller Foundation 1916-1929 and of its commission to China 1915; commissioned First Lieutenant, Medical Reserve Corps, April 17, 1917; assigned to Base Hospital, Fort Riley,
    Kans., in December, 1917, and to Camp Taylor, Ky., in November,
    1918; received discharge January 18,1919; contributed to Journal of
    Medical Research, Journal of Experimental Physiology•, and Science;
    member Harvey Society, Optical Society of America, Society of Experimental Physiology, and American Association for the Advancement of Science.
    Married September 11, 1917, in Duluth, Minn., Dorothy Olcott
    (B.A. Smith 1913; M.A. Columbia 1917), daughter of William James
    Olcott (Ph.B. University of Michigan 1883, M.S. 1884, honorary
    M.A. 1908) and Fanny (Bailey) Olcott. Children: Olcott, Barbara,
    Frederick Taylor, ad, Dorothy, and Deborah.
    Death due to a fractured skull and brain hemorrhage. Cremation
    took place. Survived by wife, five children, three brothers* Franklin
    H. Gates, ’12, Russell C. Gates, ’14, and Percival T. Gates (B.A.
    Yale College 119
    University of Chicago 192a), and three sisters, Alice Gates Pudney,
    wife of William K. Pudney (M.D. Columbia 1917), of Montclair,
    N. J., Lucia Gates Hooper, wife of Leverett F, Hooper (B.A. Harvard
    1915), of New York City, and Grace Gates Mitchell, wife of Morns
    R. Mitchell (B.A. University of Delaware 1919), of Montclair. – SOURCE (PDF) – P.118-119

    Historian, Antony C. Sutton writes:

    ”American Medical Association

    Your doctor knows nothing about nutrition? Ask him confidentially and he’ll probably confess he had only one course in nutrition. And there’s a reason.

    Back in the late 19th century American medicine was in a deplorable state. To the credit of the Rockefeller General Education Board and the Institute for Medical Research, funds were made available to staff teaching hospitals and to eradicate some pretty horrible diseases. On the other hand, a chemical-based medicine was introduced and the medical profession cut its ties with naturopathy. Cancer statistics tell you the rest.

    For the moment we want only to note that the impetus for reorganizing medical education in the United States came from John D. Rockefeller, but the funds were channeled through a single member of The Order.”

    “One day in 1912 Frederick T. Gates of Rockefeller Foundation had lunch with Abraham Flexner of Carnegie Institution. Said Gates to Flexner:

    ”What would you do if you had one million dollars with which to make a start in reorganizing medical education in the United States?”

    “Flexner’s reply, however, to the effect that any funds — a million dollars or otherwise — could most profitably be spent in developing the Johns Hopkins Medical School, struck a responsive chord in Gates who was already a close friend and devoted admirer of Dr. William H. Welch, the dean of the institution.”

    Welch was President of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research from 1901, and a Trustee of the Carnegie Institution from 1906.”

    William H. Welch was also a member of the Order and had been brought to Johns Hopkins University by Daniel Coit Gilman.”

    ”There is an Establishment history, an official history, which dominates history textbooks, trade publishing, the media and library shelves. The official line always assumes that events such as wars, revolutions, scandals, assassinations, are more or less random unconnected events. By definition events can NEVER be the result of a conspiracy, they can never result from premeditated planned group action. An excellent example is the Kennedy assassination when, within 9 hours of the Dallas tragedy, TV networks announced the shooting was NOT a conspiracy, regardless of the fact that a negative proposition can never be proven, and that the investigation had barely begun.

    Woe betide any book or author that falls outside the official guidelines. Foundation support is not there. Publishers get cold feet. Distribution is hit and miss, or non-existent.

    Just to ensure the official line dominates, in 1946 the Rockefeller Foundation allotted $139,000 for an official history of World War Two. This to avoid a repeat of debunking history books which embarrassed the Establishment after World War One. The reader will be interested to know that The Order we are about to investigate had great foresight, back in the 1880s, to create both the American Historical Association and the American Economic Association (most economists were then more historians than analysts) under their terms, with their people and their objectives. Andrew Dickson White was a member of The Order and the first President of the American Historical Association.”

    America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones Antony C. Sutton, 1986

    They, themselves admit…

    It is true that in early 1918, before the first cases of Spanish flu were reported at Camp Funston at Fort Riley in Kansas in March 1918 ( here ), a trial of a vaccine made with inactivated strains of the meningococcus bacteria ( here ) was conducted on military volunteers at the same location.
    According to a report published in July 1918 by Frederick L. Gates, First Lieutenant of the Medical Corps, U.S. Army ( here ), the experimental vaccine created in the laboratory of The Rockefeller Institute was given to “about 3,700 volunteers” and the doses “rarely caused more than the mildest local and general reactions”, which included “headache, joint pains, and nausea” and in some cases, diarrhea.

    Reuters

    AND IT WOULDN’T BE TOO HARD TO MIX THEM UP IN 1918 SINCE THEY’RE SO SIMILAR IN SYMPTOMS AND…

    SOURCE

    While virology would not emerge until the 1930s, physicians could identify many of the bacteria causing the deadly pneumonias that were killing their patients, but without antibiotics they could do little to fight the infections. Thus, as the epidemic struck their camps, hospitals, ships, ports, or divisions, many medical officers documented what they saw, as if trying to define that which they could not control. 

    IF YOU’RE STILL NOT CONVINCED, YOU HAVEN’T FULLY READ THE REUTERS PIECE, IT DOES A GREAT JOB AT CONFIRMING EVERYTHING THEY WANT TO DEBUNK:

    “Stephen Kissler, Postdoctoral Fellow of Immunology and Infectious Diseases at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health ( here ) told Reuters via phone that the vaccine used at Camp Funston “was derived from existing meningitis strains” that were potentially inactivated with heat. He saw no reason to conclude a vaccine, which was made with existent, inactivated strains of meningitis bacteria from people who had previously been sick with meningitis, had “caused a major epidemic.”

    As explained here the Office of Medical History of the U.S. Army Medical Department, meningococcal meningitis, which causes inflammation around the surrounding tissues of the brain ( here ), “has always been one of the most serious and important of the various communicable diseases of man” among soldiers. “It becomes more common when young people are together in closed quarters like dormitories or barracks,” so “the military had a good reason to test a vaccine against meningitis,” Burke said.

    It was also not rare to research and test vaccines at this time in history given it was an “early era of microbiology,” Burke added. “The Fort Riley meningococcal vaccine experiment was not an unusual scientific undertaking” and “Many [bacterial] vaccine trials were going on all over the U.S. around 1918.”

    The article “The State of Science, Microbiology, and Vaccines Circa 1918” by John M. Eyler provides more context ( here ). For example, during the 1918 flu pandemic itself, experimental bacterial vaccines for influenza were used in army camps as well as on workers, including 275,000 employees of the U.S. Steel Company ( here , here , here ). The cause of the pandemic was unknown at the time, explaining why bacterial vaccines were being tested in the hopes they might work on this new deadly disease.” – REUTERS

    Fact. Checked. Mic. Dropped.

    Also read:

    REUTERS PUBLISHED A SMEAR PIECE ON US, WATCH OUR AUTOPSY ON IT, PHRASE BY PHRASE

    BONUS

    https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/67902

    LATER ON, ASPIRIN MAKERS RAN THE LABS IN AUSCHWITZ, UNDER MENGELE’S PROTECTION
    LMAO

    And this, my friends, was the kick-off for today’s Military BioTech Complex that I’ve just biographed.
    This was just an earlier Great Reset, like they regularly do.
    You have the military, the Rockefellers, the experiments, all the motives and the weapons, they assemble themselves like the Transformers. Only malfeasance or a severe cognitive-dissonance seizure could blame this on coincidence rather than conspiracy. Because if it’s not intentional, it’s coincidental, and you should know by know this is not a place for coincidence theories.

    To be continued?
    Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
    We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
    Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

    ! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

    ORDER

    Life and existence are two separate things and the Vatican is doing a bait and switch on behalf of Klaus Schwab.
    Humanism and Transhumanism are mutually exclusive, to advance in one is to leave the other, and if you don’t make your own wise choices, The Borg will, on your behalf.

    And this just one of many examples of Transhumanist programs and activities going on under Vatican’s roof. Here are a few more samples:

    Fallen Covid hero Francis Collins and two gay ninjas, I guess
    From VATICAN HD channel

    Do members of the Catholic faith plan to denounce this abomination before it completely implodes their thingy? Yesterday is the time.

    Vatican Official Denies Church Going Bankrupt

    By David Israel / jEWISH PRESS – October 23, 2019

    Photo Credit: Courtesy Amazon

    Gianluigi Nuzzi’s ‘Universal Judgment’

    A Vatican official, Bishop Nunzio Galantino, on Tuesday denied reports that the Catholic Church is at risk of a financial default as a result of plummeting contributions.

    In an interview with the Italian bishops’ conference’s newspaper Avvenire, Bishop Galantino, who is in charge of the Vatican’s investments, said “there is no threat of collapse or default here.”

    Italian investigative journalist Gianluigi Nuzzi on October 21 published an investigative book titled “Giudizio Universale (Universal Judgment),” in which he reports that decades of mismanagement, shady deals and radically decreasing donations will result in the Vatican going bankrupt by 2023.

    The book states that following the global rash of sexual abuse lawsuits, donations to the Vatican have dropped to $56.9 million in 2018, compared with $112.7 million in 2006.

    The Vatican channels the contributions from Catholics into the Peter’s Pence collection, to be used by the pope for charity and emergency assistance; and a fund supporting the work of the Vatican. Nuzzi’s book reports that an estimated 58% of the donations to the Peter’s Pence collection were used “not for works of charity, but to fill in the (financial) gaps of the (Roman) Curia,” following the Church’s heavy losses in numerous court cases.

    Recently, a new scandal has emerged, suggesting the Vatican has been speculating on a large-scale with funds from the Peter’s Pence collection – which will likely result in an even greater decline in contributions.

    But Bishop Galantino insists the Vatican is doing fine, and that “there is only the need for a spending review, which is what we’re doing.”

    SO DID THE WEF BAIL OUT THE VATICAN?

    “The transHuman Code Meeting of The Minds” originated in Davos, Switzerland in 2015 where global leaders assembled to discuss the impending impact of the 4thIndustrial Revolution. 

    Yahoo! Finance

    This is a book that delivers a long-term view on how to manage the convergence of humanity and technology. Only David and Carlos have the foresight and network to bring together a stellar group of experts on the socio-political impact of techno-economical transformations happening on a daily basis all over the world. This is indeed a great platform to engage us all in a conversation that is so critical to our future!

    Danil Kerimi – Head of the Technology Industries for the World Economic Forum where he facilitates the critical global dialogue between government, business and academic leaders on the future of technology


    PRESS RELEASE PR Newswire
     Jan. 23, 2018, 11:30 AM

    NEW YORK and LONDON, Jan. 23, 2018 /PRNewswire/ — The TransHuman Code is the first interactive “knowledge platform” for managing the convergence of humanity and technology, its impact on our daily lives, and the long-term implications. This dynamic initiative will be introduced on January 24 at Davos, Switzerland during the world’s foremost assembly of international leaders. 

    “The TransHuman Code Davos Gathering of Minds,” hosted by CBS Inside Edition Host, Megan Alexander, will bring together global leaders in technology, business, finance, government, academia and the media for an exclusive event.  The event will feature an interactive discussion amongst the assembled leading experts including:

    Alex Pentland | Director, MIT Connection Services and Human Dynamics Lab

    Evgeni Borisov | Founder and CEO, Vimana Global

    Salim Ismail | Author,Exponential Organizations and Founding CEO, Singularity University

    Greg Cross | Chief Business Officer, Soul Machines

    Rachel | The World’s First Digital Person

    Shantenu Agarwal | Director, IBM Watson

    Rodrigo Arboleda | Chairman, Fast Track Institute

    Wang Wei | Founder, China M&A Group

    VATICAN HOSTS CONFERENCE TOUCHING ON TRANSHUMANISM

       by William Mahoney, Ph.D.  •  ChurchMilitant.com  •  July 29, 2019

    Humanity 2.0 and the Vatican discuss the transHuman Code

    VATICAN CITY (ChurchMilitant.com) – With the support of the Pontifical Lateran University (PLU), globalists met in Vatican City on Monday to discuss the best path forward with humanity and technology in harmony.

    The meeting has been described as an “exclusive gathering of technology, corporate, finance, government, academic, ecclesiastic and media leaders … to catalyze awareness and establish the best path forward with humanity and technology in harmony.”

    Sponsored by OISTE Foundation, Humanity 2.0 held the meeting titled “Technology and Human Flourishing” with the support of the PLU at the Collegio Teutonico, which is adjacent to St. Peter’s Square.Humanity 2.0 developed in collaboration with the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development (DPIHD).GabTweet

    Humanity 2.0 developed in collaboration with the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development (DPIHD) as “an agent of the common good and a believer in the need for a shared horizon to unite humankind,” according to the organization’s website.https://www.youtube.com/embed/YBwcC2GnY7s


    Pope Francis created the DPIHD in August 2016 with the mission to promote “the integral development of the person in light of the Gospel and in line with the Social Doctrine of the Church.”

    The DPIHD operates “by means of a network of interactions that involve local Churches, Episcopal Conferences, the other organs of the Roman Curia, the international organizations (both Catholic and non-Catholic), the relations with governments and supranational organizations,” according to the mission statement.

    Humanity 2.0’s vision is defined by five beliefs, including a belief that we are one species with a collective responsibility for shaping our future and that challenges to humanity must be met by coordinated action.

    Image

    The organization attempts to achieve its ends in three ways, the third way being to bring aboard “religious organizations who are aligned in tackling the respective impediment and investing in the solution.”

    The meeting at the Collegio Teutonico on Monday centered around talks by Carlos Moreira and David Fergusson and their co-authored book, The transHuman Code: How to Program Your Future, as well as Fr. Philip Larrey and his book, Artificial Humanity: An Essay on the Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

    Moreira is an active leader and member of several institutions and organizations focused on the advancement of technological innovation and preservation of human identity.

    Fergusson is a corporate finance leader specializing in global mergers and acquisitions.

    Father Philip Larrey is a Catholic priest who holds the chair of Logic and Epistemology at the Pontifical Lateran University in the Vatican and the chairman of Humanity 2.0.Fergusson is a corporate finance leader specializing in global mergers and acquisitions.

    According to the transHuman Code‘s synopsis:

    Image
    Fr. Philip Larrey

    What the authors propose is that if we start the design of the transHuman future from a human perspective, making sure that technology will inspire revolution or evolution, then we can ensure humanity continues to thrive. The transHuman Code tries to center humanity in the emerging tension between a human-controlled or a machine-controlled world. Moreira and Fergusson examine how humans can maintain the uniqueness and the humanity of this brave new world.

    Larrey’s book, Artificial Humanity, offers a philosophical discussion on artificial intelligence.

    OISTE, the sponsor of Humanity 2.0’s recent gathering in Vatican City, has a consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the UN and is an accredited member of the non-commercial Users Stakeholders Group of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. •  ChurchMilitant.com

    “In The transHuman Code, authors Carlos Moreira and David Fergusson ask, “Are we building a better future for humanity with the help of magnificent technology or are we instead building a better future of better technology at the expense of humanity?” We must learn to put humanity first instead of getting caught up in the promise of technological advancement. Humans have been able to adapt, morph, and compromise in every situation we have faced over the centuries and have been able to maintain dominance. We must approach the promises of technology with the same adaptability.

    What the authors propose is that if we start the design of the transHuman future from a human perspective, making sure that technology will inspire revolution or evolution, then we can ensure humanity continues to thrive. The transHuman Code tries to center humanity in the emerging tension between a human-controlled or a machine-controlled world. Moreira and Fergusson examine how humans can maintain the uniqueness and the humanity in this brave new world.” – https://www.transhumancode.com/

    Transhuman Code authors discuss digital ID’s and a centralized AI-controlled society. In 2018

    About WISeKey

    WISeKey (SIX Swiss Exchange: WIHN) is a leading global cybersecurity company currently deploying large scale digital identity ecosystems for people and objects using Blockchain, AI and IoT respecting the Human as the Fulcrum of the Internet. WISeKey Microprocessors Secures the pervasive computing shaping today’s Internet of Everything. WISeKey IoT has an install base of over 1.5 billion microchips in virtually all IoT sectors (connected cars, smart cities, drones, agricultural sensors, anti-counterfeiting, smart lighting, servers, computers, mobile phones, crypto tokens etc.).  WISeKey is uniquely positioned to be at the edge of IoT as our semiconductors produce a huge amount of Big Data that, when analyzed with Artificial Intelligence (AI), can help industrial applications to predict the failure of their equipment before it happens.

    Our technology is Trusted by the OISTE/WISeKey’s Swiss based cryptographic Root of Trust (“RoT”) provides secure authentication and identification, in both physical and virtual environments, for the Internet of Things, Blockchain and Artificial Intelligence. The WISeKey RoT serves as a common trust anchor to ensure the integrity of online transactions among objects and between objects and people. – GLOBENEWSWIRE.com

    LOOKS FAMILIAR?

    WISeKey, OISTE.ORG and the Trust Protocol Association to Help Health Organizations Deploy a Covid-19 Trusted Health Passport on the Blockchain

    Press release posted May 21st, 2020 for WISeKey and archived here

    WISeKey, OISTE.ORG and the Trust Protocol Association to Help Health Organizations Deploy a Covid-19 Trusted Health Passport on the Blockchain

    The project is under the supervision of a new association, the Trust Protocol Association, established last January as an independent, not-for-profit membership organization, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland

    Geneva, Switzerland – May 22, 2020 – The purpose of the Trust Protocol Association is to establish a new Trust Protocol for the Internet combining traditional Cryptographic Trust Models with distributed blockchain ledgers creating a new Global Trust platform.

    The mission of the Association is to create an ecosystem of governmental, technology and business partners, each representing a node with the possibility to have multiple nodes per country.

    Blockchain-based solutions aim to override the need for a central authority by distributing information previously held in a centralized repository across a network of participating nodes. While Blockchain is not owned by one individual or organization, anyone with an internet connection (and access, in the case of private Blockchains) can make use of it, help maintain and verify it. When a transaction is made on a Blockchain, it is added to a group of transactions, known as ‘blocks”. Each block of transactions is added to the database in a chronological, immutable chain. Each block is stamped with a unique cryptographic code, which ensures that records are not counterfeited or changed. The Blockchain approach lacks legal validity in most jurisdictions, which only recognize the digital signatures as equally valid that manuscript signatures when generated using traditional PKI technology.

    The Trust Protocol Association is working with a number of members in USA, Asia MEA and Europe to deploy a fully compliant Trusted Health Passport using the WIShelter Version 2, a new application in the WISeID App ecosystem, designed to remediate risks during the global COVID-19 lockdown period. Using their digital identity secured by WISeKey, users will be able to geo-localize other certified users and stablish secure communications. If needed, the app allows users to prove to local authorities that they are respecting the stay at home recommendations. To ensure the data privacy, each user’s Personal Identifiable Information is kept encrypted and never disclosed without their consent.
    WIShelter app is based on WISeID, WISekey’s Digital Identity platform and combines in a unified solution a suite of web services and mobile applications:

    1. The WISeID Account:   a digital identity with a unique credential that can be used to access all of WISeKey’s services and other affiliated services
    2. A Digital Certificate :  offers strong authentication and digital signatures which can be also used to protect users’ email and communication during Teleworking
    3. A Personal Encrypted Vault : provides secure storage of confidential information, including the medical details

    The new features of the WIShelter Version 2 include a full health digital certificate that is imported into the App by connecting it to the medical record of the patient issued by a bona fide qualified health certification program on which Doctors and Medical Facilities can join.
    The App’s secure QR Code provides access to the user’s WISeID Health Card. The QR Code is displayed in three colors:
    – Green: the person is healthy
    – Yellow: the person’s health is compromised
    – Red: the person has a health problem

    The WISeID Health Card includes important medical details like blood type, allergies, and other medical conditions, and can be enriched with digital health certificates, as it’s the case of the result of an official COVID-19 test.
    This simple method to display the Health Card could allow law enforcement and other public services to apply controls during the de-escalation phase of the pandemic.
    All health details are encrypted and linked to the user’s identity, represented by a Digital Certificate. Encrypting this data is important to protect user’s confidential information and ensuring that the user is staying up-to-date with its health credentials, and is in compliance with all privacy requirements, like the European General Data Protection Regulation (Directive 95/46/EC), known as GDPR, the primary law regulating how companies protect EU citizens’ personal data.
    WISeKey is a fully Qualified Trust Service Provider (TSP) under eIDAS, the updated EU regulations dealing with trusted eID and electronic transactions and Webtrust.ORG.

    WISekey is currently working with several governments and health organizations to add functionalities to the WIShelter app such as the ability for users to upload and digitally certify the results of their COVID-19 test. These functionalities will allow local governments to enable healthy/immured persons to safely return to their jobs thus reduce the economic impact of the epidemic while protecting the high-risk population by controlling the spread of this infectious disease. 
    For almost two decades, WISeKey has contributed to the design and implementation of global standards for the internet’s long-missing identity layer: decentralized, point-to-point exchange of information about people, organizations, or things – enabled by blockchain and certified by cryptographic Root of Trust. WISeKey’s technology, products and services can be used by individuals and organizations.

    To that effect, WISekey has launched an enhanced version of WISeID, adding easy to use strong authentication and email security capabilities that can remediate threats like phishing, ransomware or identity theft. Strong Authentication is a mechanism able to enhance security by complementing the traditional username/password access to online services with additional security factors, like biometry, hardware tokens and one-time-passwords. Additionally, secure eMail techniques allow confidential messages to be exchanged encrypted, and to affix a “digital signature” to the outgoing email, ensuring the recipient that the message comes from a genuine person and that has not been manipulated in the way.

    About WISeKey

    WISeKey (NASDAQ: WKEY; SIX Swiss Exchange: WIHN) is a leading global cybersecurity company currently deploying large scale digital identity ecosystems for people and objects using Blockchain, AI and IoT respecting the Human as the Fulcrum of the Internet. WISeKey microprocessors secure the pervasive computing shaping today’s Internet of Everything. WISeKey IoT has an install base of over 1.5 billion microchips in virtually all IoT sectors (connected cars, smart cities, drones, agricultural sensors, anti-counterfeiting, smart lighting, servers, computers, mobile phones, crypto tokens etc.).  WISeKey is uniquely positioned to be at the edge of IoT as our semiconductors produce a huge amount of Big Data that, when analyzed with Artificial Intelligence (AI), can help industrial applications to predict the failure of their equipment before it happens.
    Our technology is Trusted by the OISTE/WISeKey’s Swiss based cryptographic Root of Trust (“RoT”) provides secure authentication and identification, in both physical and virtual environments, for the Internet of Things, Blockchain and Artificial Intelligence. The WISeKey RoT serves as a common trust anchor to ensure the integrity of online transactions among objects and between objects and people. For more information, visit  www.wisekey.com .

    About the Trust protocol Association
    The purpose of the Trust Protocol Association (the Association) is to establish a new Trust Protocol for the Internet by combining traditional Cryptographic Trust Models with permissioned Blockchain transactions through strong authentication provided by the OISTE WISeKey Root of Trust, and create a new Global Trust platform and an ecosystem of governmental, technology and business partners, each representing a certification node with the possibility of having multiple certifications nodes per country. The Association promotes the use of Blockchain technologies internationally, facilitate the rapid adaptation and on-boarding of Blockchain-based solutions, foster stronger collaboration between the public, private and academic sectors.

    https://trustprotocolassociation.org/

    About OISTE FOUNDATION

    Founded in Switzerland in 1998, OISTE was created with the objectives of promoting the use and adoption of international standards to secure electronic transactions, expand the use of digital certification and ensure the interoperability of certification authorities’ e-transaction systems.
    The OISTE Foundation is a not for profit organization based in Geneva, Switzerland, regulated by article 80 et seq. of the Swiss Civil Code. OISTE is an organization in special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations (ECOSOC) and belongs to the Not-for-Profit constituency (NPOC) of the ICANN.  http://www.oiste.org/ .

    Mission: transfer the control and management of technologies dealing with digital identities to neutral authorities working for the public interest.

    Vision: an Internet where users engage in online transactions and communications under systems of digital identity management that offer robust protection against fraud and theft, while protecting the fundamental right to privacy.

    THE INTERNET OF BODIES AKA THE BORG IS HERE, KLAUS SCHWAB SAYS (BIOHACKING P.5)

    You see, symbiosis is a concept that refers to the cooperation for survival between two living organisms, man-machine symbiosis is an oxymoron.

    Dead matter cannot function like living matter and substitute it. Schwab’s AIs and implants, al the goddamn Borg, is nothing but a pirate’s wooden leg connecting to Internet.

    The ‘thingification’ of people is but gradual extinction.

    It’s called TRANShumanism, because it departs from Humanism and life, it drops a few nukes on its, way out and outside the departure location only death awaits. Prolonged existence too, maybe, but the further into Transhumanism you go, the closer to a dead object / device status you get.

    LATER UPDATE:

    TRANSHUMANISM: RICH DEGENERATES WHO HAVEN’T GROWN OVER THEIR FEAR OF DEATH

    WE WRITE NEW DNA USING RNA ONLY – STAR SCIENTIST FINANCED BY EPSTEIN, DARPA AND SCHWAB’S WYSS INST.

    JEFFREY EPSTEIN AND THE DECADENCE OF SCIENCE

    To be continued?
    Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
    We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
    Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

    ! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

    In an increasingly baby-minded world, I had to pull out the crayons again.
    I feel embarrassed for the human race that I have to explain this and so many people need to see it.

    These guys are funded by Bill Gates btw

    Is It ‘Eugenics’ to Abort Unborn Babies with Down Syndrome?

    By Alexandra DeSanctis, staff writer for National Review and a visiting fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

    “On the legal blog Dorf on Lawin an article by Sherry F. Colb, a Cornell University law professor. Colb argues that, because eugenics is defined as “a movement . . . aimed at improving the genetic composition of the human race,” it is inapt to call selective abortions “eugenic,” because a woman who chooses abortion after a Down-syndrome diagnosis “understands that she is thereby doing virtually nothing to alter the human genome.”

    But Colb ignores another meaning of the adjective “eugenic”: “relating to or fitted for the production of good offspring.” Though the term “eugenics” undoubtedly evokes a program of controlled, selective breeding to reshape a population, it is entirely accurate to describe as “eugenic” an individual choice to eliminate a child deemed “unfit,” even in just one instance.

    Colb concludes with this argument:

    What if everyone pregnant with a DS fetus terminates? What then? Do we want to live in a world in which DS people are extinct? No. There is no question but that people with DS, like people with all sorts of other challenges, enrich our world and teach us to tolerate those who differ from ourselves. It would indeed be sad if the world contained no one with DS. But just because we want a group of people in the world does not entitle us to conscript individuals to create such people in their wombs.

    But of course, forbidding abortions chosen on the basis of disability cannot rightly be described as “conscripting individuals to create such people in their wombs.” When a pregnant mother receives a prenatal Down-syndrome diagnosis, she has already created a human being who might have Down syndrome (though such tests have been known to be wrong). Forbidding a woman from actively killing her unborn child based on its disability is not the same thing as conscripting her into creating that child.

    That defenders of legal abortion are reduced to such arguments is telling. In the end, it doesn’t matter much whether we can rightly label certain abortions “eugenic” or whether one side of the debate has the most accurate history of racial discrimination and population control.

    What matters is that, in Ohio, lawmakers have laid down a marker establishing that it is wrong and therefore that it is now illegal to end the life of an unborn human being simply because he or she is diagnosed with a chromosomal abnormality. Supporters of abortion refuse to respond to this argument, because to do so would expose the logic of all abortion, which, regardless of disabilities, grants some human beings the power to declare the lives of others not worth living.”

    Gates conducted an interview with Bill Moyers on PBS to explain the rational for his charitable contributions:

    MOYERS: You could have chosen any field, any subject, any issue and poured billions into it and been celebrated. How did you come to this one? To global health?

    GATES: The one issue that really grabbed me as urgent were issues related to population… reproductive health.

    And maybe the most interesting thing I learned is this thing that’s still surprising when I tell other people which is that, as you improve health in a society, population growth goes down.

    You know I thought it was…before I learned about it, I thought it was paradoxical. Well if you improve health, aren’t you just dooming people to deal with such a lack of resources where they won’t be educated or they won’t have enough food? You know, sort of a Malthusian view of what would take place.

    And the fact that health leads parents to decide, “okay, we don’t need to have as many children because the chance of having the less children being able to survive to be adults and take care of us, means we don’t have to have 7 or 8 children.” Now that was amazing.

    So Gates is interested in improving health because he believes that would reduce the amount of people on the planet.  His goal is not to help people but to eliminate them.  He states that if people are healthy that they will want fewer kids but he doesn’t offer evidence to support this and frankly it doesn’t appear to make much sense. Why would a sick person who could die at anytime want to have kids if they knew there was a good possibility they wouldn’t be around to support the child?   Does Gates really believe this or is this just his cover story so not arouse any suspicions about his true motivations?  Gates also admits that he notes that he previously shared the opinion with Malthus that health should not be improved because that would encourage population growth.  If you remember Malthus wanted villages built near sewage to encourage disease.  Now he doesn’t disagree with Malthus that population growth is bad he only disagrees on how to reduce population.

    I don’t believe that Gates’ actually thinks that improving health reduces population.  I think that he is using global health as a stalking horse to eliminate population.  Gates’ could donate money to provide basic healthcare to poor Africans like Doctors Without Borders, he could build hospitals, and he could help provide low cost health insurance to the millions who can’t afford it.  Bill Gates money could be spent improving access to safe drinking water and providing sanitation services.  His money is spent on any of this noble The elites of the world choose to spend the tax dollars of the American middle class on contraceptives, abortions, and vaccines.  Kenyan gynecologist Dr. Stephen Karanja observed, “USAID and other Non-Governmental organizations funded mainly by the U.S. Government have targeted our people with a ruthlessness that makes one shudder. Our health sector has collapsed. Thousands of the Kenyan people will die of malaria, whose treatment costs a few cents, in health facilities whose shelves are stocked to the roof with millions of dollars worth of pills, IUDs, Norplant, Depo-Provera, most of which are supplied with American money.”

    “Many are maimed for life. The hypertension, blood clots, heart failure, liver pathology and menstrual disorders cannot be treated due to the poor health services…. Malaria is epidemic in Kenya. Mothers die from this disease every day because there is no chloroquine, when instead we have huge stockpiles of contraceptives.” – SOURCE – I used this not for authoritativeness, but for logic and because it very much speaks my mind too. And I fact-checked it.

    IT WORKS BOTH WAYS, AS YOU BALANCE AND STEER IT.
    SOURCE

    THE AFRICAN PERSPECTIVE ON IT

    Population Control is GENOCIDE

    (This interview with Sister Aset was first published in Global Africa Pocket News (GAP News) Vol. 1, No. 7 Sept. 1994. It was submitted to Caribbean Times in January ’96 but never published) #14
    SOURCE

    What is population control?


    The United Nations Population Fund would like us to believe that it is a benign process of ‘voluntary’ application of ‘family planning’ to control the ‘rate of growth’ of the world’s ‘sustainable’ population within ‘manageable’ levels in relation to the amount of ‘food’ and ‘consumable goods’ the earth can produce. That is as far from the truth as the divide between the very richest and the very poorest people on this planet.
    The truth is that population control is the process by which Global Europe (whites, Caucasians, Aryans) seeks to guarantee its perpetual domination of the rest of the human race because of its own fear of annihilation. According to Dr. Frances Cress-Welsing, it is this fear based on the fact of their numerical minority status and their low level of surface melanin, which drives them to commit the most atrocious crimes against humanity, in particular, the most feared nation of all, Global Africa (Black people).


    Is it true that the world is over crowded and moving towards an unsustainable population level?


    No. Absolutely not. Overcrowding can be measured by one method only that is whether there are too many people to fit in the space available. The most densely populated continent area in the world is Europe, (see GAP News #7, Population Figures), but do Europeans think there are too many people in Europe? Of course not. But they believe there are too many African and Asian people in Europe. That is not overcrowding that is racism.


    What about all those starving Africans? If they can’t feed themselves surely, there must be too many of them.


    No, that is not the case. Those “starving Africans”, Asians and other “Third World” peoples produce most of the world’s surplus food. Most of the food they produce are luxury or raw, unprocessed goods which are sold cheaply as exports and re-imported as expensive processed foods.
    The main reason though, why there appears to be not enough food to go around is not because the so-called third world cannot feed itself, it is because Global Europe, less than 25% of the world’s population uses or wastes over 80% of the worlds food goods (consumables) but produces less than 15% of it. So the “third world” make up 75% of the world’s population, produce 85% of the world’s consumables and consume less than 20% of all that is consumed. If they consumed as much as they produced, Global Europe would be dying of starvation, not Africa.


    Is the African population expanding too rapidly?


    Let’s look at the evidence: After being systematically depopulated for 400 years, Africa is now the least populated continent in the world with a density one-sixth of Europe’s. Africa’s death rate is more than twice that of Europe. To be level pegging, Africa’s death rate should also be one-sixth of Europe’s. When these dishonest people talk about population they make reference only to birth rate. They show that Africa’s birth rate is nearly three times that of the European rate, but forget to mention that the infant mortality rate is 5 times higher in Africa.
    They never talk about density except in reference to Asia or to say that “Rwanda is the most densely populated country in Africa”. They forget to say it was a quarter the density of any country in Europe. They forget also, to tell you that in order for Africa to get to the same population density as Europe (is Europe overpopulated?) the African birth-rate has to be more than 12 times that of Europe (6 times if the death rate becomes equal) for a whole generation.
    So, when they talk about “equalizing” or reducing the African birth rate, while at the same time nurturing conflict, manufacturing famine, and importing disease to increase the death rate further, you begin to get the picture. If the birth rates were made equal and everything else remained the same as they are now, each time Europe’s population doubled Africa’s population would be halved. The world’s population may become “stabilized” as they like to say it, but the percentage ratio between the nations would continue changing to their advantage. (See GAP News #5)
    It is understandable then, why Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, a senior Vatican official cried that if the precepts of the UN Population Control Conference in Cairo were to be implemented the world would experience “the most disastrous massacre in history”. He should know, it was his organization, the Roman Catholic church, which sanctified the trade in African lives, resulting in the death of over 200 million people.
    Some of the liars say that deaths in war time make very little difference to the population growth because after a war birth rates usually increase to compensate. Certainly, that is true when mostly male soldiers are killed. But when two thirds of the female population are murdered, like the Rwandan slaughter, it would take 4 or 5 generations to get back to where it was before the war. And that is the key. The women.
    Global Europe have done everything they could to destroy our people but we are still here and still strong. They are now trying, through an apparently limitless line of African and Asian female mercenaries, posing as leaders, to co-opt us. To convince us that regardless of our particular environmental conditions, contrary to our own community’s social and economic needs, it would be in our individual interests to have fewer or no children at all.
    Women have the power to determine the fertility or sterility of our nation. It is imperative that we do not allow ourselves to be misled into committing generational suicide. We carry the future of our nation in our hands. We are here because those before us gave us life. Let us give life to our children. We deserve to live.

    SOURCE

    FRAGMENT:

    ABORTION FOR EUGENICS: CONSPIRACY OR SIMPLE CONSEQUENCE?

    How one answers the question whether abortion is a tool of racial, gender, or disability eugenics depends very much on how the question is asked. Is legalized abortion a eugenicist conspiracy — a deliberate plot on the part of those favoring abortion rights to reduce the number of people of a given race, sex, or disability? Surely not. At the very least, such motivations form no part of the modern argument for abortion rights. Does unrestricted legal abortion-choice produce a disparate impact resulting in disproportionate numbers of abortions ending the lives of minority, female, and disabled fetuses? Undeniably. The aborted are disproportionately Black, female, and disabled. Is the right to abortion sometimes used, by those exercising the abortion-choice, for eugenics purposes — specifically for the purpose of aborting on the basis of race, sex, or disability? Unquestionably. Some — but not all — of the abortion–disparate impact is attributable to intentional decisions to abort based on a trait of the baby that otherwise would be born.

    These are three different questions. Justice Thomas’s concurrence in Box keeps them distinct. Murray’s article, in attempting to critique Thomas, tends to smush these separate questions together in a mildly confusing way.

    Begin with Justice Thomas’s Box concurrence itself. Thomas’s opinion compiles an impressive and rightly disturbing narrative of evidence that family planning and abortion advocates in the past embraced the desirability of abortion as an instrument for achieving racial eugenics and for culling persons with disabilities from the population. (There appears to be no evidence that early abortion advocates ever favored abortion for gender-eugenics purposes — aborting girls because they are girls.18×18. This is probably most simply explained by the fact that the technology for discerning the fetus’s sex before birth was not readily available until relatively recently. See, e.g., Juan Stocker & Lorraine Evens, Fetal Sex Determination by Ultrasound, 50 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY 462, 465 (1977).

    Han Chinese academics in Xinjiang in recent years have blamed the high birth rate among the Uyghurs and Kazaks for fostering religious extremism and poverty. According to Zenz’s research, government and academic papers have referred to the birth rate of ethnic minorities in the region as “excessive” and have claimed that the population growth and concentration of ethnic minorities in Xinjiang “weakens national identity and identification with the Chinese Nation-Race (Zhonghua Minzu).”

    Population Research Institute

    I’ve been meaning to put this together for this a long time now, but we owe it to An0maly that I arrived to finish it, he tipped me over with this great brand new video, where he kills it in his own terms. I just felt I need to round it up and bring more depth and definition that he can’t possibly achieve in his format. The guy is one of the clearest minds on Internet right now.

    MORE References

    To be continued?
    Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
    We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
    Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

    ! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

    ORDER

    You can’t put out so much BS without crumbling under its weight, as I’ve said many times and anyone over the mental age of 14 should understand from experience..

    FUNNY HOW THEIR COLLAPSE OCCURED THE DAY AFTER I RELEASED THIS MEME

    Below there’s a pertinent technical explanation of the situation from ZDNet.
    What they don’t tell you is the cause of the cause:
    Their organization and systems have been debilitated by the Covid paranoid policies and restrictions they pushed, scattering their human and physical resources and dissolving their coherence.
    That’s what they tried to do to us, in fact, and it hit them too eventually.
    Not only the BS they’re pushing, but the dumbing down strategies they’re involved in trickled up as fast as they trickled down, and that’s a second bullet they shot in their other foot.
    Karma is not as mystical as presented by some folks. Prescribing poison has more adverse effects than the poison sometimes and it’s just logical. These inbred retardoid jackasses can’t see they turned on the gas. but they are still working inside the gas chambers they set for others.

    What took Facebook down: Major global outage drags on

    DNS appears to be a symptom of the root cause of Facebook’s global failure. Don’t expect a quick fix.

    The old network troubleshooting saying is, when anything goes wrong, “It’s DNS.” This time Domain Name Server (DNS) appears to be the symptom of the root cause of the Facebook global failure. The true cause is that there are no working Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) routes into Facebook’s sites.

    BGP is the standardized exterior gateway protocol used to exchange routing and reachability information between the internet top-level autonomous systems (AS). Most people, indeed most network administrators, never need to deal with BGP. 

    Many people spotted that Facebook was no longer listed on DNS. Indeed, there were joke posts offering to sell you the Facebook.com domain.  

    Cloudflare VP Dane Knecht was the first to report the underlying BGP problem. This meant, as Kevin Beaumont, former Microsoft’s Head of Security Operations Centre, tweeted, “By not having BGP announcements for your DNS name servers, DNS falls apart = nobody can find you on the internet. Same with WhatsApp btw. Facebook have basically deplatformed themselves from their own platform.”

    Whoops.

    As annoying as this is to you, it may be even more annoying to Facebook employees. There are reports that Facebook employees can’t enter their buildings because their “smart” badges and doors were also disabled by this network failure. If true, Facebook’s people literally can’t enter the building to fix things.  

    In the meantime, Reddit user u/ramenporn, who claimed to be a Facebook employee working on bringing the social network back from the dead, reported, before he deleted his account and his messages, that “DNS for FB services has been affected and this is likely a symptom of the actual issue, and that’s that BGP peering with Facebook peering routers has gone down, very likely due to a configuration change that went into effect shortly before the outages happened (started roughly 1540 UTC).”

    He continued, “There are people now trying to gain access to the peering routers to implement fixes, but the people with physical access is separate from the people with knowledge of how to actually authenticate to the systems and people who know what to actually do, so there is now a logistical challenge with getting all that knowledge unified. Part of this is also due to lower staffing in data centers due to pandemic measures.”

    Ramenporn also stated that it wasn’t an attack, but a mistaken configuration change made via a web interface. What really stinks — and why Facebook is still down hours later — is that since both BGP and DNS are down, the “connection to the outside world is down, remote access to those tools don’t exist anymore, so the emergency procedure is to gain physical access to the peering routers and do all the configuration locally.” Of course, the technicians on site don’t know how to do that and senior network administrators aren’t on site. This is, in short, one big mess.

    As a former network admin who worked on the internet at this level, I anticipate Facebook will be down for hours more. I suspect it will end up being Facebook’s longest and most severe failure to date before it’s fixed. -ZDNET

    Basically, these morons reset themselves and we can only wish them a Great Reset! 😀

    PS: SEEING THAT WE’RE DEALING WITH A PSY-OP MACHINE, NEVER LEAVE OUT OF SIGHT THE POSSIBILITY OF A FALSE FLAG .
    This is an analysis of the official narrative, which can always turn out fake.

    To be continued?
    Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
    We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
    Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

    ! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

    ORDER

    Thanks dr. Zelenko for the link, I await your response on my little inquiry!

    vigiaccess.org – scroll down, accept the terms, then search ‘covid-19 vaccine’.

    The data, as of October 3, 2020, spaks for itself:

    DISTRIBUTION

    HERE COMES A VERY TROUBLING PART:

    how?!?!

    I’ll wait for an explanation, meanwhile we’re set for Nuremberg2!

    To be continued?
    Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
    We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
    Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

    ! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

    ORDER

    For my mother, who has just buried my father, passed away from a very suspicious heart event involving some clots. She had to bury him in my absence, because the Military BioTech Complex holds us prisoners on two different continents. I had to bury myself in work to keep it together.

    Work in progress, I will keep adding pieces to the Tetris until it goes away.
    Please return regularly for updates, this is a very long and fascinating story that should change the worldview for most people.

    This is to request that the current retention allowance [(b)(6) redaction] for Dr. Anthony S. Fauci be converted to a permanent pay adjustment in the amount [(b)(6) redaction] over his base pay of [(b)(6) redaction] in order to appropriately compensate him for the level of responsibility in his current position of Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), especially as it relates to his work on biodefense research activities.”

    GW BUSH

    Key points

    First, in the US, Military and an emerging petrochemical industry with strong roots in agriculture but expanding into health, among others. The Rockefellers were the main force driving this expansion in the US and bridging over the ocean to Germany, the most advanced country in terms of chemical industrialization.
    But it was mostly Crown-controlled and Rothschild-controlled from the City of London, through their many henchmen.

    After a few good collaborative experiences, the Military and Pharmafia decided they have a future together, and they bought up the Academia to help with the labs and the brains, as both industries already had a foot in the door there.

    Two world wars demonstrated there’s hardly any limit to what they can achieve together.

    The Cold War is then used as an excuse to develop more surveillance and population control tools. From these efforts spring1 out Silicon Valley and the Internet.

    Before the end of 20th century, Big Pharma and Big Tech are fused by all means: capital, gear, agenda.

    The Great Military BioTech Complex is born to be the main Operating System of the system.

    9/11 is the launch of the new control grid.

    Many of the following events were just test runs.

    Covid is a forced upgrade of this operating system.

    Weapons trade is disguised as “defense”, bioweapons trade as “biodefense”. And the latter is booming.

    Transhumanism Airlines depart from Humanism and are set to land in lifeless soulless material existence.

    The Military Biotech Complex Origins

    After 1865, American inventiveness turned away from war and toward commerce and industry. Development of the lands of the West did promote some agencies to investigate natural resources. The Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce and Labor, and the National Park Service appeared during this period. While government research tended toward the applied end of the research spectrum, newly-created private foundations, such as the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Institute of Washington, supported much of the nation's basic scientific research.- Daniel Else, "Origins of the Military-Industrial Complex", 2017 
    This is the official history, not whistleblowing. It’s redacted by a system critter to make crimes palatable to the normies. Still a good starting point

    Summary

    Daniel Else explored the results of his year-long inquiry into the organizational underpinnings of that military technological revolution of the 1940s and 1950s. By mining the Library’s resources, Else traced the evolving relationship between science and the federal government leading to the creation of the Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD) in 1941. A temporary wartime agency, OSRD mobilized the nation’s academic and industrial technological resources in support of the war effort, and in so doing profoundly altered the linkages between science and engineering, industry, and government. Else explored those wartime changes and outline their impact, still seen and felt today more than seven decades after V-J Day.

    Event Date September 21, 2017

    Notes-  Daniel Else was a specialist in national defense in the Congressional Research Service in the Library of Congress and the 2016 Kluge Staff Fellow at the Library’s John W. Kluge Center.

    Finally in 1950, the Air Force created a larger organization, the Air Research and Development Command. The House finally passed the Senate bill that had been passed the year before, and the president signed the bill, establishing the National Science Foundation. So in that five-year gap, what we saw was the creation of a number of military, Department of Defense organizations for science and scientific research, and the final NSF bill contained no mandate for military research for the National Science Foundation. 
    
    So, what are its legacy organizations? A number of federal agencies can trace their origins back to the OSRD. National Science Foundation, of course, the Office of Naval Research, the Army Research Development and Engineering, or, and Evaluation Command, Air Force Office of Scientific Research, DTRA, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, DARPA, of course, and in the Department of Energy, the National Nuclear Security Administration, which is the custodian of atomic stockpile. - Daniel Else, "Origins of the Military-Industrial Complex", 2017 
    Some of Vannevar Bush’s greatest official honors

    One of Vannevar Bush’s PhD students at MIT was Frederick Terman, who was later instrumental in the development of “Silicon Valley”.

    Wikipedia

    MEANWHILE, IN EUROPE

    AND FROM THERE TO ALL THE QUEEN’S TERRITORIES

    MIT is basically MBTC’s main civilian lab

    Rockefeller Medicine – James Corbett
    One of the most essential videos on Internet. Source
    US virus surveillance started with Project Blackflag (synonym for false flag) – intelligence expert

    From Dark Winter to the coming winter – how biodefense drills have altered society

    DR. HEIKO SCHÖNING: THE STAGE FOR THE DARK WINTER HAS BEEN SET WITH THE ANTHRAX ATTACKS FROM 2001. There was even an Event201 for the Anthrax attacks. It was called “The Dark Winter”

    The Dark Winter exercise was the collaborative effort of 4 organizations. John Hamre of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) initiated and conceived of an exercise wherein senior former officials would respond to a bioterrorist induced national security crisis. Tara O’Toole and Tom Inglesby of the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Studies and Randy Larsen and Mark DeMier of Analytic Services, Inc., (ANSER) were the principal designers, authors, and controllers of Dark Winter. Sue Reingold of CSIS managed administrative and logistical arrangements. General Dennis Reimer of the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism (MIPT) provided funding for Dark Winter.

    DARK WINTER Official page

    Deleted article, now ARCHIVED HERE

    Simulations and Tabletop Exercises

    Part of the: Homeland Security Archived Projects

    Preparing homeland security professionals through scenario-based simulations and exercises on key issues.

    Steadfast Resolve

    The Steadfast Resolve exercise was planned to address the concern that poorly designed government response to the next terrorist attack could disrupt America’s economy and society as much or more than the attack itself. This concern is particularly relevant in the context of an attack that may be harmful, but not catastrophic.

    In the event of a next attack, government officials will be under enormous pressure to respond swiftly, more than likely with limited information about the status of the attack or what to expect next. In today’s news cycle, the public – and the situation – will demand a swift and decisive response perhaps before exactly what is happening becomes clear. Confusion, indecision, or false starts at government’s highest levels will be magnified and may have long-lasting ramifications. Getting it wrong will be easier than getting it right. As the Hurricane Katrina experience has demonstrated, a lack of situational awareness, understanding of current plans, and an absence of effective decisionmaking tools can lead to disaster. 

    Dark Winter: Bioterrorism Simulation Exercise

    In the summer of 2001, a group of senior-level officials, including Gov. Frank Keating of Oklahoma, David Gergen, and James Woolsey, participated in an executive level simulation. Dark Winter simulated a U.S. National Security Council meeting at which senior officials were confronted with a smallpox attack on the United States. The exercise illustrated the issues to be addressed in the event of a bioterrorism crisis, including the challenges facing state and local governments, the role and responsiveness of the federal government, and the likely friction spots between federal- and state-level responders and responses.

    Coming as it did before the September 11 terrorist attacks and the subsequent anthrax attacks, Dark Winter generated an enormous amount of interest in both the public policy community and the media. CSIS briefed Vice President Dick Cheney, then National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice, then FEMA Director Joe Allbaugh, over 80 members of Congress, senior government officials and leaders, including approximately 20 ambassadors to the United States, and senior government officials from Asia, Latin America, and Europe. Besides raising public awareness of the bioterrorism threat, these briefings contributed to the Bush administration’s decision to manufacture 300 million doses of the smallpox vaccine.

    Silent Vector: A Critical Energy Infrastructure Simulation Exercise

    The events of September 11 and additional intelligence on al Qaeda demonstrate the potential for an attack against the infrastructure of the United States. To face this challenge, CSIS developed an executive-level simulation focusing on U.S. critical energy infrastructure. The exercise took place in October 2002 and employed a simulated National Security Council of senior policymakers with former senator Sam Nunn, now chairman of CSIS’s Board of Trustees, serving as scenario president.

    Silent Vector was designed to simulate possible U.S. reaction to a credible threat of terrorist attack when there is not sufficient information for effective protection. The overall purpose of the exercise was to assist the administration and Congress in their attempts to improve the effectiveness of response during the pre-attack phase of a major terrorist incident. Silent Vector challenged current and former senior government leaders to respond to increasingly credible and specific intelligence indicating the possibility of a large-scale attack against critical energy and energy-related infrastructure on the East Coast of the United States.
     

    Black Dawn: A Scenario-Based Exercise on Catastrophic Terrorism

    Organized under the auspices of the Strengthening the Global Partnership project by CSIS and the Nuclear Threat Initiative, Black Dawn gathered approximately 55 current and former senior officials and experts from the European Council, the European Commission, NATO, 15 member states, and various international organizations to grapple with the challenges associated with preventing the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by terrorists.

    The exercise aimed to develop a set of actionable recommendations for the EU, NATO and individual European governments to prevent terrorists from acquiring and using WMD. The exercise was designed to energize discussion and debate as various European countries and institutions entered into their policy and budget deliberations. The central question animating the exercise was this: In hindsight, what could we have done to prevent terrorists from acquiring WMD and conducting such an attack? And what more can and should we do now?

    The exercise concluded with several lessons learned: the threat of WMD terrorism is real; it could happen in Europe; prevention is the best option; we can take concrete steps to significantly reduce the risk of terrorists acquiring nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons; Europe has a leadership role to play; and we need to act now.

    • Simon Chair BlogCommentaries on U.S. relations with countries in the Western Hemisphere – focusing on international political economy, trade, investment, energy, and other current events.

    A “Dark Winter” for Public Health: Meet Homeland Security’s New Bioterror Czarina

    by Tom Burghardt / August 24th, 2009

    In the wake of the 2001 anthrax attacks, successive U.S. administrations have pumped some $57 billion across 11 federal agencies and departments into what is euphemistically called “biodefense.” Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland in January 2005, former U.S. Senate Majority Leader William Frist, a Bushist acolyte, baldly stated that “The greatest existential threat we have in the world today is biological” and predicted that “an inevitable bioterror attack” would come “at some time in the next 10 years.”

    Later that year, Frist and former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) covertly inserted language into the 2006 Defense Appropriations bill (H.R. 2863) that granted legal immunity to vaccine manufacturers, even in cases of willful misconduct. It was signed into law by President Bush.

    According to Public Citizen and The New York Times, Frist and Hastert benefited financially from their actions; the pair, as well as 41 other congressmen and senators owned as much as $16 million in pharmaceutical stock. revealed that “the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) is purported to be the key author of the language additions. This trade association represents virtually all major vaccine manufacturers.”

    The Senate Majority Leader’s alarmist jeremiad at Davos was seconded by Dr. Tara O’Toole who added, “This [bioterrorism] is one of the most pressing problems we have on the planet today.”

    Really? Not grinding poverty, global warming or the lack of access by hundreds of millions of impoverished workers and farmers to clean water, an adequate diet, health care or relief from epidemic levels of preventable diseases such as malaria, tuberculosis or diarrhea, but “bioterrorism” as narrowly defined by securocrats and their academic accomplices.

    But Dr. Victor W. Sidel, a founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) and an outspoken critic of the Bioweapons-Industrial-Complex challenged O’Toole’s hysterical paradigm.

    Sidel made the point that there is a fundamental conflict between the state’s national security goals and health care providers’ professional responsibilities to patients. He wrote in 2003 that “military, intelligence, and law enforcement agencies and personnel have long histories of secrecy and deception that are contrary to the fundamental health principles of transparency and truthfulness. They may therefore be unsuitable partners for public health agencies that need to justify receiving the public’s trust.”

    In this context, the choice of O’Toole as the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Undersecretary of Science and Technology is troubling to say the least. As former CEO and Director of UPMC’s Center for Biosecurity, critics charge that O’Toole’s appointment will be nothing short of a disaster.

    No ordinary policy wonk with an impressive résumé and years as a government insider, O’Toole is a key player advocating for the expansion of dual-use biological weapons programs rebranded as biodefense.

    Subverting the Biological Weapons Convention

    The resuscitation of American bioweapons programs are facilitated by their secretive and highly-classified nature. Under cover of academic freedom or intellectual property rights, the U.S. Bioweapons-Industrial-Complex has largely been outsourced by the state to private companies and contractors at top American corporations and universities.

    Efforts to strengthen the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) by the inclusion of verification language into the treaty and regular inspection of suspect facilities by international experts have been shot-down since 2001 by the Bush and now, the Obama administrations. Why?

    Primarily because the United States view onsite measures as a threat to the commercial proprietary information of multinational pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies as well as to America’s reputedly “defensive” biological programs; initiatives that continue to work with nature’s most dangerous and deadly pathogens.

    In fact, the problem of the dual-use nature of such research is a conundrum facing critics who challenge the break-neck expansion of concealed weapons programs. Simply put, military activities can be disguised as commercial research to develop medical countermeasures without anyone, least of all the American people, being any the wiser.

    Highly-trained microbiologists deployed across a spectrum of low-key companies, trained for academic, public health, or commercial employment are part of the dual-use problem. Who’s to say whether scientists who genetically-manipulate pathogens or create Frankenstein-like chimera disease organisms (say, synthesized Marburg or Ebola virus as has already been done with poliovirus in a U.S. lab) are engaged in treaty-busting weapons research or the development of life-saving measures.

    And what about the accidental, or more sinisterly, the deliberate release of some horrific new plague by a scientist who’s “gone rogue”? As researcher Edward Hammond pointed out:

    British researchers pled guilty in 2001 to charges that they improperly handled a genetically engineered hybrid of the viruses causing hepatitis C and dengue fever. British authorities characterized the virus as “more lethal than HIV”. ‘Dengatitis’ was deliberately created by researchers who wanted to use fewer laboratory animals in a search for a vaccine for Hepatitis C. Under unsafe laboratory conditions, the researchers created and nearly accidentally released a new hybrid human disease whose effects, fortunately, remain unknown; but which may have displayed different symptoms than its parents and thus been difficult to diagnose, and have required a new, unknown treatment regime. (Emerging Technologies: Genetic Engineering and Biological Weapons, The Sunshine Project, Background Paper No. 12, November 2003)

    A new report by the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation has charged that despite restrictions under the BWC prohibiting the development, production, stockpiling and use of weaponized disease agents such as anthrax, smallpox or plague, as well as equipment and delivery systems intended for offensive use, the rapid growth of “biodefense and research programs over the last decade” has placed “new pressure” on efforts to curb the development of banned weapons listed in the treaty.

    In an interview with Global Security Newswire Gerald Epstein, a senior fellow with the hawkish Center for Security and International Studies (CSIS) told the publication, “When one is doing bioresearch and biodefense, one has to be careful to not overstep the treaty itself.”

    He cited the U.S biodefense effort Project Bacchus–an investigation by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency to determine whether it was possible to build a bioweapons production facility using readily available equipment–as an instance where questions were raised if the treaty had been violated.

    The type of biodefense activity that is most likely to raise questions regarding treaty compliance is “threat assessment,” the process of determining what type of biological attacks are most likely to occur, he told Global Security Newswire. A dangerous biological agent could inadvertently be developed during such research, Epstein said. (Martin Matishak, “Biodefense Research Could Violate Weapons Convention, Report Warns,” Global Security Newswire, August 20, 2009)

    But Pentagon bioweaponeers did more than build “a bioweapons productions facility using readily available equipment.” They built banned weapons. According to Jeanne Guillemin, author of Biological Weapons: From the Invention of State-Sponsored Programs to Contemporary Bioterrorism, the Pentagon and CIA made and tested a model of a Soviet anthrax bomb and created an antibiotic-resistant strain of anthrax.

    After consulting with scientists who strongly suggested that the CIA anthrax bomb project would violate the BWC, “CIA lawyers decided the project was within the allowed realm of defensive research,” Guillemin revealed. Project Clear Vision, a joint investigation by the CIA and the Battelle Memorial Institute, under contract to the Agency, reconstructed and tested a Soviet-era anthrax bomblet in order to test its dissemination characteristics. The Agency “decided the same” for the small, fully functional bioweapons facility built under the rubric of Project Bacchus.

    The third initiative, Project Jefferson, led to the development of an antibiotic-resistant strain of anthrax based on a Soviet model. After the outgoing Clinton administration hesitated to give the CIA the go-ahead for the project, the Bush regime’s National Security Council gave the Pentagon permission. “They believed” Guillemin wrote, “the Pentagon had the right to investigate genetically altered pathogens in the name of biodefense, ‘to save American lives’.”

    Shortly thereafter, the Pentagon authorized the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), one of the most secretive and heavily-outsourced Defense Department branches, to re-create the deadly anthrax strain.

    What the scope of these programs are today is currently unknown. We do know however, that based on available evidence the Department of Homeland Security, the Defense Department and the oxymoronic Intelligence Community, using the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) as a cover, continue to investigate the feasibility of transforming nature’s most deadly pathogens into weapons.

    In close coordination, the United States government and their outsourced corporate partners are spending billions of dollars on research and simulation exercises, dubbed “disaster drills” by a compliant media, to facilitate this grisly trade.

    Secrecy and Deceit

    That the official bioterror narrative is a preposterous fiction and swindle as even the FBI was forced to admit during its much-maligned Amerithrax investigation, is hardly worth a second glance by corporate media beholden to the pharmaceutical industry for advertising revenue; call it business as usual here in the heimat.

    As we now know, the finely-milled anthrax powder which killed five people and shut down representative government didn’t come from the Afghan-Arab database of disposable Western intelligence assets known as al Qaeda, but rather from deep within America’s own Bioweapons-Industrial-Complex, to wit, from the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Ft. Detrick in Maryland. But such troublesome and inconvenient truths are barely worth a mention by “respectable” media, e.g. the corporate stenographers who sold two imperialist military adventures to the American people.

    Indeed, a credible case can be made that without the anthrax attacks, the fear levels gripping the country in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist events–and the subsequent clamp-down that followed, from the USA Patriot Act to the indefinite detention and torture of “terrorism” suspects, and from warrantless wiretapping to the demonization of dissent–may very well have been impossible.

    It is difficult not to conclude that from the beginning of the affair, there was a clear intent on the part of the anthrax terrorist(s) to draw a straight line between 9/11 and the anthrax mailings. From there, it was but a short step to stitching-up a case for “regime change” in Iraq. The media’s role in this criminal enterprise was indispensable for what Salon’s Glenn Greenwald has called“the single greatest, unresolved media scandal of this decade.” As Greenwald points out,

    During the last week of October, 2001, ABC News, led by Brian Ross, continuously trumpeted the claim as their top news story that government tests conducted on the anthrax–tests conducted at Ft. Detrick–revealed that the anthrax sent to [former Senator Tom] Daschle contained the chemical additive known as bentonite. ABC News, including Peter Jennings, repeatedly claimed that the presence of bentonite in the anthrax was compelling evidence that Iraq was responsible for the attacks, since–as ABC variously claimed–bentonite “is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s biological weapons program” and “only one country, Iraq, has used bentonite to produce biological weapons.” (Glenn Greenwald, “Vital unresolved anthrax questions and ABC News,” Salon, August 1, 2008)

    Despite ABC News’ claims that their information came from “four well-placed and separate sources,” they were fed information that was patently false; as Greenwald avers, “No tests ever found or even suggested the presence of bentonite. The claim was just concocted from the start. It just never happened.”

    And as we will shortly explore below, the dubious “Dark Winter” and “Atlantic Storm” bioterror exercises designed by Dr. Tara O’Toole freely drew from the neocon’s sinister playbook, right down to the weaponized smallpox supplied to al Qaeda by Saddam.

    Whether or not one buys the current permutation of the “lone nut” theory, this one alleges that Dr. Bruce Ivins, a vaccine specialist employed by USAMRIID, was the anthrax mailer; the fact is, when all is said and done the attacks, to use a much over-hyped phrase, were an inside job.

    And like other “lone nuts” who have entered the parapolitical frame at their own peril, Ivins isn’t around to refute the charges.

    The Alliance for Biosecurity: Insiders with a Mission and (Very) Deep Pockets

    Before being pegged by the Obama administration to head DHS’s Science and Technology division where she will oversee the department’s billion dollar budget, with some 45 percent of it going towards chemical and bioweapons defense, O’Toole, as previously mentioned, was the CEO and Director of UPMC’s Center for Biosecurity, a satrapy which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to improving the country’s resilience to major biological threats.”

    How “independent”? You make the call!

    According to their web site The Alliance for Biosecurity is “a collaboration among the Center for Biosecurity and 13 pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies whose mission is to work in the public interest to improve prevention and treatment of severe infectious diseases–particularly those diseases that present global security challenges.”

    Alliance partners include the usual suspects: Bavarian Nordic; Center for Biosecurity of UPMC; Cangene Corporation; DOR BioPharma, Inc.; DynPort Vaccine Company LLC, a CSC company; Elusys Therapeutics, Inc.; Emergent BioSolutions; Hematech, Inc., a subsidiary of Kyowa Kirin; Human Genome Sciences, Inc.; NanoViricides, Inc.; Pfizer Inc.; PharmAthene; Siga Technologies, Inc.; Unither Virology LLC, a subsidiary of United Therapeutics Corporation. Rounding out this rogues gallery are associate members, the spooky Battelle Medical Research and Evaluation Facility and the Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute.

    Among the chief activities of the Alliance is lobbying Congress for increased funding for the development of new drugs deemed “countermeasures” under the Project BioShield Act of 2004, previously described by Antifascist Calling as a particularly grotesque piece of Bushist legislative flotsam.

    The Alliance avers that “the United States faces unprecedented risks to national security … by the clear and growing danger of bioterrorism or a destabilizing infectious disease pandemic,” and that “our nation’s vulnerability to biothreats is so severe” due to the fact that “most of the vaccines and medicines that will be needed to protect our citizens do not now exist.” Therefore, countermeasures needed to mitigate nebulous biothreats never spelled out once in the group’s literature “will likely require several years and several hundred million dollars each to successfully develop and produce.” (emphasis added)

    An Alliance report, The State of Biosecurity in 2008 and Proposals for a Public/Private Pathway Forward, charts a course for “improving and accelerating” efforts to “develop medical countermeasures (MCMs) for the nation’s Strategic National Stockpile (SNS).”

    Under the Project Bioshield Act of 2004, Congress authorized $5.6 billion over ten years “to purchase MCMs for the SNS.” Funds were allocated for the procurement of the anthrax vaccine as well as for “therapeutic antibodies for inhalational anthrax, a botulism heptavalent antitoxin, a smallpox vaccine, and several products for radiological and nuclear threats, obligating a total of about $1.9 billion of the $5.6 billion BioShield fund.”

    In 2006 as I noted previously, Congress created the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). BARDA was authorized to spend some $1.07 billion over three years for MCMs, “only $201 million has been provided by Congress through FY 2008″ noted the Alliance, “approximately one-fifth of the authorized level.”

    According to an “independent economic analysis” carried out by (who else!) the Alliance’s academic partner, the Center for Biosecurity, “it would require $3.4 billion in FY 2009 to support one year of advanced development.”

    “Similarly” according to the organization, “the original appropriation of $5.6 billion for Project BioShield is equally insufficient to ensure that once MCMs are developed there will be funds available to procure them and maintain the stockpile.” Indeed, “this level of funding would need to be sustained for many years.” You can bet however, that Alliance lobbyists are busy as proverbial bees in pressuring Congress to fork over the dough!

    The report state’s that Alliance goals necessarily entail instilling “a sense of urgency … with Congress” by hyping the “bioterror threat.” But there’s much more here than a simple cynical exercise at preparing the “public diplomacy” ground through academic and industry “message force multipliers” that will enable Congress to shower Big Pharma with a veritable tsunami of cash. A “risk-tolerant culture” should be promoted within BARDA, one that “understands the realities, risks, timelines, and costs of drug development.”

    The “risks” to whom and for what purpose are not enumerated, but one can be certain that a “risk-tolerant culture” crafted by industry insiders will come at the expense of the health and safety of the American people, one that pushes potential legal liability should things head south onto the taxpaying public.

    The stealth nature of Alliance recommendations are clearly spelled out when they aver that “stakeholders” should “focus more on the potential biothreats and the corresponding countermeasures, rather than the price tag” and that BARDA, ostensibly a public agency, should be packed with insiders “who have drug development and manufacturing experience.” This will lead to the development of “a culture that is focused on partnering with industry and academia.”

    But the bottom line as always, is the corporatist bottom line for Alliance shareholders! How else can one interpret their statement that emerging “biothreats” are all the more dire today now that “interest of the public and private capital markets in biodefense has declined over the last 2-3 years.” What better way then, to beef-up those sagging capital markets than to install an industry-friendly individual at DHS with a documented track record of overplaying the “bioterror threat.”

    Dark Winter

    O’Toole was the principal designer of two “tabletop” bioterror preparedness drills, the 2001 Dark Winter exercise and the 2005 Atlantic Storm run-through; both were criticized by scientific experts as fabrications of an alleged threat of a smallpox attack mounted by al Qaeda.

    Reviewing Milton Leitenberg’s 2005 report, Assessing the Biological Weapons and Bioterrorism Threat, published the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute, protein chemist Dr. Eric Smith wrote the following:

    Of note is Leitenberg’s dissection of the process of assessment as practiced through bioterrorism threat scenarios conducted by the US government and private think tanks. Exercises like Dark Winter, which modeled an “aerosolized” smallpox attack, Top Off 2 and 3, both on pneumonic plague strikes, and Atlantic Storm, an exercise that purported to show an al Qaida group manufacturing a dry powder smallpox weapon, were rigged. In the cases of Dark Winter and the Top Offs, transmission rates of disease were sexed up beyond historical averages so that “a disastrous outcome was assured” no matter any steps taken to contain outbreaks. Eight pages are reserved to pointedly condemn the Atlantic Storm exercise on a host of sins which can generally be described as a bundle of frank lies and misinformation coupled with a claimed terrorist facility for making smallpox into a weapon that even state run biological warfare operations did not possess. And once again, juiced transmission rates of disease were employed to grease theoretical calamity. The reader comes to recognize the deus ex machina–a concoction or intervention added to dictate an outcome, in these cases very bad ones–as a regular feature of the exercises. However, the results of the same assessments–the alleged lessons learned–have never been reported with much, if any, skepticism in the media. (Eric Smith, “A Vaccine for the Hype: Milton Leitenberg’s new ‘Assessing the Biological Weapons and Bioterrorism Threat,” Global Security, National Security Notes, March 31, 2006)

    In criticizing “the fancy that such attacks are easy and one of the most catastrophic threats faced by the American people,” Smith denounces the alarmist scenarios of Dark Winter and Atlantic Storm’s designers–people like Dr. Tara O’Toole and the coterie of industry insiders and other well-paid “experts”–as guilty of perpetrating a massive “fraud … and a substantial one” on the American people.

    While one of Atlantic Storm’s architects proclaimed “this is not science fiction” and that “the age of Bioterror is now…” Leitenberg and Smith denounce O’Toole’s spurious claims as “not the least bit plausible.”

    Leitenberg wrote that “well before October-November 2001, the spectre of ‘bioterrorism’ benefitted from an extremely successful sales campaign.” Indeed, hyped-up scenarios such as Dark Winter and Atlantic Storm that place “weapons of mass destruction” in the hands of shadowy, intelligence-linked terror outfits like al Qaeda provided “inflated predictions that … were certainly not realistic. Much worse, in addition to being wrong, inflated predictions were counterproductive. They induced interest in BW in the wrong audiences.”

    But the implausible nature of the scenarios deployed in national exercises hardly prohibited the Bioweapons-Industrial-Complex from concocting scarecrow-like straw men designed to sow terror amongst the American people while extracting regular infusions of cash from Congress.

    Among the eight exercises analyzed by Leitenberg between 1998-2005, he found that each and every one were fraudulently designed and the threat of bioterrorism had been framed as a rationalization for “political action, the expenditure of public funds for bioterrorism prevention and response programs,” that could “not occur without it.” This is “not benign,” Leitenberg concludes.

    A second consequence of sexed-up “bioterror” drills have even more ominous implications for the immediate future. Because of national security state perceptions that mitigation of catastrophic bioterrorism is of supreme importance for national survival–perceptions reinforced by academic, corporate and militarist peddlers of crisis–”the US biodefense research program appears to be drifting into violation” of the Biological Weapons Convention. This is a menacing development and has happened, I would argue precisely because the evaluation process which justifies research into biological weapons threat capabilities and scenarios, are repackaged to conceal the offensive thrust of this research as wholly defensive in nature, which it certainly is not.

    How else would one explain ongoing research funded by the National Institutes of Health to study botulism toxin, “with the added qualification” Smith points out, that because the protein toxin is “unstable, therefore there will be collaboration with other researchers to stabilize it.” The NIH grant “means preparing a much more effective botulinum toxin than had been available before.”

    Smith goes on to cite “another problematical breakout” offered by two scientists to study the “aerobiological” characteristics of the lethal Marburg and Ebola viruses. How this is “defensive” in nature, in keeping with research restrictions under the Biological Weapons Convention, is another instance of a backdoor move to kick-start illicit bioweapons development.

    According to Smith, the study “looks to define how the organisms can be aerosolized, an instance of research into examining vulnerability in the complete absence of a verified threat.” But I would argue that showering taxpayers dollars into such dark and troubling research tributaries deploy hyped-up threats as cover for the development of illegal weapons.

    When her nomination was announced in May, Rutgers University and homeland security critic Richard Ebright told Wired,

    “This is a disastrous nomination. O’Toole supported every flawed decision and counterproductive policy on biodefense, biosafety, and biosecurity during the Bush Administration. O’Toole is as out of touch with reality, and as paranoiac, as former Vice President Cheney. It would be hard to think of a person less well suited for the position.”

    “She was the single most extreme person, either in or out of government, advocating for a massive biodefense expansion and relaxation of provisions for safety and security,” he adds. “She makes Dr. Strangelove look sane.” (Noah Shachtman, “DHS’ New Geek Chief is a Bioterror ‘Disaster,’ Critics Charge,” Wired, May 6, 2009)

    And Dr. Smith told Wired that exercises designed by O’Toole and her colleagues show her to be “the top academic/salesperson for the coming of apocalyptic bioterrorism which has never quite arrived.”

    As noted above, “[She’s] most prominent for always lobbying for more money for biodefense, conducting tabletop exercises on bioterrorism for easily overawed public officials, exercises tweaked to be horrifying,” Smith told Wired.

    But Smith goes even further and denounces O’Toole as an industry shill who “has never obviously appeared to examine what current terrorist capabilities have been… in favor of extrapolating how easy it would be to launch bioterror attacks if one had potentially unlimited resources and scientific know-how.” It’s a “superb appointment if you’re in the biodefense industry and interested in further opportunity and growth.”

    “Alternatively” Smith avers, O’Toole’s appointment is “a disaster if threat assessment and prevention” has “some basis in reality.”

    Not that any of this matters in Washington. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee led by “independent Democrat” and arch neocon Sen. Joseph Lieberman, voted to send her nomination to the full Senate July 29.

    Never mind that the deadly weaponized pathogen employed in the attacks didn’t originate in some desolate Afghan cave or secret underground bunker controlled by Saddam.

    And never mind that the principal cheerleaders for expanding state-funded programs are Pentagon bioweaponeers, private corporations and a shadowy nexus of biosecurity apparatchiks who stand to make a bundle under current and future federal initiatives.

    Leading the charge for increased funding is the Alliance for Biosecurity, a collaborative venture between the Center for Biosecurity of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) and Big Pharma.

    Tom Burghardt is a researcher and activist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. His articles are published in many venues. He is the editor of Police State America: U.S. Military “Civil Disturbance” Planning

    Bioweapon manufacturing and trading is ‘biodefense’. Guess who does the bioterrorism that sells the ‘biodefense’.
    Deleted article ARCHIVED HERE

     Soviet scientists reportedly used newly developed genetic engineering techniques to create vaccine-subverting and antibiotic-resistant strains of anthrax, plague, tularemia, and smallpox for attacks against military forces and civilian populations (Bozheyeva et al. 1999Alibek and Handelman 2000)

    More info: BBC / GRUNGE / THE GUARDIAN
    Sure
    Is that US bill ‘military’ for the same reason the Defence Force is involved in this act?
    SOURCE
    TRUMP: WE’RE MOBILIZING THE MILITARY TO DELIVER THE CORONAVIRUS VACCINE END OF 2020
    Dr Sharad S. Chauhan is a decorated Indian Police Service (IPS) officer awarded the Prime Minister’s baton and the Home Minister’s Revolver. He is also a Gold Medallist MBBS Doctor from Delhi University with a PhD in Bioterrorism. He also authored the book Biological Weapons.
    SOURCE

    The market is fragmented, and the degree of fragmentation will accelerate during the forecast period. Alexeter Technologies LLC, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc., Altimmune Inc., ANP Technologies Inc., Bavarian Nordic AS, Cleveland BioLabs Inc., Elusys Therapeutics Inc., Emergent BioSolutions Inc., General Dynamics Corp., and GlaxoSmithKline Plc are some of the major market participants. Although the rising prevalence of infectious disease and rapid increase in government funding in R&D will offer immense growth opportunities, to leverage the current opportunities, market vendors must strengthen their foothold in the fast-growing segments, while maintaining their positions in the slow-growing segments.

    TECHNAVIO BIODEFENSSE MARKET REPORT
    GERMAN & UK DEFENSE WORK ON MASSIVE “HUMAN AUGUMENTATION” PROJECT FOR CIVILIAN POPULATION

    In an exclusive interview, Dr. Boyle touches upon GreatGameIndia‘s exclusive report Coronavirus Bioweapon – where we reported in detail how Chinese Biowarfare agents working at the Canadian lab in Winnipeg were involved in the smuggling of Coronavirus to Wuhan’s lab from where it is believed to have been leaked.

    In this bombshell interview (full transcript below), Boyle talks about:

    • The bioweapons origins of the coronavirus
    • How the Deep State deployed anthrax on US soil to whip up publicity about biological weapons and increase funding for bioweapons labs
    • Why the WHO and CDC are both criminal organizations which are complicit in the covert development of biological weapons
    • The “death science” industry and why the US government has spent over $100 billion developing self-replicating weapons
    • Details about the Pirbright Institute and its ties to bioweapons, depopulation, vaccines and coronavirus patents. (It’s partially funded by Bill & Melinda Gates)
    • Why all BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs in the world should be banned and shut down.

    Full transcript


    Geopolitics and Empire: Geopolitics & Empire is joined by Dr. Francis Boyle, who is international law professor at the University of Illinois. We’ll be discussing the Wuhan coronavirus and biological warfare. He’s served as counsel to numerous governments such as Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Palestinian authority. He’s represented numerous national international bodies in the areas of human rights, war crimes and genocide, nuclear policy, and biowarfare. He’s written numerous books, one of my favorites being “Destroying Libya and World Order”, which I assigned as mandatory reading material for my own students when I taught at the Monterrey Institute of Technology.

    But most important for this interview, he’s written a book called “Biowarfare and Terrorism”, and drafted the US domestic implementing legislation for the biological weapons convention, known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 that was approved unanimously by both houses of the US Congress and signed into law by President Bush. Thanks for joining us, Dr. Boyle.

    Dr. Francis Boyle: Wow. Thank you so much for having me on and thanks for that kind introduction.

    Geopolitics and Empire:  Now let’s get to what’s been on the news recently. This coronavirus in Wuhan. There have been some reports recently, there’s a really interesting website called GreatGameIndia that has been reporting on this. They’ve been talking about China, which they say has been complying with biological weapons convention in recent years.

    But then there are some people in the US and experts that have been saying that in reality, China isn’t complying with the weapons convention. And I think neither, perhaps the US as well. I’m wondering if China is developing its own biosafety level four lab in Wuhan and elsewhere, as you know, as a type of deterrence. Is it a type of a biological arms race that we have going on?

    You told me in an email that you suspect China was developing the coronavirus as a dual use of biowarfare weapons agent. Also, what do you make of reports that Chinese scientists have been stealing research and viruses, including the coronavirus from a Canadian bio lab this past December?

    And as well, Chinese nationals have been charged with smuggling vials of biological research to China from the US with the aid of Charles Lieber who was the chair of Harvard’s chemistry department. And he also happens to be in 2011 a strategic scientist at Wuhan University. So, can you tell us what’s going on with this recent outbreak in Wuhan?

    Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, that’s a lot of questions. I guess we can take them one at a time, but if you just do a very simple Google search on “Does China have a BSL-4 laboratory?”, Wuhan comes up right away. It’s at the top of the list. That’s all with the moment this type of thing happened I began to do that. So a BSL-4 is the most serious type. And basically BSL-4 labs, we have many of them here in the United States, are used to develop offensive biological warfare weapons with DNA genetic engineering.

    So it does seem to me that the Wuhan BSL-4 is the source of the coronavirus. My guess is that they were researching SARS, and they weaponize it further by giving it a gain of function properties, which means it could be more lethal.

    Indeed, the latest report now is it’s a 15% fatality rate, which is more than SARS at 83% infection rate. A typical gain of function travels in the air so it could reach out maybe six feet or more from someone emitting a sneeze or a cough. Likewise, this is a specially designated WHO research lab. The WHO was in on it and they knew full well what was going on there.

    Yes. It’s also been reported that Chinese scientists stole coronavirus materials from the Canadian lab at Winnipeg. Winnipeg is Canada’s formal center for research, developing, testing, biological warfare weapons. It’s along the lines of Fort Detrick here in the United States of America. I have three degrees from Harvard. It would not surprise me if something was being stolen out of Harvard to turn over to China. I read that report. I don’t know what was in those vials one way or the other.

    But the bottom line is I drafted the US domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention that was approved unanimously by both Houses in the United States Congress signed into law by President Bush Sr. that it appears the coronavirus that we’re dealing with here is an offensive biological warfare weapon that leaped out of Wuhan BSL-4. I’m not saying it was done deliberately. But there had been previous reports of problems with that lab and things leaking out of it. I’m afraid that is what we are dealing with today.

    Geopolitics and Empire: We’ll be talking about the Wuhan and the coronavirus and China, but can you give us kind of like a bigger context. I know you’ve, previously, in interviews said that since 9/11, you think that the US has spent $100 billion on biological warfare research. We know the Soviet Union, if I’m not mistaken, developed anthrax as a bioweapon. And you’ve also mentioned that UK, France, Israel and China are all involved in biological warfare weapons research.

    And something interesting, I believe one or two years ago a Bulgarian journalist and the Russian government shared their concern of the discovery of a US bioweapons lab in the country of Georgia. You’ve commented how in Africa, US has set up bioweapons labs to work on Ebola, which I think is illegal under international law. But they were allowed somehow to put those in Africa. Can you give us like a bigger picture? What’s going on with these different countries and what’s the purpose of this research?

    Dr. Francis Boyle: All these BSL-4 labs are by United States, Europe, Russia, China, Israel are all there to research, develop, test biological warfare agents. There’s really no legitimate scientific reason to have BSL-4 labs. That figure I gave $100 billion, that was about 2015 I believe. I had crunched the numbers and came up with that figure the United States since 9/11.

    To give you an idea that’s as much in constant dollars as the US spent to develop the Manhattan Project and the atom bomb. So it’s clearly all weapons related. We have well over 13,000 alleged life science scientists involved in research developed testing biological weapons here in the United States. Actually this goes back it even precedes 9/11 2001.

    I have another book, The Future of International Law and American Foreign Policy, tracing that all the way back to the Reagan administration under the influence of the neocons and they got very heavily involved in research development testing of biological weapons with DNA genetic engineers. It was because of that I issued my plea in 1985 in a Congressional briefing sponsored by the Council for Responsible Genetics, I’m a lawyer for them. They’re headquartered in Cambridge, Mass. All the MIT, Harvard people are involved in that, the principal ones. And then they asked me to draft the implementing legislation.

    The implementing legislation that I drafted was originally designed to stop this type of work. “Death science work”, I call it, “by the United States government”. After 9/11, 2001, it just completely accelerated. My current figure, that last figure a 100 billion. I haven’t had a chance to re-crunch the numbers because I just started classes. But you have to add in about another 5 billion per year.

    Basically, this is offensive biological weapons raised by the United States government and with its assistance in Canada and Britain. And so other States, the world have responded accordingly including Russia and China. They were going to set up a whole series of BSL-4 facilities as well. And you know Wuhan was the first. It backfired on them.

    Geopolitics and Empire: Would you basically consider what happened and Wuhan and just boil it down to ineptitude or incompetence on the Chinese part?

    Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, it’s criminality. It does appear they stole something there from Winnipeg. This activity that they engaged in clearly violates the Biological Weapons Convention. Research development of biological weapons these days is an international crime, the use of it would be. That was criminal.

    I’m not saying they deliberately inflicted this on their own people, but it leaked out of there and all these BSL-4 facilities leak. Everyone knows that who studies this. So this was a catastrophe waiting to happen. Unfortunately, it happened. The Chinese government under Xi and his comrades there have been covering this up from the get-go. The first reported case was December 1, so they’d been sitting on this until they couldn’t anymore. And everything they’re telling you is a lie. It’s propaganda.

    The WHO still refuses to declare a global health emergency. It said Tedros was over there shaking hands with Xi and smiling and yanking it up. The WHO was in on it. They’ve approved many of these BSL-4 labs., they know exactly what’s going on and that is a WHO research-approved laboratory. They know what’s going on too. You can’t really believe anything the WHO is telling you about this, either they’re up to their eyeballs in it, in my opinion.

    Geopolitics and Empire: I’d probably agree with you that this outbreak in Wuhan was an accidental leak from the laboratory. But just your thoughts, it’s happening at quite an opportune time because namely we’re smack in the middle of a US-China new Cold War, which is currently characterized by economic warfare such as the trade war among other forms of hybrid and technological warfare. And it seems the Wuhan outbreak will likely hit the Chinese economy hard. The Chinese are flat out dismissing any idea that the US is involved in. Like I said, it’s probably they made the mistakes in the Wuhan lab. What are your thoughts of any seemingly, this would benefit the US…

    Dr. Francis Boyle: When the outbreak occurred, of course I considered that alternative too. When you have an outbreak, you’re never quite sure who or what is behind it. It certainly isn’t bats, that’s ridiculous. They made the same argument on Ebola in West Africa. I demolished that online. You can check it out. So I kept competing theories about this.

    But right now, when you originally contacted me, I said I wasn’t prepared to comment because I was weighing the evidence. I’m a law professor and a lawyer,  I try to do the best I can to weigh the evidence. But right now, the Wuhan BSL-4 in my opinion is the most likely source, apply Occam’s razor, the simplest explanation. I’m not ruling out some type of sabotage. But right now, I believe that is the source here.

    Geopolitics and Empire: And you mentioned WHO. I’d like to just get your thoughts on the WHO and the Big Pharma. There’s also some analysts who are downplaying this news media hype of the coronavirus. You’ve just said that it seems to be lethal, but if we go back a decade to the 2009 swine flu, which I believe didn’t have too many casualties, but I think profited greatly the pharmaceutical companies. If I recall that back in 2009, many countries purchased great stocks of the vaccines and they ended up not using anywhere from 50 to 80% of the vaccines that they purchased.

    You’ve previously stated in an interview that the World Health Organization is a front for Big Pharma if I’m not mistaken. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. also agrees and he says, you know, 50% of WHO funding comes from pharmaceutical companies. And that the CDC itself is also severely compromised. What are your thoughts on the WHO? The CDC?

    Dr. Francis Boyle: Can’t trust anything the WHO says because they’re all bought and paid for by Big Pharma and when they work in cahoots with the CDC, which is the United States government, they work in cahoots with Fort Detrick, so you can’t trust any of it.

    However, the swine flu and yes, I agree pharma made a lot of money, but that swine flu which I looked at it, it did seem to me to be a genetically modified biological warfare weapon. It was a chimera of three different types of genetic strains that someone put it together in a cocktail. Fortunately, it was not as lethal as all of us fear. So fine. But as I said, this figure I just gave to you was Saturday from Lancet, which is a medical publication, saying it’s a 15% fatality rate and an 83% infection rate. So it’s quite serious, I think, far more serious than the swine flu.

    As for big pharma, sure they’re all trying to profit off this today as we speak. There was a big article yesterday in the Wall Street Journal, all big pharma trying to peddle whatever they can over there in China even if it’s worthless and won’t help. We do know, if you read the mainstream news media they say there isn’t a vaccine.

    Well, there is, it’s by the Pirbright Institute in Britain that’s tied into their biological warfare program over there. They were behind the hoof and mouth disease outbreak over there that wiped out their cattle herd and it leaked out of there. So it’s clear they’re working on a hoof and mouth biological warfare weapon, but the vaccine is there. I have the patent for it here, I haven’t had a chance to read the patent it’s about 25 pages long and my classes just resume. So eventually, I get some free time and I’ll read the patent.

    You can’t patent a vaccine with the United States patent office unless the science is there. So there is a vaccine. Everyone’s lying about that, no one’s pointing this out – there’s a vaccine but instead big pharma wants to make money and the researchers say, well, it’ll take three months and we’re racing forward, you know. Everyone’s gonna make a buck off of this, that’s for sure. But there is a vaccine, I have the patent here. It’s been patented by the United States government.

    So obviously, I don’t know exactly how workable it is, but it’s a vaccine. I don’t know why it isn’t out there now? Why isn’t someone saying there is a vaccine? Perhaps political leaders have already been vaccinated for all I know, I really don’t know.  But there is a vaccine, Pirbright is well known there in Britain and it’s tied into Fort Detrick and CDC is tied into Fort Detrick too. So they all know there’s a patented vaccine.

    Geopolitics and Empire:  And just to get your comment on, I mean, something to related to this, which was my next question. So I think, I’m not sure if it’s that same Institute that you just mentioned that has the patent.  I read somewhere that the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation maybe funds or has some connection to that Institute that has the patent.

    Dr. Francis Boyle:  I think they do. The Bill & Melinda Gates information, they fund this type of DNA genetically engineered biological warfare work. That’s correct. So you can’t trust anything they’re telling you that somehow they’re out there trying to make the world a better place.  I mean, we have Bill Gates publicly admitting that the world be a better place if there were a lot less people. So the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, they are wolves in sheep’s clothing and they are funding this type of stuff. Sure.

    Geopolitics and Empire: And just your comment, there was also the report that I guess it was a consortium of companies which included the Gates foundation that back in just two or three months ago in October of 2019 they held a pandemic exercise simulating an outbreak. I mean, what are the chances specifically of a coronavirus and it was called events 201. People can find this online online and they gave a list of seven recommendations for governments and international organizations to take. I also find that kind of interesting how they had this simulation.

    Dr. Francis Boyle:  That’s correct. It raises that question,  the origins of what happened here.  But right now, I’m just looking at the evidence I have and applying Occam’s razor and we know that Wuhan BSL-4 was research developing, testing, SARS as a biological warfare agent. So it could have been, they gave it this DNA genetic engineering enhanced properties gain of function which we do here in the West, in the United States all the time. We have  all sorts of research that is clearly a bio warfare research that has been  approved by the National Institutes of Health, it’s a joke. They know full well they are proving all kinds of biological warfare research and it gets funded by the United States government.

    Geopolitics and Empire:  And you’ve also mentioned in the email to me that what happened in the biosafety lab level 4 in Wuhan calls into question the safety of all of these level 3and 4four labs around the world.

    Dr. Francis Boyle:  They’re complete unsafe. BSL-3 and BSL-4 lab are only designed for research development testing of offense of biological warfare agents.  In my opinion, they serve no legitimate purpose at all. They should all be shut down, every one of them. Even assuming, they’re simply too dangerous. If you want, there’s an excellent  documentary called Anthrax Wars by Nadler and Coen and I’m in there.  Repeatedly at the end, I say with respect to these labs, three and four, this is a catastrophe waiting to happen. Well, I’m afraid the catastrophe is now happened. So there it is.

    Geopolitics and Empire:  Yeah, I was just watching that documentary before we connected and I recommend the listeners go check that out. Do you see, in the future, any countries,  if we come to a conflict between US, EU, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, Russia,  I mean you name it. Do you see any of these countries actually utilizing these biological weapons?  I mean, it’s illegal under international law but we know like in the past that international law isn’t followed. Do you think that there’s a real danger of this escalating?

    Dr. Francis Boyle: For sure. That’s the only reason they develop these biological weapons to eventually be used, sure.  I mean, it’s like the Manhattan project, we put all that money into developing an atom bomb and even though it was not needed to end world war II they still knew Hiroshima and Nagasaki. So, yes,  I think that’s correct.  And also these can be used covertly. Anytime you see an unexplained  sudden outbreak of a disease like this anywhere in the world, both for human beings and or animals, I always suspect the bio warfare agent is at work.  I monitor the situation like I did at Wuhan until I can reach a conclusion. Yes, they can be used as the eyes for the United States government, today they are fully prepared, armed, equipped, supplied to wage a biological warfare with anthrax.

    These other more exotic things I don’t know, but they have the weapons, there are stockpiles. We have to understand if you read Seymour Martin Hersh’s book published about 1968, he won the Pulitzer prize, he had the whole offensive US biological warfare industry in there back before it was illegal and criminal. Basically after 9/11, 2001, that entire industry – offensive biological warfare industry has been reconstituted here in the United States with all these BSL-4 BSL-3 labs, well over 13,000, alleged scientists sort of like Dr. Mengele working on these things. Other countries have responded in kind like Russia, like China, France is involved, Britain’s involved. Sure.

    Geopolitics and Empire: I just wanted to get your thoughts on, in the last few years there was the Russian double agent spy Sergei Skripal who had been allegedly poisoned with Novichok out in Britain and  I thought it was funny. It just so happened where he was allegedly poisoned, he was right in Porton down the British bio weapons lab, I guess the world’s first bio weapons lab that was created in 1916. I mean,  I don’t know if you have thoughts on that whole incident.

    Dr. Francis Boyle: Yeah, I was right down the street from Porton Down, so applying Occam’s razor who you think might’ve been behind this and it was not a nerve agent. A nerve agent would have killed him immediately. This is Novichok. It was something else like DX or something like that. So fine. But, I would just say that I don’t think that was a coincidence, but, you know, there you go. There’s the, obviously there’s a lot of speculation on that.

    Geopolitics and Empire: Something else that’s kind of interesting. You’ve written in bio warfare and terrorism in your book and there’s also Graeme Macqueen, I think your colleague who wrote the anthrax deception the case for domestic conspiracy…

    Dr. Francis Boyle:  Everything you said in there. That’s correct.

    Geopolitics and Empire:  I’m wondering also if this new war for biotechnological dominance, whatever you want to call it, if it can also be used kind of as a pretext for the centralization of political power and the initiation of wars like I guess it did in the 2003 Iraq war. I mean, is this another danger that we get these events like now this coronavirus and then governments will call for a centralization of greater power and taking away some of our civil liberties?

    Dr. Francis Boyle:  Sure. If you look at the October, 2001 anthrax attacks here in the United States, that was clearly by elements of the United States government that was behind that. That was a super weapons grade anthrax with a trillion spores per gram and it floated in the air solely a very sophisticated biological weapons lab like Fort Detrick could produce that. And they use that anthrax attack including on Congress to brand through the USA Patriot act which basically turned the United States to a police state which is what we have now. You have to understand the Pentagon, Fort Dietrich made the dugway proving ground still has a stockpile of that super weapons grade anthrax that we saw in October of 2001 that they can use the next time they want to do something like that to further develop the American police thing. Right.

    Geopolitics and Empire:  Is there anything else you feel important to mention regarding this Wuhan Coronavirus outbreak or biological warfare or any other thoughts you’d like to leave us with?

    Dr. Francis Boyle:  Well, you just can’t believe anything the Chinese government, the WHO,  the CDC are telling. They’re all lies because they know what’s going on here  and so you’re going to have to figure it out as fast as you can. But in my opinion, as of this time and I’m fully prepared to consider further evidence on this, it does seem to me that this was  a DNA genetically engineered biological warfare agent leaking out of Wuhan that has gain-of-function properties which can make it more lethal.  I think they are probably doing something with SARS to make it a lot more lethal and more infectious. And so for that reason,  you have to take extreme precautions and they’re now finally admitted anyone within six feet can be infected, whereas with SARS that was about two feet. Well, that’s gaining a function right there and that should be a tip off.

    So, I guess you’re gonna have to protect yourself.  Laurie Garrett had a pretty good essay in a foreign policy yesterday and she was over there covering the SARS and she has very good advice in there except that she took the SARS figure out two to three feet and said  well, you gotta stay to two to three. I think you’ve got to stay at least six feet away because this is gained function. It can flow through the air and infect and it can get you in the eyes. Any orifice, the mouth, maybe the ears, we’re not sure at this point.

    Geopolitics and Empire: I’m here on the border of China in Kazakhstan and I was just reading yesterday – today that they’re no longer allowing Chinese citizens into Kazakhstan without a medical paper, a medical check to get their visas to enter Kazakhstan

    Dr. Francis Boyle:  Those medical checks are worthless because this is just public relations by all the governments involved because there is a 14 day incubation period where people can still be infected. So someone could walk right through a medical inspection and passing a gate into your country and then they come down with the coronavirus.  So that’s all public relations in my opinion by governments and they know it and they’re just sending people out there with temperatures and things like that. It’s not like SARS, this is more dangerous than SARS.  As I said, I think that Wuhan lab, we know they had SARS in there that they were dealing with and I think they enhanced it at and  I’m afraid that’s what we’re dealing with. But you know, I’m keeping an open mind as to what other sources that might have and I wasn’t prepared to say anything until that Wuhan lab is right there and it’s dealing with coronavirus. So again, apply Occam’s razor. It seems to me that’s the simplest explanation here.

    Geopolitics and Empire: I guess my, one of my final question would be in the months ahead, apart of what you say staying six feet away from people.  I’ve read taking high doses of vitamin C and other things like this can help you. But, if they come out as the situation develops and if it gets worse and they come out with a coronavirus vaccine,  should people take it or not? What are your thoughts?

    Dr. Francis Boyle:  Well, what I would say is this. Right now, if you look at the article at the Wall Street Journal, big pharma is trying to sell all sorts of – they’re taking all their drugs off the shelf and say well let’s see if it works. Which is preposterous. Okay. The scientists are saying, well, we can get you a vaccine maybe two to three months but they’re not tested.  So what we do know, however, is that Pirbright vaccine has been patented. So all I can assume is that that might work. But I don’t think I’d be taking any of these other vaccines. No, you have no idea what’s in there. You’ll be the Guinea pig for big pharma and everyone figures they’re gonna make a lot of money here. So I’ll keep my eye open on this  and how it develop but I wouldn’t trust anything they’re trying to sell right now. They’re just pulling these things off the shelf.

    If they do come up with something in two to three months, even that’s not going to be tested in accordance with normal scientific protocol. So it’s going to be a crap shoot. If it’s going to help you, indeed it might not help you because they’ll be using for this vaccines (these DNA genetic engineered vaccines) they’ll be using live coronavirus probably and sticking it in there and giving you some live coronavirus on the theory you’ll develop an immunityThat’s the way a lot of these vaccines worked out, that’s what happened with the Ebola vaccine that created the Ebola pandemic there in West Africa. They were testing out a vaccine on poor black Africans, as usual, and  this vaccine had live Ebola in it so it gave them Ebola. So again, I’d be very careful even if they do come up with these vaccines two to three months from now, very careful. Why would you want to inject the live coronavirus in you?

    Geopolitics and Empire: All right. I don’t believe you have a strong online presence. How can people best follow your work? I suppose to search for interviews as well as get your books.

    Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, basically I’m blackballed and blacklisted off all the mainstream news media here on purpose. As far as I can figure out, the US government gave an order that I should not be interviewed by anyone, so I’m not.  I guess you could just put my name in there under Google, Google alert, and some interviews might come up. What happened was, right after the anthrax attacks of 9/11 2001, I was giving a lecture out at Harvard m Alma Mater.  I was running a panel on biological warfare for the council for responsible genetics and it was at Harvard Divinity School and as I was going in, there was a Fox camera crew there from Boston and I said it looks to me like this has come out of the US government lab. We know they do research and testing on anthrax. Then I said the same thing there at Harvard then I gave an interview to a radio station in Washington, D C then I gave an interview on that to the BBC. So the whole world saw it and at that point I was completely cut off and I’ve been cut off  ever since. So you  probably not going to hear too many  interviews from me here. As for my book. Biowarfare & Terrorism, you can just get it at amazon.com. That picks up the story pretty much from 9/11 2001 and until it went to press and then there are interviews I’d given to an investigative reporter, Sherwood Ross and a big one I just sent you and you might want to put that on your web page. That was pretty comprehensive.

    Geopolitics and Empire: Yeah,  I read that as well and I’ll include the link in the description of this interview so people can go check that out. You’re not the only academic I know and have heard of others that similar things have happened and that’s just I guess the price we pay for telling the truth. Again, for listeners, if people wanted to have a broader context and deeper understanding of what’s happening today especially with biological warfare as well as us foreign policy and international affairs, I urge you to get Dr. Francis Boyle’s books and listen to his interviews as well as his colleagues book. Graeme Macqueen, The Anthrax Deception, The Case For Domestic Conspiracy. Thank you for being with us, Dr. Boyle.

    Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, thank you and again, please understand these are my current opinions.  I could change my opinion here based on more evidence. So  I’m just looking at the evidence out there as I see it and you have to understand there is so much disinformation, lies and propaganda that it’s kind of very difficult to distinguish truth from fact.  I’m doing the best job I can here.

    — end interview —


    Originally published (greatgameindia.com)


    BONUS:

    ‘It’s warfare, not science’ – Dr. Nancy T. Banks – the legendary 2012 interview on vaccines & pharma

    To be continued?
    Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
    We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
    Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

    ORDER

    ! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

    Translated into NPC: “How I Learned to Build Back Better”

    How I Learned to Love the New World Order

    by Biden, Joseph R Jr.
    Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Apr 23, 1992. pg.
    A13

    How I Learned To Love The New World Order - Joe Biden, 1992

    Imagine my surprise when a Wall Street Journal editorial appointed me dean of the Pat Buchanan school of neo-isolationism. My credentials? Believing that the Pentagon’s new strategy — America as “Globocop” — could render the United States a hollow superpower. All agree we need the military capacity to defend our vital interests — by ourselves when need be. The question is grand strategy. With the Journal’s endorsement, the Pentagon has called for a Pax Americana: The U.S. should cast so large a military shadow that no rival dare emerge.

    American hegemony might be a pleasant idea, but is it economically, politically or even militarily wise? Bristling with weapons, we would continue our economic decline, while rising industrial and financial giants in Europe and Asia viewed our military pretensions with indifference or contempt.

    Defense Secretary Dick Cheney outdid even the Journal, dipping deep into the well of Cold War argumentation to accuse Pax Americana critics of thinking “America’s world presence is somehow immoral and dangerous.” Why doesn’t the Journal stop the namecalling, get its schools sorted out, and court an honest debate over America’s proper role in the new world order?

    Pat Buchanan’s “America First” preaches martyrdom: We’ve been suckered into fighting “other” people’s battles and defending “other” people’s interests. With our dismal economy, this siren song holds some appeal.

    But most Americans, myself included, reject 1930s-style isolationism. They expect to see the strong hand of American leadership in world affairs, and they know that economic retreat would yield nothing other than a lower standard of living. They understand further that many security threats — the spread of high-tech weapons, environmental degradation, overpopulation, narcotics trafficking, migration — require global solutions.

    What about America as globocop? First, our 21st-century strategy has to be a shade more clever than Mao’s axiom that power comes from the barrel of a gun. Power also emanates from a solid bank balance, the ability to dominate and penetrate markets, and the economic leverage to wield diplomatic clout.

    Second, the plan is passive where it needs to be aggressive. The Journal endorses a global security system in which we destroy rogue-state threats as they arise. Fine, but let’s prevent such problems early rather than curing them late. Having contained Soviet communism until it dissolved, we need a new strategy of “containment” — based, like NATO, on collective action, but directed against weapons proliferation.

    The reality is that we can slow proliferation to a snail’s pace if we stop irresponsible technology transfers. Fortunately, nearly all suppliers are finally showing restraint. The maverick is China, which persists in hawking sensitive weapons and technology to the likes of Syria, Iran, Libya, Algeria and Pakistan — even while pledging otherwise.

    The Senate has tried to force China’s leaders to choose between Third World arms sales (1991 profits of $500 million) and open trade with the U.S. (a $12.5 billion annual Chinese surplus). Even though we have convincing intelligence that China’s leaders fear the use of this leverage, the president inexplicably refuses to challenge Beijing.

    Weapons containment can’t be foolproof; and against a nuclear-armed North Korea, I would support pre-emptive military action if necessary. But let’s do our best — using supplier restraint and sanctions against outlaw sellers and buyers-to avoid having to round up the posse.
    Why not an anti-proliferation “czar” in the cabinet to give this objective the prominence it urgently needs?

    Third, Pax Americana is a direct slap at two of our closest allies — Japan and Germany — and a repudiation of one of our panel1. Rather than denigrating collective security, we should regularize the kind of multilateral response we assembled for the Gulf War. Why not breathe life into the U.N. Charter? great postwar triumphs.

    For years, American leaders argued that building democracy in Europe and Asia would guarantee stability because democracies don’t start wars. Now the Pentagon says we must keep our military large enough to persuade Japan and Germany “not to aspire to a greater role even to protect their legitimate interests.”

    How has our success suddenly become a threat? It hasn’t, but the Pentagon plan could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. By insulting Tokyo and Berlin, and arrogating to ourselves military stewardship of the world, we may spark the revival no one wants.

    Secretary Cheney says he wants the allies to share the burden on defense matters. But Pax Americana puts us on the wrong end of a paradox: Hegemony means that even our allies can force ever greater U.S.
    defense spending the more they try to share the burden!

    Fourth, collective security doesn’t rule out unilateral action. The Journal says I’m among those who want “Americans . . . to trust their security to a global committee.” But no one advocates that we repeal the “inherent” right of self-defense enshrined in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.

    Secretary Cheney says his plan wouldn’t undermine support for the U.N. Who would know better than the U.N.’s usually understated secretary general? If implemented, says Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the Pentagon’s strategy would spell “the end of the U.N.”

    Rather than denigrating collective security, we should regularize the kind of multilateral response we assembled for the Gulf War. Why not breathe life into the U.N. Charter? It envisages a permanent commitment of forces, for use by the Security Council. That means a presumption of collective action — but with a U.S. veto.

    Rather than defending military extravagance, the Bush administration should be reallocating Pentagon funds to meet more urgent security needs: sustaining democracy in the former Soviet empire; supporting U.N. peacekeepers in Yugoslavia, Cambodia and El Salvador; and rebuilding a weakened and debt-burdened America.

    If Pentagon strategists and their kneejerk supporters could broaden their horizons, they would see how our superpower status is best assured. We must get lean militarily, revitalize American economic strength, and exercise a diplomatic leadership that puts new muscle into institutions of collective security.

    Sen. Biden is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s European Affairs Subcommittee.

    Thanks the great investigators at https://greatgameindia.com/ for making the transcript and all their work!

    Very apt commentary from the John Birch Society

    To be continued?
    Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
    We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
    Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

    ! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

    You thought Magnetogenetics are scary? Optogenetics are a similar thing, but using light instead of electromagnetism, non-invasive and non-detectable. Both stem from DARPA’s BRAIN Initiative.
    And you may be able to avoid EMF radiation, but you can’t avoid light.

    (BIOHACKING P.6)

    This actually touches on a wide array of concerns, from LEDs to vaccines, The Great Reset and the smart grid.
    I am very confident that if you pay attention to this video presentation from start to end, you will spend one hour, but you will save incommensurably more hours of guessing, wondering and researching. Not just the many hours I spent doing this, but the many more hours I learned where to look for and how to connect things.
    You’re still supposed to not take my word and do your own research, but this will give you some of the best tips on the topic.

    Oh, so much wow! just hours after putting this out I find out they will be spraying us with viruses. Shocker!

    ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

    OBAMA, DARPA, GSK AND ROCKEFELLER’S $4.5B B.R.A.I.N. INITIATIVE – BETTER SIT WHEN YOU READ

    THE INTERNET OF BODIES AKA THE BORG IS HERE, KLAUS SCHWAB SAYS (BIOHACKING P.5)

    FOIA RELEASE: REMOTE MIND CONTROL LINKED TO DARPA’S BRAIN MAPPING. IN 2018

    MAGNETOGENETICS, CO-FINANCED BY DARPA, GATES, ROCKEFELLERS, ZUCKERBERG! ISN’T THIS WHY VAXXERS TURN INTO FRIDGE DOORS AND MAGNETS STICK ON THEM?!

    HOW CAN PATTERNED ILLUMINATION BE USED IN OPTOGENETICS EXPERIMENTS?

    Brain Control With Light: It’s Possible With Optogenetics

    Lighting the Brain

    Karl Deisseroth and the optogenetics breakthrough.

    By John Colapinto, The New Yorker, May 11, 2015

    By rendering individual neurons photosensitive Deisseroths technique brings a once unthinkable level of precision and...
    By rendering individual neurons photosensitive, Deisseroth’s technique brings a once unthinkable level of precision and control to experiments designed to determine how the brain processes information and drives behavior.

    DARPA Awards $21.6M to Develop Optogenetic ‘Read-Write’ Neural Interface

    July 24, 2017, Biosciences

    Ehud Isacoff of the Molecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging (MBIB) Division is the project lead on a $21.6 million grant awarded to UC Berkeley as part of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA’s) Neural Engineering System Design program. The team led by Isacoff, director of the Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute at UC Berkeley, aims to develop a novel brain-machine interface that uses light to monitor and modulate the activity of thousands to millions of individual neurons in the cerebral cortex.

    To communicate with the brain, the team will first introduce a gene encoding a fluorescent protein into neurons, making the cells flash when they fire an action potential. This will be accompanied by a second gene encoding a light-activated protein that stimulates neurons in response to pulses of light. The reading device Isacoff’s group is developing is a miniaturized light field microscope, which captures light through an array of lenses and reconstructs images computationally in any depth of focus. For the writing component, they are developing a means to stimulate groups of neurons by projecting three-dimensional light patterns onto them.

    The researchers’ goal during the initial four-year funding period is to create a prototype device using model organisms—such as zebrafish larvae and mice—in which neural activity and behavior can be simultaneously detected and controlled. But DARPA’s ultimate goal is to accelerate the development of biocompatible neural implants for use in humans to compensate for sensory deficits or to control prosthetic devices. Read more from the UC Berkeley News Center.

    To be continued?
    Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
    We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
    Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

    ! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

    ORDER

    Ok, everything they’ve done so far was plain retarded but this is some smart evil scheming. Not really original, they steal merits even from plumbing, but there’s finally some intellectual merits to this plan. Or former plan, because it’s not gonna work that well once everybody finds out.

    When I said “real cure”, I have not abandoned the truth that Moronavirus exists only on computers, so it can’t have real cures other than ctrl+del.
    But SARS-COV-2 manufacturers stole some real symptoms from real viruses and diseases.
    Most of these are sensitive to a set of chemicals like the ones described below.
    The fake virus would be much harder to prop without some of these real cases of other diseases. And successes against flu, let’s say, are sold as victories against the monstrous Covidzilla.

    Also facts:

    Most drugs are just botched lab copies of natural compounds.
    Pfizer’s “twice-a-day Covid pill” is pretty much the same thing to Ivermectin.

    Pfizer ad

    Pfizer’s press-release on the pill.

    SOURCE

    “An In-silico data analysis conducted by Choudhury et al. demonstrated that Ivermectin efficiently utilizes viral spike protein, main protease, replicase, and human TMPRSS2 receptors as the most possible targets for executing its “antiviral efficiency” by disrupting binding. Since Ivermectin exploits protein targets from both, the virus and human, this could be the behind its excellent in vitro efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 “

    The Journal of Antibiotics, June 15, 2021
    they used the protease description instead of the name, I wonder if intentionally…
    SOURCE

    We identify hydroxychloroquine, a drug that already has approved uses in pregnancy, as a possible inhibitor of NS2B-NS3 protease by using a Food and Drug Administration-approved drug library, molecular docking, and molecular dynamics simulations. Further, to gain insight into its inhibitory potential toward NS2B-NS3 protease, we performed enzyme kinetic studies, which revealed that hydroxychloroquine inhibits protease activity with an inhibition constant (K i) of 92.34 ± 11.91 µM. Additionally, hydroxychloroquine significantly decreases Zika virus infection in placental cells.

    Future Virology, March 25, 2021

    The hypothesized scope for all these drugs and others is protease inhibition.

    Our results indicate that boceprevir, ombitasvir, paritaprevir, tipranavir, ivermectin, and micafungin exhibited inhibitory effect towards 3CLpro enzymatic activity. The 100 ns molecular dynamics simulation studies showed that ivermectin may require homodimeric form of 3CLpro enzyme for its inhibitory activity. In summary, these molecules could be useful to develop highly specific therapeutically viable drugs to inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 replication either alone or in combination with drugs specific for other SARS-CoV-2 viral targets.

    Communications Biology, January 2021

    Pfizer found a slightly different strategy to chemically sabotage the protease, there had to be something different to be able to patent it, but that’s like different knives to cut the same sushi, and the science is in where to cut and how deep. This is the actual breakthrough that Ivermectin inventors got a Nobel for, and Pfizer is just ripping it ready-made and tweaking it.
    Take this to your fav fucked-checker!

    SOURCE
    SOURCE

    It’s harder to steal an icecream cone from a toddler than to sell poison to grown-ups.

    To be continued?
    Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
    We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
    Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

    ! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

    Sometimes my memes are 3D. And you can own them. Or send them to someone.
    You can even eat some of them.
    CLICK HERE