Goodbye Covid Part 1
The COVID Rabbit Hole: An Inside Look at the Virus’ Origin + Building an Alternative Medical Economy
Goodbye Covide Part 1.
Federal Reserve announces major ‘pilot exercise’ for ESG social credit score system.
She was murdered
As Gates Doubles Down on Digital IDs, Critic Warns of ‘Gravest Technological Threat’ to Liberty. Sociopath Cult puppet Gates, the CFR, UN & WEF must all be stopped at all costs.
Report: China Opens 110 Overseas Police Stations, Including US & Canada
The COVID Rabbit Hole: An Inside Look at the Virus’ Origin
Dr. Paul Marik on why doctors aren't speaking out
Mass Formation Theory & The Updated Mass Induced Psychosis
THE BIG RESET MOVIE [THE UNCENSORED] TRUTH OF THE PANDEMIC.
Building an Alternative Medical Economy
Question: Which disease or injury now kills more people than Covid?
A) Stomach cancer.
B) Falls.
C) Traffic accidents.
D) Tuberculosis.
Trick question.
The answer is E) All of the above, according to World Health Organization data on the leading causes of death in 2019.
The Federal Reserve has taken a major step in the direction of facilitating an ESG compliant monetary network that effectively acts as a parallel system to that of the Chinese Communist Party’s infamous social credit scoring system.The Fed said in a statement Thursday:
“Six of the nation's largest banks will participate in a pilot climate scenario analysis exercise designed to enhance the ability of supervisors and firms to measure and manage climate-related financial risks. Scenario analysis—in which the resilience of financial institutions is assessed under different hypothetical climate scenarios—is an emerging tool to assess climate-related financial risks, and there will be no capital or supervisory implications from the pilot.”
In other words, The Fed is working with the big banks to monitor their ability to comply with the ruling class’s preferred enviro statist technocratic tyranny.
The banks involved in this pilot program are Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and Wells Fargo.
Of course, it’s just a scenario, until it’s not. The Fed pilot program is set to launch in early 2023.
The banks that are involved in this deadly ESG scam happen to also be part owners of the privately owned Fed.
The Bank for International Settlements has instructed all of its G7 central bankster nodes to crash the global financial system, making 2008 look like a pleasant Disneyland outing. They will make it appear like “markets” are rebounding to draw in the muppets a few more times and fleece them for old times sake, but, ultimately, this global ponzi scheme and the untenable debt supercycle have been perfectly prepped for demolition. Slowly, then all at once.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) this month said it will invest $200 million in digital ID projects, encompassing “digital public infrastructure, including civil registry databases and digital ID” to help meet the 2030 target date for reaching the United Nation’s (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
The $200 million in new funding — part of an overall $1.27 billion commitment by the BMGF in support of “global health and development projects,” is closely tied to Goal 16.9 of the SDGs, for which “digital identity programs are supposedly needed,” Reclaim the Net reported.
The funding adds to several existing BMFG-supported global digital ID initiatives, even as such initiatives come under fire for violating people’s right to privacy.
Michael Rectenwald, author of “Google Archipelago: The Digital Gulag and the Simulation of Freedom,” said that far from promoting an improved digital infrastructure or “global health and development,” digital identity will have more onerous applications.
Rectenwald told The Defender:
“Of all the other means of identifying and tracking subjects, digital identity poses perhaps the gravest technological threat to individual liberty yet conceived.
“It has the potential to trace, track and surveil subjects and to compile a complete record of all activity, from cradle to grave.”
Rectenwald said these more onerous applications of digital identity are what the BMGF and other similar entities find appealing:
“Digital identity will serve as a means of coercion and enforced compliance with the outrageous demands of a vaccine regime that will have no end.
“It is no wonder that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is funding this invasive, rights-abrogating technology, given Gates’ investments, both financially and ideologically, in coercive neo-Malthusian and arguably eugenics-friendly methods.”
Report claims biometric technologies required for ‘equitable redistribution of wealth and resources’
Commenting on the $200 million investment, the BMGF said:
“This funding will help expand infrastructure that low and middle-income countries can use to become more resilient to crises such as food shortages, public health threats, and climate change, as well as to aid in pandemic and economic recovery.”
Additionally, according to the BMGF, such infrastructure “encompasses tools such as interoperable payment systems, digital ID, data-sharing systems, and civil registry databases.”
The announcement came during the two-day Goalkeepers event in New York City held in parallel with the annual session of the UN General Assembly, and one week after the release of the BMGF’s “Goalkeepers Report” for 2022.
The 2022 Goalkeepers Report warned that progress toward achieving most SDGs by 2030 is off track, in part due to a myriad of global crises in the past two years that reversed previous progress in meeting the targets.
The report also highlighted biometrics as one of the technologies required to achieve the equitable redistribution of wealth and resources in economically developing countries — a goal also contained within the SDGs.
Participants in this year’s Goalkeepers event — the first held in person since 2019 — stressed the need for a renewed commitment to meeting the SDGs by the 2030 target.
BMGF CEO Mark Suzman, speaking at the event, said:
“We can get back on track toward the SDGs, but it’s going to take a new level of collaboration and investment from every sector.
“That’s why our foundation is significantly stepping up our commitment to helping confront crises now and ensure long-term impact across critical determinants of health and development.”
Gates, BMGF, Microsoft involved in multiple global digital ID initiatives
Gates is invested in digital ID initiatives around the world, not only through the BMGF but also personally and through Microsoft.
For instance, the BMGF is a supporter of MOSIP, an India-based open-source digital ID platform.
On its website, MOSIP provides “a robust scalable and inclusive foundational identity program” and “an open source platform on which national foundational IDs are built.”
These platforms, claims MOSIP, help “governments and other user organizations implement a digital, foundational identity system in a cost effective way.”
The BMGF is also a partner of Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, which in 2018, through its INFUSE (innovation for uptake, scale and equity in immunization) initiative, advocated in favor of digital IDs for kids:
“Imagine a future in which all children have access to life-saving vaccines no matter where they live — a future in which parents and health workers ensure their timely vaccination, a future in which they have their own digitally stored health record that cannot be lost or stolen, a future in which, regardless of gender, economic or social standing, this record allows each child (and parents) to have access to a bank account, go to school, access services and ultimately build a prosperous life.
“This future is possible today. With the latest advances in digital technologies that enable more effective ways to register, identify births and issue proof of identity and authentication for access to services — we are on the brink of building a healthier and more prosperous future for the world’s most vulnerable children.”
This would be accomplished by “calling for innovations that leverage new technologies to modernize the process of identifying and registering the children who are most in need of life-saving vaccines.”
The INFUSE initiative supports a digital ID for children from the moment they are born, claiming that “digital records can make it convenient to track a child’s vaccines and eliminate unnecessary paperwork.”
According to INFUSE, as children grow, “their digital health card can be used to access secondary services, such as primary school, or ease the process of obtaining alternative credentials.”
“The digital health card could, depending on country needs and readiness, potentially become the first step in establishing a legal, broadly recognized identity,” INFUSE concluded.
Investigative reporter Leo Hohmann described the initiative as “all about data collection,” having “nothing to do with health” but instead bringing “the current generation of children into the blossoming global digital identity system.”
Gavi, in turn, closely collaborates with the ID2020 Alliance, founded in 2016, which claims to advocate in favor of “ethical, privacy-protecting approaches to digital ID,” adding that “doing digital ID right means protecting civil liberties, and claims to support “ethical, privacy-protecting approaches to digital ID.”
Microsoft is a founding member of the ID2020 alliance (in 2018) and appears to partner with it, while Kim Gagné, ID2020’s board chairman, is a former Microsoft executive.
Other founding partners of ID2020 include Gavi, the BMGF, the World Bank, Accenture and the Rockefeller Foundation.
Bill Gates also backed Aktivate, a “software-as-a-service” platform that “powers student-athlete administration for over 1,300 K-12 schools and 1.5 million athletes across 30 states.”
Aktivate recently generated controversy in one Florida school district, which quietly made the platform mandatory for the registration of student athletes, before walking back this requirement.
Gates has drawn fire in India for his support and funding of various digital ID schemes there.
For instance, on his personal blog, Gates praised Aadhaar, a national digital identification card system launched in 2009, which today is the world’s largest biometric identification system.
Gates described Aadhaar as “a valuable platform for delivering social welfare programs and other government services” — and Nandan Nilekani, who developed the Aadhaar system and now works with the World Bank Group to help other countries develop similar schemes.
The Aadhaar identification number was linked with numerous public and private services, including the opening of bank accounts, verification of electoral identity, filing income tax returns, making digital payments, receiving government pensions, subsidies and welfare payments and registration of mobile SIM cards.
Aadhaar generated controversy in India over the government’s plans to link it to the national voter database, and the alleged coercion of HIV patients to submit their Aadhaar numbers, leading them to drop out of treatment programs due to privacy concerns.
Gates has dismissed privacy concerns surrounding Aadhaar, stating that “Aadhaar in itself doesn’t pose any privacy issue because it’s just a bio ID verification scheme,” adding that “We [the BMGF] have funded the World Bank to take this Aadhaar approach to other countries.”
A counterpart system to Aadhaar, the Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission — a system that would complement Aadhaar by providing a unique digital health ID to all citizens and would be linked to their personal health records — was launched in 2021.
Gates also publicly praised this platform, claiming it will help “ensure equitable, accessible healthcare delivery and accelerate progress on India’s health goals.”
The BMGF gave the Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission a $350,690 grant to support its “rollout and strengthening,” despite concerns regarding privacy, informed consent and data leakage.
A report released July 2022 by New York University’s Center for Human Rights and Global Justice entitled “Paving the Road to Hell? A Primer on the Role of the World Bank and Global Networks in Promoting Digital ID” specifically linked digital ID programs such as Aadhaar to “severe and large-scale human rights violations.”
According to the report, such digital ID programs “may in fact exacerbate pre-existing forms of exclusion and discrimination in public and private services” and “may furthermore lead to novel forms of harm, including biometric exclusion, discrimination, and the many harms associated with surveillance capitalism.”
The report added that the benefits of digital ID are “ill-defined” and “poorly documented,” and their repercussions may be “severe and potentially irreversible,” adding that the “ultimate objective” of such programs is to “facilitate economic transactions and private sector service delivery while also bringing new, poorer, individuals into formal economies and ‘unlocking’ their behavioral data.”
The same report also highlighted the role of entities such as the World Bank in promoting digital ID schemes — highlighting broader efforts to continue developing such programs despite the controversy they have created.
Commenting on the report, Rectenwald said:
“Integrated with a kind of social credit scoring system like the one supposed to be in place in China, as well as a vaccine passport, the digital identity could serve as a definitive means for political profiling, for perfecting the means of political cancellation already a part of Western life.”
Vaccines kill.
The digital health ID kills.
The social credit score system kills.
Do NOT comply.
Report: China Opens 110 Overseas Police Stations, Including US & Canada
The report, entitled “110 overseas,” details China’s extensive efforts to combat “fraud” by its citizens living overseas, in part by opening several police stations on five continents that have assisted Chinese authorities in “carrying out policing operations on foreign soil.”
According to the report, most of the overseas police stations run by China are located in Europe. The locations include London, Amsterdam, Prague, Budapest, Athens, Paris, Madrid and Frankfurt. There are currently three locations in Canada and one in New York City.
Safeguard Defenders also reported that this is a way for China to “combat the growing issue of fraud and telecommunication fraud by Chinese nationals living abroad.”
They wrote, “As these operations continue to develop and new mechanisms are set up, it is evident that countries governed by the standards set by universal human rights and the rule of law urgently need to investigate these practices to identify the (local) actors at work, mitigate the risks and effectively protect the growing number of those targeted.”
Safeguard Defenders tweeted, “Our newest investigation, out today, comes with 5 major revelations re: China’s global policing and transnational repression #TNR. 2) A new law adopted 2 Sept establishes full extraterritoriality over Chinese and foreigners globally for certain crimes.
The COVID Rabbit Hole: An Inside Look at the Virus’ Origin
In early 2020, a Scripps Research virologist discovered a paper describing gain-of-function techniques that looked like a how-to manual for building the Wuhan coronavirus in a laboratory.
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Evidence points to SARS-CoV-2 being the result of a lab leak, and that Dr. Anthony Fauci, Harvard researchers, China, the mainstream media, the World Health Organization and tech companies all worked together to cover it up. U.S. Right to Know has published a detailed timeline of the cover-up
In mid-January 2020, then-director of the CDC, Dr. Robert Redfield voiced concerns that the pandemic may have been the result of a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China. He called Fauci, Wellcome Trust director Jeremy Farrar, and World Health Organization director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, urging each of them to “take the lab leak hypothesis with extreme seriousness.” To this day, he believes the lab leak theory is the most credible
In his memoir, “Spike,” Farrar noted that emails were circulating among credible scientists “suggesting the virus looked almost engineered to infect human cells.” The topic so concerned him, he acquired a burner phone and instructed his contacts to use different phones and email accounts when discussing the matter
January 29, 2020, Scripps Research virologist Kristian Andersen discovered a research paper describing gain-of-function techniques used on coronaviruses at the WIV that could have given rise to SARS-CoV-2. According to Andersen, the study looked like a how-to manual for building the Wuhan coronavirus
Andersen and several other researchers who initially suspected a lab leak rapidly changed their minds, coincidentally mere days after the Chinese real estate company Evergrande made a large donation to Harvard Medical School
That all of our federal health agencies are captured by industry can no longer be in doubt. The COVID pandemic has confirmed lingering suspicions of this, and then some. Captured agencies that are now more or less openly working against the interest of the American public include the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
They have repeatedly authorized experimental mRNA-based COVID shots despite overwhelming evidence of harm and little to no benefit. The National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which has been in charge of all U.S. biodefense research since 2003, under the leadership of Dr. Anthony Fauci, is also part of this group.
As reported by Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar (video above), evidence points to SARS-CoV-2 being the result of a lab leak, and that Fauci, Harvard researchers, China, the mainstream media, the World Health Organization and tech companies all worked together to cover it up. In his report, Saagar reviews the timeline of that cover-up, published by U.S. Right to Know (USRTK) September 14, 2022.1
Timeline of the Lab Leak Cover-Up — January 2020
In mid-January 2020, then-director of the CDC, Dr. Robert Redfield, a virologist, voiced concerns that the pandemic may have been the result of a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China. He told Vanity Fair that he called Fauci, Wellcome Trust director Jeremy Farrar, and World Health Organization director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, urging each of them to “take the lab-leak hypothesis with extreme seriousness.”2
In his memoir, “Spike,” Farrar also noted that emails were circulating among credible scientists “suggesting the virus looked almost engineered to infect human cells.”3 The topic so concerned him, he acquired a burner phone and instructed his contacts to use different phones and email accounts when discussing the matter.
January 27, 2020, Fauci was reminded that he funds coronavirus research at the WIV by way of the EcoHealth Alliance, which by then had been collaborating with the WIV on coronavirus research for the previous five years. Two days later (January 29) Scripps Research virologist Kristian Andersen discovered a paper describing gain-of-function techniques used on coronaviruses at the WIV that could potentially have given rise to SARS-CoV-2. As reported by USRTK:4
“Andersen became alarmed that a bat coronavirus may have been engineered to infect humans, pointing to the receptor binding domain and furin cleavage site ... He also flagged a gain-of-function study that ‘looked like a how-to manual for building the Wuhan coronavirus in a laboratory.’
‘Andersen found a scientific paper where exactly this technique had been used to modify the spike protein of the original SARS-CoV-1 virus, the one that had caused the SARS outbreak of 2002/3,’ Farrar wrote. ‘The pair knew of a laboratory where researchers had been experimenting on coronaviruses for years: the Wuhan Institute of Virology, in the city at the heart of the outbreak.’
The title of this paper is unknown. But it is clear that a 2015 paper5 involving gain-of-function work with a SARS-CoV backbone at the Wuhan Institute of Virology appears to have alarmed Fauci a few days later.
The 2015 paper had been given an abbreviated title: ‘SARS Gain of function.’ Andersen and [University of Sydney virologist Edward] Holmes met on a Zoom call. ‘Fuck, this is bad,’ Holmes said in response to Andersen’s findings.”
January 31, 2020, Andersen wrote an email to Fauci, stating that the virus looked unnatural to him and three other virologists who had looked at its genetic sequence, and that all four of them “find the genome to be inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.”
The three virologists in question were Robert (Bob) Garry at the Tulane Cancer Center, Eddie Holmes at the University of Sydney and Michael Farzan, chair of the Scripps Research Department of Immunology and Microbiology. According to Farrar’s memoir, Holmes was at that time 80% sure the virus came from a lab, while Andersen estimated the risk of it being from a lab leak at 60% to 70%.
Two hours after Andersen gave him the bad news, shortly past midnight, Fauci emailed NIAID principal deputy director Hugh Auchincloss, telling him “It is essential that we speak this AM. Keep your cell phone on.”
He also instructed Auchincloss to read an attached scientific paper, thought to be the 2015 Nature paper “A SARS-Like Cluster of Circulating Bat Coronaviruses Shows Potential for Human Emergence,” which the NIH had funded through an EcoHealth Alliance grant, and told him he “will have tasks today that must be done.”
That paper, co-led by WIV director Zhengli Shi, described how they’d spliced the spike protein of one coronavirus into a SARS-CoV backbone. Importantly, the authors noted that additional experimentation “may be too risky to pursue.”
Cover-Up Timeline: February 2020
Shortly before noon February 1, 2020, then-director of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins, emailed a preprint study authored by Shi to Fauci, describing several coronaviruses, including one called RaTG13. Collins added that there’s “No evidence this work was supported by NIH.” At 2 p.m., Fauci and Collins both joined a confidential teleconference organized by Farrar.
Other attendees included Andersen, Holmes, Garry, University of Edinburg virologist Andrew Rambaut, Erasmus MC virologist Ron Fouchier, Erasmus MC department of viroscience director Marion Koopmans, Institute of Virology at Charite Hospital director Christian Drosten, German Primate Center virologist Stefan Pohlman, Wellcome deputy chair Mike Ferguson, Wellcome chief operating officer Paul Schreier, and chief scientific adviser to the U.K., Patrick Vallance.
Redfield was not invited, despite his earlier discussions with Fauci and Farrar. Later that evening, someone in the group (name redacted) emailed the group (although only Farrar and Vallance’s names are unredacted) asking, “We need to talk about the backbone too, not just the insert?” That question is important, as scientists on this call ended up writing a paper dismissing the lab leak theory as pure bunk.
The next day, the virologists exchanged thoughts. At that time, several were leaning toward it being a manufactured virus. Garry stressed he couldn’t understand how SARS-CoV-2 could have emerged naturally, and Farzan was “bothered by the furin site” and could not explain the presence of it “as an event outside the lab.”
In an email, Farzan suggested the unique features in SARS-CoV-2 might best be explained by “continued passage of virus in tissue culture ... accidentally creating a virus that would be primed for rapid transmission between humans via gain of furin site (from tissue culture) and adaption to human ACE2 receptor via repeated passage.”
Talking About a Lab Leak Would ‘Harm Science in General’
Fouchier, who in 2011 alarmed the world by modifying the deadly avian flu (H5N1) to make it spread between ferrets,6 warned the group that continuing this debate “would unnecessarily distract top researchers from their active duties and do unnecessary harm to science in general.”
Within a couple of hours, Collins had jumped on Fouchier’s bandwagon. He emailed Fauci, Farrar and NIH official Lawrence Tabak, stating he was “quickly coming around to the view that a natural origin is more likely,” and that a “swift convening of experts in a confidence inspiring framework” was needed to quell “voices of conspiracy” that could do “great potential harm to science and international harmony.”
Within the hour, Farrar forwarded an article by ZeroHedge to Fauci, Collins and Tabak, which discussed HIV insertions found in SARS-CoV-2. Approximately 2.5 hours after that, Twitter suspended ZeroHedge.
While not included in USRTK’s timeline, investigative journalist Ashley Rindsberg in May 2022 reported on a curious coincidence that took place February 2, 2020.7 Evergrande, one of the largest real estate companies in the world, which has close ties to the Chinese Communist Party and is in serious financial trouble, donated $115 million to Harvard Medical School.
Harvard dean George Daley emailed Fauci that morning, informing him of the meeting with Evergrande’s CEO Jack Zia and its chief health officer Dr. Jack Liu. For unknown reasons, Daley asked Fauci to share information “on your current efforts to coordinate a response.” Fauci and Collins phoned Daley and the Evergrande officials the next day.
Just two days after that, February 4, Farrar circulated a rough draft of what was to become “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,”8 which completely denied any possibility of a lab leak. Did Evergrande’s donation to Harvard have anything to do with Harvard scientists suddenly changing their views on the lab leak theory?9
According to USRTK, “Holmes had emailed Farrar the summary, noting that ‘It’s fundamental science and completely neutral as written. Did not mention other anomalies as this will make us look like loons.’” Farrar at that point stated he was 50/50 on the lab leak theory, while Holmes was 60/40 in favor of a lab leak.
Andersen, meanwhile, at this point changed his tune and encouraged the scientists to claim the virus was “consistent with natural evolution,” which is the complete opposite of his view just a few days earlier, when he told Fauci the genome was “inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.”
At the same time that all of this was going on, members of the group were pressuring the WHO to convene a group to investigate the virus’s origin. As we now know, that group was biased beyond belief and its conclusions so absurd that the world rejected it wholesale, forcing Ghebreyesus to backpedal and promise to launch a new investigation.
February 11, Ian Lipkin, a virologist and professor of epidemiology at Columbia University and a coauthor of “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” sent an email to his coauthors — Andersen, Rambaut, Holmes and Garry — stating the argument against genetic engineering was “well reasoned,” but that it “does not eliminate the possibility of inadvertent release following adaptation through selection in culture” at the WIV.
He continued, “Given the scale of the bat CoV research pursued there and the site of emergence of the first human cases, we have a nightmare of circumstantial evidence to assess.”
Cover-Up Timeline: March 2020
In a March 6, 2022, email, Andersen thanked Farrar, Fauci and Collins for their “advice and leadership” on the “Proximal Origin” paper. “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2”10 was published in the journal Nature Medicine in mid-March.
As intended, it received massive media coverage, with headlines like, “The Coronavirus Did Not Escape from a Lab: Here’s How We Know,” “Once and for All, the New Coronavirus Was Not Made in a Lab,” and “Sorry, Conspiracy Theorists. Study Concludes COVID-19 Is Not a Laboratory Construct.” March 26, Collins even highlighted the paper on the NIH blog — but didn’t say a word about his own involvement.
Cover-Up Timeline: April and May 2020
Alas, despite best efforts, and with all of mainstream media helping push the false narrative, “conspiracy theories” about the virus being a lab-created bioweapon just would not stop — a fact that probably kept Fauci and Collins awake many a night.
In an April 16, 2020, email to Fauci titled “conspiracy gains momentum,” Collins asked, “Wondering if there is something NIH can do to help put down this very destructive conspiracy, with what seems to be growing momentum ... I hoped the Nature Medicine article on the genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 would settle this ...”
Fauci replied, “I would not do anything about this right now. It is a shiny object that will go away in times [sic].” Hours later, Fauci did a White House press conference in which he cited the “Proximal Origin” paper he helped conceive, telling reporters the virus arose naturally, and is “totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human.”
That same day, April 16, Holmes and a Chinese researcher also published “A Genomic Perspective on the Origin and Emergence of SARS-CoV-2,”11 in which they argue that RaTG13 could not have been used to create SARS-CoV-2 because RaTG13 was sampled from the Yunnan Province while COVID-19 appeared in Wuhan. Furthermore, it would take 20 to 50 years for RaTG13 to mutate into SARS-CoV-2.
May 5, 2020, Lipkin emailed Chen Zhu, China’s former minister of health, expressing deep appreciation for “your efforts in steering and messaging” around COVID-19’s origin.
Cover-Up Timeline: July and August 2020
Fast-forward to July, and the authors of “Proximal Origin” had a new problem. An anonymous whistleblower contacted Science journalist Jon Cohen, sharing “the bizarre back-story” of the “Proximal Origin” paper.
Cohen, in turn, forwarded the message to Holmes and Andersen who, within three hours, conferred with Fauci and Farrar on how to respond. According to USRTK, Cohen has not released the email he received from the tipster, nor Holmes’ response. Cohen also never used it for an article.
By August 19, 2020, Fauci and Collins were again conferring about how to address critical news articles. One postulated the virus was created in a lab. The other two discussed NIAID grants to EcoHealth Alliance. Despite questions being raised about the connections between the NIH, EcoHealth and the WIV, the NIAID extended a new grant to EcoHealth and Andersen’s lab just eight days later.
Cover-Up Timeline: 2021
Efforts to keep a lid on the lab leak theory didn’t fare any better in 2021. At the end of March 2021, the WHO released its COVID origin report, which dismissed the lab leak theory, but backlash forced Ghebreyesus to stress that the investigation was incomplete and would continue.
June 1, emails received by BuzzFeed following a FOIA lawsuit revealed Andersen and other authors of the “Proximal Origin” paper had initially leaned toward it being a lab leak, and that Fauci and Collins had participated in and probably steered its conception. Andersen denied the NIH had anything to do with the article and started deleting tweets amid the backlash.
In June, questions also arose about why the NIH deleted early SARS-CoV-2 genomic data from its public database. The deletion of the data was reported by evolutionary biologist Jesse Bloom on the preprint server BioRxiv. According to Bloom, Collins, Fauci, Andersen and Garry encouraged him to delete the preprint, which he refused to do.12
Cover-Up Timeline: 2022
In 2022, the cover-up started to unravel. BuzzFeed’s FOIA documents “starkly showed concerns among the authors [of the Proximal Origin paper] about unusual features of the genome,” USRTK writes. Garry, like Andersen before him, did what he could to protect Fauci and Collins, insisting they had nothing to do with the writing of that paper.
July 1, 2022, Lipkin, one of the “Proximal Origin” coauthors, was suddenly found to have once been a partner of EcoHealth Alliance, which was not reported in the paper’s conflict of interest section.
“The potential for conspiracy is really on the other side. The conspiracy is Collins, Fauci, and the established scientific community that has acted in an antithetical way to science.” ~ Former CDC director Robert Redfield
By the end of the month, new entries in an NIH genomic database revealed Holmes too has had an ongoing relationship with the WIV, including collaborative work on RaTG13, and Holmes, like Lipkin, did not disclose this in his “Proximal Origin” conflicts of interest statement.
Classified Information May Reveal Lab Accident
In a recent interview with investigative journalist Paul Thacker,13 former CDC director Redfield discussed “inside battles with Fauci” and claimed classified information “will point to a lab accident in Wuhan.” Thacker writes:
“’Tony and I are friends, but we don't agree on this at all,’ Redfield told me. ‘The potential for conspiracy is really on the other side. The conspiracy is Collins, Fauci, and the established scientific community that has acted in an antithetical way to science.’
Speaking with me from his home in Baltimore, Redfield said that evidence in favor of a lab accident in China continues to accumulate and he expects more classified information to become public.”
In related news, September 15, 2022, The Lancet Commission also published its long-awaited report on the origin of SARS-CoV-2, and it’s not what Fauci and his cronies were hoping for. On the contrary, the report outlines “the possibility that the COVID-19 pandemic may have originated with a pathogen leaked from a lab ...” The Independent reports.14
The report stresses that while it could have come from a natural spillover, it could just as easily be the result of a lab leak. Commission chairman Jeffrey Sachs has been outspoken about his suspicions that the virus emerged from a U.S.-backed research program in China. At the same time, continued in-depth investigation continues to be hampered by misplaced allegiance to the CCP. As reported by Matt Ridley in The Telegraph:15
“The Lancet Commission ... has concluded that ‘the origin of the virus remains unknown’ and that ‘both natural and laboratory spillovers are in play and need further investigation.’ This conclusion matters because there has been an attempt to shut down all curiosity about the origin of the pandemic ...
The Sachs Commission points out that a great many related viruses were collected from bats and engineered by a laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in collaboration with US partners in the years leading up to the outbreak. That simple fact puts the Wuhan lab under suspicion.
Further, SARS-CoV-2 contains a dangerous feature called a furin cleavage site in its spike gene that is found in no other virus of this kind (the sarbecoviruses). Many scientists admitted early in the pandemic to being baffled as to how it could have acquired this feature naturally yet with minimal other mutations in its spike gene.
Last year a document surfaced showing that scientists in Wuhan and elsewhere were in 2018 considering inserting exactly such a furin cleavage site into newly discovered sarbecoviruses to test their virulence in human cells ...
The point Sachs’s team is making is that the technology used in Wuhan to create ‘chimeric’ (hybrid) sarbecoviruses and insert material into their genomes originated in the University of North Carolina with other coronaviruses, and it would be nice ... if US researchers who collaborated with Wuhan were more forthcoming about what they know.
The Sachs Commission makes the crucial point that ‘no independent, transparent, and science-based investigation has been carried out regarding the bioengineering of Sars-like viruses that was underway before the outbreak of Covid-19’ ...
Pause to notice how shocking this is. Around 20 million are dead because of a virus new to the human species. A strong possibility is that it originated in laboratory research that was going on in the city where it started.
Yet the notebooks and databases from that lab have never been made available, and many scientists and politicians are not even prepared to criticize the Chinese government over this lack of cooperation.
The reason that prominent western scientists gave in private emails in 2020 for not wanting to discuss a possible lab origin of the virus was that it might do harm to ‘international harmony.’ What happened to seeking the truth?”
Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.
The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.
If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.
5 Nature Medicine 2015; 21: 1508-1513
7 Spectator World May 26, 2022 (Archived)
8 Nature Medicine 2020; 26: 450-452
9 Twitter Marty Makary September 16, 2022
10 Nature Medicine 2020; 26: 450-452
11 Cell April 16, 2020; 181(2): 223-227
13 The Disinformation Chronicle September 15, 2022
14 The Independent September 15, 2022 (Archived)
15 The Telegraph September 18, 2022 (Archived)
Dr. Paul Marik on why doctors aren't speaking out
My blue pilled friends can't figure out why, if the vaccines are so dangerous, aren't more doctors speaking out. Here's why.
My blue pilled friends who believe the vaccines are safe have told me they would reconsider their position if just a single one of their own doctors came out against the vaccine. One of them said even if a “TV doctor” (such as Sanjay Gupta) said it was unsafe, they would reconsider their position.
Mass Formation Theory & The Updated Mass Induced Psychosis
"We are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind...and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world."
-- Edward Bernays, "Propaganda", chapter 1 (1928)
There are some nuances to Desmet’s Mass Formation Psychosis theory that some may not be fully appreciating.
The 'Big Reset Movie' shows the truth about the so-called ‘pandemic’ and how detrimental policies have been implemented all over the world using fear and manipulation it includes statements from a wide range of experts who show what’s behind the Great Reset.
This film is DISTURBINGLY MIND BENDING as it exposes the who, what, when, where, why, and how.
The world’s population must attempt to connect the dots to discern the truth. I hope this movie will trigger a massive awakening around the world. The more it is shared and circulated, the more lives will be saved.
Building an Alternative Medical Economy in Response to ‘Tyranny’: Telehealth CEO
By Harry Lee and David Zhang August 30, 2022 Updated: August 30, 2022
Military veteran and entrepreneur Adam Hardage aims to build an alternative medical economy in response to what he calls “tyranny” in the nation.
Hardage is CEO and co-founder of Remote Health Solutions (RHS), along with Dr. Jon Baugh, its chief medical officer. The two started the company five years ago, focusing on high-quality telemedicine care. After experiencing lockdowns and COVID-19 vaccine mandates, and what he calls “corruption within the medical industrial complex,” Hardage decided to build a “medical economy 2.0.”
Speaking with The Epoch Times on Aug. 12, Hardage said of the lockdowns and mandates: “It’s immoral, it’s unethical, and it’s unconstitutional.”
“Moreover, it’s frankly criminal, and it’s just punitive unnecessarily to fire health care workers that were last year’s heroes, and now they’re this year zeros, all for just refusing an experimental gene modification injection,” Hardage added. “So we’re going to make it our mission to hire every single one of those providers across the nation. We’re going to build the medical economy 2.0.”
There are no national statistics on how many health care workers have been fired nationwide for refusing the COVID-19 vaccines. In New York, a state with one of the most strict vaccination requirements, about 34,000 health care workers have quit, retired, or been fired over refusing the vaccines.
‘Noah’s Ark for Medicine’
Hardage and his team pivoted the business model about a year ago. RHS now provides concierge-level health care for patients across the nation. In addition, the company, which Hardage calls the “Noah’s Ark for medicine,” welcomes medical professionals whose careers were jeopardized because they refused COVID-19 vaccines.
Hardage said RHS can handle up to 90 percent of a patient’s typical needs through virtual care. The virtual medicine service can be especially helpful under certain circumstances, for instance, if a child gets sick at night or during a holiday.
“We want you well. It’s in our best interest financially for you to be healthy,” said Hardage. “If we’re giving out bad treatment, bad advice, bad guidance to our patients, and they get sick all the time—well, then, we’re going to go out of business.”
Because the business charges a flat fee for unlimited care per month, seeing the doctor more frequently or getting additional treatment will not benefit RHS financially.
“A hospital is completely the opposite,” said Hardage.
Remdesivir
To illustrate, Hardage used the example of COVID-19 treatment. He said hospitals are financially incentivized to perform PCR testing, use remdesivir, intubate COVID-19 patients, and put them in the ICU.
Remdesivir is a controversial drug, authorized and later approved in 2020 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat COVID-19 patients. Multiple studies have shown that remdesivir has no effect on hospitalized COVID-19 patients. In fact, some doctors claim that the drug has played a key role in COVID-related deaths, and the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended against the drug in November 2020. Following the publication of a clinical trial in April, the WHO now suggests using remdesivir in mild or moderate COVID-19 patients at high risk of hospitalization.
Hospitals in the nation are eligible for a 20 percent add-on payment for using some FDA-approved or authorized COVID-19 treatments, including remdesivir, according to an interim final rule issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), an agency under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
An ampule of Gilead Sciences COVID-19 antiviral remdesivir is pictured at University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, in Hamburg, Germany, on April 8, 2020. (Ulrich Perrey/Pool via Reuters)
Dr. Peter McCullough, a renowned cardiologist and epidemiologist, has called administering remdesivir as a frontline therapy “intentional and injurious to the population.”
“As a doctor, I use lots of drugs in the hospital. I’ve never had an antibiotic or antiviral where the entire hospital stay would get a 20 percent bonus,” McCullough told EpochTV’s “Facts Matter” program in early August. “Americans should be asking questions.”
According to CMS, the add-on payment was to “mitigate potential financial disincentives for hospitals to provide new COVID-19 treatments” during the public health emergency period.
The Epoch Times has contacted HHS for additional comment.
Alinsky’s Playbook
Hardage believes the United States has experienced “an attempted Marxist, communist, internal coup.”
Having served in the military for 20 years, “I cannot believe that this is the country that I came back to,” Hardage said. “I don’t understand what I’m seeing a lot of times. But now, after the last few years, I’ve really started to unpack it. And I understand very clearly what’s going on. This is nothing less than Saul Alinsky’s playbook of, let’s go after the first pillar, for example, which is health care.”
Alinsky was a community organizer and left-wing social activist. His thought, reflected in the 1971 book “Rules for Radicals,” is believed to have influenced former President Barack Obama.
A Parallel Economy
Hardage said the damage to today’s medical system can be traced back to Obama’s policies.
“What you are seeing right now is a direct result of the Obamacare policies,” Hardage said. “If a hospital is going to take money from Medicare, Medicaid—Affordable Care Act—then they have to follow those guidelines, those mandates, those regulations.”
Protesters gather in Grand Park outside Los Angeles City Hall, at a March for Freedom rally, demonstrating against the Los Angeles City Council’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for city employees and contractors, on Nov. 8, 2021. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)
Hardage feels federal health agencies could have recommended early treatment options such as vitamin D, C, B, zinc, quercetin, ivermectin, or hydroxychloroquine. However, these drugs are safe but not “profitable.”
In reaction, what Hardage calls a “parallel economy” has been built, standing “in direct response to oppression, to tyranny.”
“Stop giving your money to the institutions that are corrupt, that are literally taking everything from you, including your health, and join a patriot organization such as ours,” Hardage said.
To Support and Defend the Constitution
Hardage believes what he is doing is a continuation of his service to his country: “I’ve taken the oath of office many times,” he said, citing the oath service members take to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
“That doesn’t mean I’m going to pick up a gun and go run around the streets like a crazy person. But it does mean that we’re going to defeat them at the ballot box. We’re going to defeat them in the war of ideas. We’re going to defeat them on the stage. We’re going to defeat them with the whole notion of reawakening America, instead of resetting America.”