80% of All New ‘Covid Vaxx-disease Cases’ Are Fully Jabbed. Yes, these are the ones they are still calling covid19 disease.

The plandemic of the “fully vaxxinated” rages on as the latest data shows that the vast majority of hospitalizations and deaths from the Covid-19 vaxx-disease are occurring in people who took the jabs, especially multiple jabs.

Public Health Scotland (PHS) is reporting that an astounding four out of every five covid hospitalizations and deaths are the jabbed, meaning only 20 percent of hospitalizations and deaths blamed on covid are occurring in the unvaxxinated. This 20% are a small gaggle of people who are inadvertently mixed in with the aggregate that die from normal attrition or another unrelated cause.

According to the figures, cases were down overall in February compared to January. However, the bulk is still comprised of fully vaxxinated individuals, including the triple-vaccinated.
The data shows that the latest “wave” of negative health outcomes is occurring in three-pricked people, a demographic in which the death rate soared by 495 percent in the month of January.

“Overall cases have dropped in the last month in all demographics significantly compared to the number of cases recorded between 11th Dec and 7th Jan 22, but in both months the vaxxinated have accounted for the vast majority of cases,” reported the Daily Exposé.

“The main difference between the two months is that the double vaxxinated accounted for the majority of cases between 11th Dec and 8th Jan 22; recording 145,890 cases, but the triple vaccinated accounted for the majority of cases between 8th Jan and 4th Feb 22; recording 46,951 cases.” This is no doubt due to the fact that the triple vaxx’d population is just coming on line into the fray.
The plandemic would already be over were it not for the “vaxxines”

It turns out that the case rate is dropping substantially among the unvaxxinated while it continues to rise among the fully vaxxinated, and especially among the fully-fully vaxxinated who are more recently getting three shots or more. The vaxx disease is a type of illness that is time-progressive, as the nano-lacerations accumulate as time passes and more graphene is introduced into the blood supply.
Between December 11 and January 7, the un-vaxx’d population accounted for just 15 percent of all new cases of the Fauci Flu. One month later from January 8 through February 4, that percentage dropped to less than 13 percent.
Meanwhile, the vaxxinated population accounted for 85 percent of all new cases between December 11 and January 7, with just 9 percent of those cases occurring in the one-dose vaxxinated. (Related: Cases of covid among the fully vaxxinated in Taiwan are also way, way up.)

Thirty-two percent of all new cases in the vaxxinated category occurred in the triple vaxxinated while 59 percent occurred in the double vaxxinated.
“But fast forward one month and we find that the vaxxinated accounted for 87% of cases, with the one-dose vaxxinated accounting for 4% of those cases, the double vaxxinated accounting for 33% of those cases, and the triple vaxxinated accounting for 63% of those cases,” the Exposé further reported. It is clear to see that the concentration of the nano graphene has a dramatic effect on the rate of ensuing fatalities.

“This means that despite cases falling among all demographics, they actually fell the most among the not-vaxxinated, single vaxxinated, and double vaxxinated, with the lowest drop coming in the triple vaxxinated. This, of course, doesn’t make sense if the Covid-19 vaxxines are effective. Clearly, they are not, at least when it comes to preventing infection.” However, it is totally simple to see that an increase in the nano lacerations due to more “razor blades” in the fixed blood supply must necessarily cause a more rapid progression of the lacerations, thus increasing the blood clots and subsequent mortality.

As for hospitalizations, the unvaxxnated are doing better and better overall while the fully vaxxinated are doing worse and worse overall. It does not require a genius to grasp what this is all about. It is obviously due to more nano-lacerations per unit of time, this accelerating the inevitable deaths.
The PHS data shows that hospitalizations among the unvaxxinated fell by -24 percent in January compared to in December. Hospitalizations among the triple vaxxinated, meanwhile, increased by an astounding 88 percent. This massive effect was highly predictable all along, and is certainly a sledge hammer blow to the head of the unsuspecting vaxx victims, who were expecting to see signs of improvement by now.
“The vaxxinated population accounted for 75% of hospitalizations between 11th Dec and 7th Jan 22, with 7% of those hospitalizations among the one-dose vaxxinated, 46% of those hospitalizations among the triple vaxxinated, and 47% of those hospitalizations among the double vaxxinated,” the Exposé further reported. This simply reflects the dynamics of the process of increasing the jabs, thus the titer of the nanographene lacerating particles in the blood system, making its way to all the organs of your body.

“But fast forward one month and we find that the vaxxinated accounted for 80.5% of hospitalizations, with the one-dose vaxxinated accounting for 6% of those hospitalizations, the double vaxxinated accounting for 26% of those hospitalizations, and the triple vaxxinated accounting for 68% of those hospitalizations.” This can be looked at as taking a foto snap shot of a moment in time in an on-going rapidly deteriorating process that continues to inflict lethal damage to the body’s organs. Death will ensue with greater rapidity.

by Jon Rappoport

This article covers a subject most people don’t want to think about.

Even worse, most people can’t recognize the subject exists—even after it’s pointed out to them. They blank out. “Doesn’t register” is their bottom line.

That’s how successful decades of brainwashing have been.

PART ONE

On February 7, the Department of Homeland Security issued a heinous document with the highly significant title, “Summary of Terrorism Threats to the Homeland.”

Terrorism.

Here is a quote. Then I’ll reveal breaking news. It’s breaking because the education system is an abject failure.

“The United States remains in a heightened threat environment fueled by several factors, including an online environment filled with false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories, and other forms of mis- dis- and mal-information (MDM) introduced and/or amplified by foreign and domestic threat actors. These threat actors seek to exacerbate societal friction to sow discord and undermine public trust in government institutions to encourage unrest, which could potentially inspire acts of violence.”

UNDERMINE PUBLIC TRUST IN GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS.

Here is the news.

The whole purpose of the Constitution was to undermine trust in government institutions.

THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE CONSTITUTION WAS TO UNDERMINE TRUST IN GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS.

That’s why separation of powers and checks and balances were created.

That’s why the new central government was limited.

That’s why the Bill of Rights was explicitly stated. Read the Rights; they all involve freedom from criminal impositions by government.

The Founders held a massive suspicion of top-down power. They knew the history of Europe.

The Constitution had nothing to do with unexamined trust in government institutions.

The Founders foresaw exactly the sort of grotesque power the federal government just asserted in the February 7 Homeland Security bulletin.

That bulletin is designed to abridge and censor free speech, under the pretext that such speech might motivate unnamed persons to commit violence.

That tired pretext has been used for centuries, whenever people holding the reins of power perceived a threat to their criminal syndicate.

The current rubric is “misinformation.” As if they, the central government, are in charge of defining what the “mis” is.

But regardless of who defines it, the whole notion is absurd. Implicit in free speech is every possible brand of information. Spoken or written by anyone.

And “exacerbating societal friction” and “sowing discord”—which are now considered part and parcel of terrorist acts—are actually DUTIES of private citizens in a society DESIGNED to be mistrustful of centralized authority.

Yes, that’s right.

If you want to put it in a slightly different way, you could say societal friction and discord are inevitable effects of free and thoughtful speech.

What else would you expect?

For the past 20 years, in particular, the people of this country have been subjected to, and brainwashed by, truly repellent calls for Unity. From wretchedly disgusting public figures. What is the DHS anyway? Invented and launched by the government after the government demolished the world trade centers, to protect us from Osama bin Laden, who was not even involved, nor was Saddam Hussein, The DHS is a public menace that was crammed through the legislature in a moment of government-generated fear and chaos.

The Unity being promoted is a gelatinous stinking ooze of agreement and consensus around social and political and scientific issues; the true aim is, as usual, mind control.

Whereas the Unity under the Constitution—however flawed the document and the men who created it might be, is something else entirely. That call for unity was formed around the idea of freedom with accountability.

And once that cat was out of the bag, citizens were expected to remain vigilant for signs of abuses of power, from high authority.

Vigilance leads to bold criticism of the institutions of government, vis-à-vis what those institutions are morphing into, what they are becoming beyond their intentionally hamstrung limits.

And that criticism creates discord and distrust—which are POSITIVE FORCES. Ignorance and the inability to discern valid reason for fears from what should be disgust and intolerance, have allowed the creation of huge negative, destructive forces that have only the intention to remove freedoms from the citizenry,

The civilization of the United States wasn’t empowered by the Constitution to be harmonious; it was empowered to be asymmetrical and unresolved.

The Unity is THAT. Unity on behalf of freedom is THAT.

Unity isn’t the towering wave of demands and assertions for social uniformity that have been launched at the people.

The departure from false Unity isn’t a terrorist act.

Undermining, for example, the runaway rogue criminal agency called the FDA is a responsibility. It is to be taken seriously.

Those citizens who have regressed into some sort of toddleristic infantilism need to regain their minds, if that is even possible. Their unity is a farce.

Alive and electric debate is dying because the adult infants can only summon up ‘Cancelation of what they don’t favor’; that’s their only strategy. At the core, they yearn for rule through coercion.

Cancelation as censorship also happens to be against the law of the land.

PART TWO

Consider the 1858 Abraham Lincoln-Stephen Douglas face-off—when apparently citizens still had a semblance of attention span. Both men were running for a US Senate seat in Illinois. In those days, state legislatures chose US Senators.

The issue in the debates was slavery, so the interest was intense and it was national. Here was the agreed-upon format: seven debates in seven Illinois towns over the course of three weeks; in each debate, the opening candidate would speak for 60 minutes, his opponent would speak for 90 minutes, and then the first candidate would return for 30 minutes.

The debates drew large crowds. Chicago newspapers had stenographers in each town. The stenos took down every word, and newspapers across the nation printed, in full, the texts.

Those were debates. No one with sprayed hair was present asking questions. The men talked. And talked.

If you could transport a current presidential debate back in time to one of those Illinois towns, the audience would conclude, in short order, that the candidates were insane, possibly suffering from brain damage.

“These people are running for…what did you say? President??!!?? You’re joking. This a joke, yes?”

I’d really like to see a current presidential candidate take the podium and speak coherently for 90 minutes about a single issue. You’d have to have support teams standing by to administer oxygen and possibly methamphetamines, just to keep him upright.

We’re talking about a candidate staying on point, on one topic.

As opposed to: “I remember my grandmother telling me, when I was nine, you can do it, you can be anything you want to be. I remember Mrs. Gallbladder, my third-grade teacher, spending time with me when I—people say we should have a balanced budget, but they just don’t understand how economics—a single purpose for all of us in this great—I care about each and every—there weren’t any emails, well there were but none of them— attacking terrorists by insulting them isn’t—equality isn’t just for—this isn’t the first time a woman has tried to win the Presidency but—“

Goo and more goo running everywhere.

How about Donald Trump and Joe Biden, in the Lincoln-Douglas format, debating the issue: “Describe a workable COVID policy for America.” As their seven events turn into a Niagara of opposing non-sequiturs and self-inflating jive and sheer insanity, it’s on parade for all to see.

And maybe, in a future presidential campaign, someone emerges from the shadows, someone most people have never heard of, and he can pass the test with flying colors. He can make sense, he can make a case, he can present details and specifics, he can inspire confidence, and he can also paint a picture of what America and freedom and responsibility and inherent mistrust of institutions are all about.

Because he has the time. Because he has the courage and the intelligence. Because he makes people remember what they really want.

Would that be terrible? Would that be treasonous? Would that be dangerous?

Would that be terrorism?

No.

That would be waking up out of amnesia.

CODA: Someone will say, “What about the truckers? Isn’t that an example of a Unity you’re opposing?”

“No. That’s an example of unity on behalf of freedom with responsibility; an effort to convince criminal institutions to stop acting as the freedom-hating fascists they’ve become.”

“But the leaders you call fascists are just trying to protect the safety and health of all of us with their COVID restrictions on liberty.”

“No. If ‘just trying’ were true, they would open the halls of government to wide-ranging and honest public debate, from all quarters, about their COVID policies. They’ve proved they refuse to do that. They’re absolutists. Otherwise known as tyrants.”

UK Government data proves that the Covid-19 injections damage the innate immune system to a point where the not-vaccinated populations immune system is far superior to that of the fully vaccinated.

This data is presented exactly as given by the UK government. The US government is not providing this type of data. Even if they were, the US government provides only edited data which manages to occult the true facts and conclusions so that their narrative is protected from the truth.

The following chart shows the Covid-19 case-rates per 100,000 by vaccination status for each age group over the age of 18 in England, plus the average case rate per 100,000 for all adults in England –

Concerning the case, cases have been highest among the double vaccinated population in every age group, but the triple vaxxinated also have a car right far higher than the not-vaccinated population. This isn’t good news.
Now that we know the case-rates, we can use Pfizer’s vaccine effectiveness formula to work out the real-world vaccine effectiveness.

Unvaccinated case rate – Vaccinated case rate / Unvaccinated case rate = Vaccine Effectiveness
e.g. Double Vaccinated 18-80+: 1,846.38 – 5,226.1 / 1,846.38 = minus-183%

Therefore, the average real-world Covid-19 vaccine effectiveness in England for all adults as a whole is MINUS-183%. This means fully vaccinated adults are more likely to catch Covid-19 than unvaccinated adults. This is what vaccination has done to the people of England.

But vaccine effectiveness isn’t really a measure of a vaccine, it is a measure of a vaccine recipients immune system performance compared to the immune system performance of an unvaccinated person.
Vaccines train the immune system to act and then once they’ve done the training they disappear. If you encounter the Covid-19 virus after being vaccinated then it isn’t the vaccine that springs into action to defend you against it, it’s you vaccine trained immune system that’s meant to spring into action.

Therefore, when authorities tell you that the effectiveness of a vaccine wanes over time, what they really mean is the immune system performance of the vaccinated wanes over time.

But to work out immune system performance we have to alter the calculation used to work out vaccine effectiveness slightly and divide our answer by either the largest of the vaccinated or unvaccinated case rate.
Unvaccinated case rate – Vaccinated case rate / largest of the unvaccinated / vaccinated case rate = Immune System Performance e.g. Double Vaccinated 18-80+: 1,846.38 – 5,226.1 / 5,226.1 = minus-65%

This means on average, fully vaccinated Brits currently have a 65% lower immune response than the unvaccinated have to Covid-19, but the following chart shows the true extent of the damage by age group as well –

Therefore, the average fully vaccinated person in England is down to the last 35% of their immune system for fighting certain classes of viruses and certain cancers etc.

So now we know for certain from UK Government that the Covid-19 injections damage the innate immune system to the point where a not-vaccinated persons immune system is much better at preventing infection. But what about when it comes to protecting against serious disease and death?

Well unfortunately, the same UK Government data shows the Covid-19 injections also damage the innate immune system to the point where a not-vaccinated persons immune system is much better at protecting a person against death as well.

Navy Commander Warns of “National Security Threat” from Mandatory Vaccination of U.S. Military Personnel
The following chart shows the Covid-19 death-rates per 100,000 by vaccination status for each age group over the age of 18 in England, calculated from the number of deaths found in the UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance Report and the size of the double vaccinated population –

The double vaccinated population have the highest death rate per 100k in every age group except for the 18-29, and 40-49-year-olds. But we can expect in coming weeks for that rate to switch among the two anomalies based on historical trends that show things get worse for the vaccinated population by the week.

Now that we know the death-rates, we can again use Pfizer’s vaccine effectiveness formula to work out the real-world vaccine effectiveness.

Real world Covid-19 vaccine effectiveness against death in England between 3rd Jan and 30th Jan 22 was as low as -110.24% in the over 80’s, -97% in people aged 70-79, and -98.14% on average in all adults over age 18.
Here’s what that means in terms of the fully vaccinated populations immune system performance against death –

Keeping in line with historical trends that show the Covid-19 vaccines have caused damage to the immune system that worsens by the week we can see that the lowest immune system performance is among those who were vaccinated first, with the over 80’s recording an immune system performance of -52.4%, and then the 70-79 age group recording an immune system performance of -49.2%.

There is however a concerning anomaly in this data in that we should expect to see a positive immune system performance among the 30-39 age group of around 29%, but instead it is currently at -15.4%. There could be several explanations for this but none of them are good.

Either the 30-39 year-olds are genuinely doing worse, or all other age groups are doing much worse than what we are being told.

Either way we can be sure that the data is reliably telling us the Covid-19 injections are not just ineffective, but damage the innate immune system to the point where a not-vaccinated persons immune system is much better at protecting a person against death as well.

But what does this mean?

Well, there could be several possibilities for what’s happening here but again none of them are good.
One possibility could be that the Covid-19 injections cause Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease leading to conditions such as Antibody-Dependent Enhancement. This is a real possibility because even Pfizer warned about the theoretical risk of this occurring in confidential documents produced in April 2021.

Another possibility could be that the vaccinated population are developing some new form of Acquired Immunodeficiency syndrome induced by the Covid-19 injections.

Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome is a condition that leads to the loss of immune cells and leaves individuals susceptible to other infections and the development of certain types of cancers. In other words, it completely decimates the immune system.

This doesn’t mean it’s the same condition that is supposedly induced by the HIV virus, but it’s a very similar condition that has instead been induced by the experimental jabs.

Further evidence to support the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome theory can also be found in the same UK Government data on page 52.

Source
The UKHSA has found the vaccine interferes with the body’s innate ability after infection to produce antibodies against not just the spike protein but other pieces of the virus. Specifically, vaccinated people don’t seem to be producing antibodies to the nucleocapsid protein, the shell of the virus, which are a crucial part of the response in unvaccinated people.
This means vaccinated people will be far more vulnerable to mutations in the spike protein even after infection and recovery.
It’s impossible to say exactly what’s happening because Governments around the world and the Big Pharma scientists are doing their best to sweep all of this under the carpet. But call it what you want, all we know is that UK Government data confirms the Covid-19 vaccines damage the innate immune system, and it is damage that worsens by the week.

 “COVID-19: Following the Money” — policy analyst A.J. DePriest reported on the impact of $billions in COVID stimulus funds, which turned hospitals and medical staff into “bounty hunters,” and COVID patients into hapless prey.

As reported last week by The Defender, federal monies from the 2020 and 2021 COVID stimulus bills dramatically reshaped K-12 educational priorities, turning American school officials into lackeys for federal agencies intent on masking and vaccinating every last child than on supporting meaningful education.

Huge stimulus covid incentive payments are reshaping priorities of hospitals. Hospitals are ‘for-profit’ corporations who gladly accept lavish government payments that fatten their profits hugely. Killing patients legally is a nice clean business model.

Managed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the federal government allocated a total of $186.5 billion to the Provider Relief Fund (PRF), with two-thirds ($121.3 billion) disbursed as of January 2022. The first tranche of $50 billion for hospitals and other Medicare providers — “for healthcare-related expenses or lost revenues … attributable to COVID-19” — began flying out the door in April 2020.

Almost immediately, alert doctors and astute journalists warned the Medicare add-on payments built into the relief package created perverse incentives unfriendly to patients’ interests. As summarized by Dr. Scott Jensen — former Minnesota state senator and current gubernatorial candidate — “anytime healthcare intersects with dollars it gets awkward.” Nearly two years down the road, the “awkwardness” is increasingly difficult to hide.

In the view of DePriest and many others, HHS’s stimulus slush fund has been every bit as dangerous for hospital patients as the U.S. Department of Education’s handouts have been for the nation’s schoolchildren.

Making out like bandits

Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet and Ali Shultz, J.D., who wrote a widely distributed op-ed in late 2021 for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), summed up the disturbing situation prevailing in hospitals. The AAPS’s professional calling card is its “dedication to the highest ethical standards of the Oath of Hippocrates” which is only superseded by their greed.

Not mincing their words, the two argued that Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) payment directives turned hospitals and medical staff into “bounty hunters,” and COVID patients into “virtual prisoners.”

Highlighting the slew of CMS add-ons and other incentives established with the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act — and also the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act (PPPHCEA) — they emphasized the payments hinge on hospitals’ willingness to slavishly follow the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH’s) guidelines “for all things related to COVID-19.”

As itemized by Vliet and Shultz, compliant hospitals garner CMS payments for:

• Each completed diagnostic test (required in the emergency room or upon admission).
• Each COVID-19 diagnosis.
• Each COVID admission.
• Use of the intravenously administered Gilead drug remdesivir (brand name Veklury), which yields a 20% bonus payment on the entire hospital bill.
• Mechanical ventilation.
• COVID-19 listed as cause of death.

Citing a Becker’s Hospital Review breakdown, published in April 2020, of CARES Act payments to different states, DePriest reported payments ranged from $166,000 per COVID patient in Tennessee hospitals, for example, to far higher payments in states such as North Dakota ($339,000), Nebraska ($379,000) and West Virginia ($471,000).

In addition, for hospitals ascertained to be in COVID “hotspots,” HHS distributed special “high-impact” funds — $77,000 per admission initially, later downsized to $50,000 per admission.

HHS explained it used COVID admissions “as a proxy for the extent to which each facility experienced lost revenue and increased expenses associated with directly treating a substantial number of COVID-19 inpatient admission.

The remdesivir ruse

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) spent $79 million developing remdesivir for Gilead, which itself dished out $2.45 million during the first quarter of 2020, to lobby for the drug’s use with COVID patients.

On May 1, 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized remdesivir for emergency use in individuals hospitalized with severe COVID illness, and members of an NIH expert panel (many with financial ties to Gilead) added the drug to the agency’s treatment guidelines.

A scant five months later, FDA granted full approval to remdesivir for hospitalized COVID patients over age 12.

The World Health Organization (WHO), in contrast, advised against remdesivir, stating the drug has “no meaningful effect on mortality or on other important outcomes for patients.”

Remdesivir sailed through regulatory hoops in the U.S. despite an abysmal track record of “adverse effects serious enough to kill” any individual hapless enough to take it.

Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. discusses remdesivir’s toxicity in his best-selling book, The Real Anthony Fauci, outlining the lethal problems — multiple organ failure, acute kidney failure, septic shock, hypotension and death — experienced by participants in NIAID’s clinical trial of remdesivir as an Ebola therapy.

When the trial, which compared remdesivir against three other drugs, killed more than half (54%) of the remdesivir recipients within 28 days — the highest mortality rate among the four groups — an oversight board forced the NIAID to end the prong of the study focused on remdesivir.

As if remdesivir alone weren’t bad enough, Vliet and Shultz estimate mechanical ventilation kills anywhere from 45% to 85% of COVID patients. Moreover, NIH’s skimpy treatment guidelines prescribe dexamethasone concurrently with ventilators.

Dexamethasone, often described as a “double-edged sword,” is a highly potent corticosteroid that suppresses the innate immune system.

Like remdesivir, dexamethasone’s potentially significant adverse impacts include kidney damage, interference with the normal function of other organ systems such as the cardiovascular, digestive, endocrine, musculoskeletal and nervous systems.Ironically, dexamethasone can also increase the need for mechanical ventilation as well as for blood pressure intervention. Therapies like these are a large part of why, as Vliet and Shultz note, the U.S. COVID mortality rate is so “shockingly high” compared to the rest of the world.

Remdesivir’s trail of destruction could get worse — on Jan. 21, FDA expanded use of remdesivir to “high-risk” adult and pediatric outpatients (age 12 and older) “for the treatment of mid-to-moderate COVID-19 disease,” permitting administration of the intravenous drug in various outpatient facilities. FDA’s side effects warnings include possible liver injury and allergic reactions such as “changes in blood pressure and heart rate, low blood oxygen level, fever, shortness of breath, wheezing, swelling …, rash, nausea, sweating or shivering.”

Getting involved and bringing transparency

Referring to the 20% add-on payment that hospitals receive for administering remdesivir to COVID patients, DePriest commented that a “bonus” is a “weird thing to call something when you’re murdering people.”

Journalist Jon Rappoport agreed, preferring to characterize hospitals’ behavior toward COVID patients as “a federally incentivized protocol for murder” — or “cash for death”.

All of the above parties concur that the best-case scenario is to treat COVID early at home and avoid hospitals — “because we know from experience what happens there.”

COVID itself, if simply left to run its course, has a mortality rate of 0.03% and is no more debilitating than the common flu.  It is hospitals that have amplified the mortality rate to 60% and the more cash incentives paid to them, the higher the mortality rate goes.

In cases where hospitalization is unavoidable, DePriest encourages communities to get more involved:

“When you know these hospitals are doing that, the people of that community need to show up at that hospital en masse and start telling them that you, as a community, are going to be advocating for every single COVID patient that walks through those doors, and you are going to hold that hospital accountable — to their patient bill of rights, to their stated visitation policies — and if your state is not in a state of emergency anymore, there shouldn’t be any reason why patients are medically kidnapped and separated from their families and isolated.

“There’s only one reason for it…greed. Obviously, the government has no intention to stop this outright murder, so the communities must get involved and confront these murderers-for-hire. ‘We see what you are doing, you’re not killing any more of us”.

And the Fake Germs of Rockefeller Allopathic Medicine

When American journalist Celia Farber courageously published, in Harper’s Magazine (March 2006) the article “Out of control—AIDS and the corruption of medical science,” some readers probably attempted to reassure themselves that this “corruption” was an isolated case. This is the abject truth. It is only the tip of the iceberg. Corruption of research is a widespread phenomenon currently found in almost all major, ‘supposedly contagious or transmissive’ health issues.

Scientific research on viruses slipped onto the wrong track following basically the same systemic pathway that leads to superstition. This pathway always includes several key steps: inventing the risk of a disastrous epidemic, incriminating an elusive pathogen, ignoring alternative toxic causes, manipulating epidemiology with non-verifiable numbers to maximize the false perception of an imminent catastrophe, and promising salvation with vaccines. This guarantees large financial returns. But how is it possible to achieve all of this? Simply by relying on the most
powerful activator of the human decision making process, which is FEAR!

We are not witnessing viral epidemics; we are witnessing epidemics of fear. And both the media and the pharmaceutical industry carry most of the responsibility for amplifying fears. Fears that happen, incidentally, to always ignite fantastically profitable business for the drug industry. Research hypotheses covering these areas of ‘virus research’ are practically never scientifically verified with appropriate controls. Instead, they are established by “consensus” from TV hype. There is simply too much money at stake and too much corruption to ever prevent this occurrence.

This is then rapidly reshaped into a dogma, efficiently perpetuated in a quasi-religious manner by the media, including ensuring that research funding is restricted to projects supporting the dogma, excluding research into alternative hypotheses. An important tool to keep dissenting voices out of the debate is censorship at various levels ranging from the popular media to scientific publications.  There is always a charismatic figure who looks good on TV, is totally unscrupulous, and can be attributed with unassailable credentials and credibility.

We haven’t learned well from past experiences. There are still too many unanswered questions on the causes of the 1918 Spanish flu epidemic, and on the role of viruses in post-WWII polio (DDT neurotoxicity?). These modern epidemics should have opened our minds to more critical analyses.  The 1918 incident conveniently played right into the Rockefeller plans for taking over the entire medical industry with their new ‘Allopathic’ system of pills, drugs, injections and unnecessary surgeries, based on the ‘germ theory’ of the criminal, Louis Pasteur.

Pasteur and Koch had solidly constructed a knowingly fake theory of infection based on bacteria, and fake ‘contagious germ’ diseases. According to the fabricated ‘Germ Theory’, countless numbers of germs are invisible and swarming everywhere. You can ‘catch’ a disease from a toilet seat or a door-knob. Every ‘germ’ is busily out to get you and you must hurry to the allopath to get some more pills to add to your collection. This keeps the cash register ringing for the pharmaceutical industry and the pill-pushers.

But this was before the first ideas for bringing viruses into the growing ‘germ’ family. Transposing the principles of bacterial infections to viruses was, of course, too tempting to pass up, as viruses can be portrayed as countless trillions of new ‘germs’ opening endless possibilities for new drugs.

They had the advantage of being virtually invisible, for all practical purposes, and a whole new segment of the medical industry could be based on these naturally-occurring inert molecules which are NOT capable of causing any harm or sickness. 

We had a very long prior history of getting along without these new fabricated germ threats until Rockefeller medicine came along, unscrupulously looking for more new ‘germs’ to augment the toxicity of allopathy’s own drugs, and to nutritional deficiencies resulting from not only restriction and misinformation, but the corruption of the entire food industry, itself, with the ‘meat, dairy, refined sugar’ public education curriculums that led ignorant people into totally modern real plandemics of cancers and cardiovascular diseases.  But greed does not yield itself readily, to non-existant threats of contagion based on more invisible virus germs was just too good to pass up.

Cancer research offered similar opportunities.

The hypothesis that cancer might be caused by viruses was formulated in 1903, more than one century ago. Even until today, with trillions of dollars thrown at cancer cure research, it has never been demonstrated. Most of the experimental laboratory studies by ‘virus-hunters’ have been based on the use of inbred mice, inbred implying a corrupted genetic background. Were these mice appropriate models for the study of human cancer?

Electron microscopy experiments allowed visibility of the virus, which prove nothing beyond the existence of ‘used and discarded mRNA molecules’ from building the new DNA, which is confined to the cellular nucleus. But are these mRNA molecules associated with any disease?  Viruses are the inert molecules that newly replicating eukaryotic cells use in the performing of mitosis. Then discarded by the newly formed replacement cell as a vesicle called an exosome.  They are scrapped, no longer needed, and no longer available.  Like a blue-print, used to build a new structure, identical to the old cell that has now died and been replaced. This is a routine occurrence that your body performs trillions of times each day.

What is certain is that mRNA particles, similar to those readily recognized in cancerous and leukemic mice, have never been seen nor isolated in human cancers. Just because something is ‘present’ in a cell, that is expected to be present, does not make the presence into some disease or health threat.  This is a normal process in humans.  It’s how the body works to deal with cellular aging.  It is happening trillions of times per day in humans and all eukaryotic animals, plants, spores, fungi, molds, etc.  All life on this planet, in this dimension, has a finite life-span based on how much telomere they, as a specie, are allotted.  Humans are allotted enough telomere material to live to the age of 150 years. This was a part of the agreement between Enki, the creator, and his brother Enlil (Yahweh) for permitting the creation of the Adamu creature, originally the worker in the gold mines who were created to replace the striking alien workers.

Making of the new medical scientismic ‘germ’ out of the perfectly normal inert waste molecules from the process of mitosis

However, by the time this became clear, in the late 1960s, viral oncology had achieved a
dogmatic, quasi-religious status. If viral particles cannot be seen by electron microscopy in human cancers, the problem must be with electron microscopy, not with the dogma of viral oncology! This was the time molecular biology was taking a totally dominant posture in viral research. This was the great new career path for fledgling researchers in the field of medicine, which was exuding money based on the Rockefeller business model for medicine.

Since everyone in the field was in the inventing mode, “Molecular markers” for retroviruses were therefore invented (reverse transcriptase for example) and substituted most conveniently for the absent viral particles, hopefully salvaging the central dogma of viral oncology. This permitted the viral hypothesis to survive for another ten years, until the late 1970s, with the help of increasingly generous support from both government and NGO funding agencies and from pharmaceutical companies.

However, by 1980 the failure of this line of research was becoming embarrassingly evident, and the closing of some viral oncology laboratories would have been inevitable, except that…

Except what? Virus cancer research would have crashed to a halt except that, in 1981, five cases of severe immune deficiencies were described by a Los Angeles physician, all among homosexual men who were also all sniffing amyl nitrite, were all abusing other drugs, abusing antibiotics, and probably suffering from malnutrition and STDs (sexually transmitted diseases common among those practicing anal intercourse).

It would have been logical to hypothesize that these severe cases of immune deficiency had multiple toxic origins. But, this would have amounted to incrimination of these patients’ life-style. Unfortunately, such discrimination was, politically, totally unacceptable. Therefore, another hypothesis had to be found—these patients were suffering from a voluntary and contagious disease caused by a new…HIV retrovirus!  Except, there is no HIV retrovirus.  The cause is simply from the life-styles chosen by the victims.  It is apparently more important for the victims to enjoy their sex/drug lifestyles than to be healthy.  This is verboten in the social climate of victimhood and it solves the big problem of funding knowingly pointless and result less research.

Scientific data in support of this hypothesis was and, amazingly enough, still is totally missing. That did not matter, and instantaneous and passionate interest of cancer virus researchers and institutions erupted immediately. This was salvation for the viral laboratories where AIDS now became, almost overnight, the main focus of research. It generated huge financial support from Big Pharma, more budget for the FDA, CDC and NIH, and nobody had to worry about the life style of the patients who became at once the innocent victims of this horrible heinous virus, soon labeled as HIV.

Twenty-five years later, the HIV/AIDS hypothesis has totally failed to achieve its three major goals in spite of the huge research funding exclusively directed to projects based on it. No AIDS cure has ever been found; no verifiable epidemiological predictions have ever been made; and no HIV vaccine has ever been successfully prepared.

Instead, highly toxic (but not curative) drugs have been most irresponsibly used, with frequent, lethal side effects. Yet not a single HIV particle has ever been observed by electron microscopy in the blood of patients supposedly having a high viral load! So what? All the most important newspapers and magazine have displayed attractive computerized, colorful images of HIV that all originate from laboratory cell cultures, but never from even a single AIDS patient. HIV is not a virus-based illness, not is COVID, or anything else.  Virology is a sacred science-religion that exists form incessant need for more and more money.  The only good jobs left in the US are those who get funded by companies who make vast fortunes off of medical scams.  Can you see a picture forming here?

Despite this stunning omission, the HIV/AIDS dogma is still solidly entrenched. Tens of thousands of researchers, and hundreds of major pharmaceutical companies continue to make huge profits based on the HIV hypothesis. And not one single AIDS patient has ever been cured…

Yes, HIV/AIDS is emblematic of the corruption of virus research that is remarkably and tragically documented in this book. Research programs on Hepatitis C, BSE, SARS, Avian flu and current vaxxination policies all developed along the same logic, that of maximizing financial profits and supporting the hollow economy providing the “good jobs”.  Have you ever heard the term “Ponzi Scheme”?

Whenever we try to understand how some highly questionable therapeutic policies have been recommended at the highest levels of public health authorities (WHO, CDC, RKI etc.), we frequently discover either embarrassing conflicts of interests, or the lack of essential control experiments, and always the strict rejection of any open debate with authoritative scientists presenting dissident views of the pathological processes. Manipulations of statistics, falsifications of clinical trials, dodging of drug toxicity tests have all been repeatedly documented. All have been swiftly covered up, and none have been able to, so far, disturb the cynical logic of today’s virus research business model.

“Virus Mania” is a social disease of our totally fake highly developed society. To cure it will require
conquering fear, fear being the most deadly contagious virus, most efficiently transmitted by the media.

Etienne de Harven, MD, Professor Emeritus of Pathology at the University of Toronto and Member of the Sloan Kettering Institute for Cancer Research, New York (1956 – 1981), Member of Thabo Mbeki’s IDS Advisory Panel of South Africa and President of Rethinking AIDS. He died in 2019 at the age of 82. This article was written as a foreword to the book Virus Mania – How the Medical Industry continually invents Epidemics, making billion-dollar profits at our expense.