Australia’s poor old women

By Jane Caro  Despite women facing the wage gap, eventual poverty and possible…

Assange’s Thirteenth Day at the Old Bailey: Mental…

September 24. Central Criminal Court, London.The lion’s share of today’s Old Bailey…

Industrial relations reform talks breached again as deadline…

With less than a week to go in the scheduled agenda for…

The big lie

By Leonie Saunders  A little over two weeks have passed since I listened…

The death of hope

“No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a…

Assange’s Twelfth Day at the Old Bailey: Autism,…

September 23. Central Criminal Court, London.Following the script sheet of the previous…

The forced sterilisation of women in detention is…

By Mikayla Chadwick  The headlines may have shocked the world, but the forced…

The $3.5 billion investment in the NBN is…

By Laurie Patton  The Coalition has announced that a further $3.5 billion will…

«
»
Facebook

COVID-19: Where was it born: China, the United States or Ukania? (At the school of Doctor Rasputin: part 3)

Continued from: COVID-19: Where was it born: China, the United States or Ukania? (At the school of Doctor Rasputin: part 2)

By Outsider

According to one Nicholas Rockefeller, (of whom it is not known whether he was related to the famous family because, when asked, the Patriarch David Rockefeller said through an associate that he did not recall ever meeting Nicholas. The relationship “is probably quite distant, seventh or eighth cousins,” according to the associate, Peter Johnson) there was in development a plan to control humanity.

Although a microchip control device may be introduced under a number of emergency measures, the most effective pretence is that of an invisible viral enemy.

In 2010 just such a scenario was envisioned by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Global Business Network. Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development purports to address “a process of creating narratives about the future based on factors likely to affect a particular set of challenges and opportunities” and “the role of technology and the future of globalization.” (Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development. This report was produced by The Rockefeller Foundation  and Global Business Network, May 2010).

At page 18 of the document mentioned above, the authors envision a “pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years.”

Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 per cent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of them healthy young adults. The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.

This ‘scenario’ is eerily predictive of the COVID-19 pandemic now underway. The Rockefeller narrative envisions a strong response from China. “The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter postpandemic recovery,” the narrative concludes.

In the past, the Rockefellers and associated tax-exempt foundations used war to force economic, political, and societal change (see M.N. Rothbard, Wall Street, Banks, and American Foreign Policy, Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn, Alabama, 2016, chapter 8, Rockefeller, Morgan, and War).

Arguably, no one has been more active in promoting and funding research on vaccines aimed at dealing with coronavirus than Bill Gates and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. From sponsoring a simulation of a coronavirus global pandemic, just weeks before the Wuhan outbreak was announced, to funding numerous corporate efforts to come up with a novel vaccine for the apparently novel virus, the Gates presence is there.

Bill Gates was prophetic. He has claimed for years that a global killer pandemic will come and that people are not prepared for it. On 18 March  2015 Gates delivered a TED talk on epidemics in Vancouver. On the same  day he wrote on his blog: “I just gave a brief talk on a subject that I’ve been learning a lot about lately – epidemics. The Ebola outbreak in West Africa is a tragedy – as I write this, more than 10,000 people have died.” Gates then added: “As awful as this epidemic has been, the next one could be much worse. The world is simply not prepared to deal with a disease – an especially virulent flu, for example – that infects large numbers of people very quickly. Of all the things that could kill 10 million people or more, by far the most likely is an epidemic.” That same year, 2015, Bill Gates wrote an article for the New England Journal of Medicine titled, “The Next Epidemic: Lessons from Ebola.” (B. Gates, The Next Epidemic — Lessons from Ebola, 09.04.2015)

There Gates spoke of a special class of drugs which “involves giving patients a set of particular RNA-based constructs which enables them to produce specific proteins – including antibodies. Although this is a very new area, it is promising because it is possible that a safe therapy could be designed and put into large-scale manufacture fairly rapidly. More basic research as well as the progress of companies like Moderna Inc. and CureVac could eventually make this approach a key tool for stopping epidemics.” Both Moderna and CureVac nowadays receive funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and are leading the race to develop an approved Covi-19 vaccine based on RNA.

In 2017, during the Davos World Economic Forum, Gates initiated something called C.E.P.I, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, together with the governments of Germany, India, Japan and Norway, along with the Wellcome Trust of the United Kingdom. Its stated purpose is to “accelerate the development of vaccines we’ll need to contain outbreaks” of future epidemics. Gates noted at the time that “One promising area of vaccine development research is using advances in genomics to map the DNA and RNA of pathogens and make vaccines.”

On 27 April 2018 Business Insider published a widely circulated primer to persuade people to expect a mass killing. The article was titled “Bill Gates thinks a coming disease could kill 30 million people within 6 months – and says we should prepare for it as we do for war.” The next deadly disease which will cause a global pandemic is coming, Bill Gates said at a discussion of epidemics promoting the Deep State’s depopulation agenda.

He made the following points:

1) We are not ready – hiding his family’s and Big Money supporters’ plan to lose another most profitable depopulating agent like H.I.V./A.I.D.S which by then had that has killed some 40 million people;

2) An illness like the pandemic 1918 influenza could kill 30 million people within six months. Gates added that the next disease might not even be a flu, but something we have never seen, like a lab-combined H.5.N.1. and H.1.N.1. that complicit scientists have already engineered threatening an outbreak which might kill as many as 60 per cent of those infected;

3) The world should prepare as it does for war, Gates said, hiding the fact that his father was among America’s leading racists and eugenics advocates, and his mother officiated for banks and IBM that made a fortune with the Nazis of WWII. (K. Loria, Bill Gates thinks a coming disease could kill 30 million within 6 months …, 29.11.2018).

On that same day, Bill Gates told listeners at a discussion about epidemics hosted by the Massachusetts Medical Society and the New England Journal of Medicine” that “We’re not ready.” He said that he was “usually the optimist in the room.” And he reminded people that he lifts children “out of poverty around the globe.”

“But ‘there’s one area though where the world isn’t making much progress,’ Gates said, ‘and that’s pandemic preparedness.’ “The likelihood that such a disease will appear continues to rise. New pathogens emerge all the time as the world population increases and humanity encroaches on wild environments. It’s becoming easier and easier for individual people or small groups to create weaponized diseases that could spread like wildfire around the globe.”

By 2019 Bill Gates and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation were proceeding full force with their pandemic scenarios. He made a Netflix video which made an eerie imaginary scenario. The video, part of the “Explained” series, imagined a wet market in China where live and dead animals are stacked and a highly deadly virus erupts that spreads globally. Gates appears as an expert in the video to warn: “If you think of anything that could come along that would kill millions of people, a pandemic is our greatest risk.” He said that if nothing was done the better to prepare for pandemics, the time would come when the world would look back and wish it had invested more into potential vaccines. That was weeks before the world heard about bats and a live wet market in Wuhan China.

Image from YouTube

In October 2019 the Gates Foundation teamed up with the World Economic Forum and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security to enact what they called a “fictional” scenario simulation involving some of the world’s leading figures in public health. It was titled Event 201.

As their website describes it, Event 201 simulated an “outbreak of a novel zoonotic coronavirus transmitted from bats to pigs to people that eventually becomes efficiently transmissible from person to person, leading to a severe pandemic. The pathogen and the disease it causes are modeled largely on SARS, but it is more transmissible in the community setting by people with mild symptoms.” (Coronavirus, Vaccines and the Gates Foundation, 02.05.2020, and see also: Video: Rockefeller Blueprint for Police State Triggered by Pandemic, Exposed, 22.03.2020).

Still, Gates was not alone.

On 30 March 2020 R.A.I.Radiotelevisione Italiana would expose dark efforts by China on viruses. A video had been broadcast in November 2015. It showed how Chinese scientists were doing biological experiments on a SARS connected virus believed to be Coronavirus, derived from bats and mice. The question was asked whether it was worth the risk in order to be able to modify the virus for compatibility with human organisms.

Chinese scientists had created a pulmonary supervirus from bats and mice, apparently only for study reasons, but there were many questionable aspects to this. Mainly, is it worth the risk? It was an experiment, of course, but it was worrisome. It worried many scientists: it is a group of Chinese researchers attaching a protein taken from bats to the SARS virus, acute pneumonia, derived from mice. The output was a super coronavirus which could affect humans. It remained closed in laboratories and it was only for study purposes, but was it worth the risk – creating such a great threat only for examination purposes?

The debate about the risks of research is as old as science itself. Like the myth of Icarus, who plunged from the Sky and perished in the sea, having gone too close to the Sun with the wings of wax designed by his father!

Here was an experiment in China, in which a group of scientists had managed to develop a chimera – an organism modified by attaching the surface protein of a coronavirus found in bats of the common species called the Great Horseshoe Bat, to a virus which causes SARS in mice, although in a non-fatal form. It was suspected that the protein could make the chimeric hybrid organism suitable for affecting humans, and the experiment confirmed it.

It is precisely this molecule, called SHCO14, which allows the coronavirus to attach itself to our respiratory cells and to trigger the syndrome. According to researchers, the two organisms, the original and even more so the engineered one, can infect humans directly from bats, without going through an intermediate species like the mouse, and it is this eventuality that raises many controversies.

Just one year before [in 2014] the United States government suspended research funding, which aimed to make viruses more contagious. The moratorium did not stop the work of the Chinese on SARS, which was already in advanced stages and looked relatively harmless.

According to a section of the scientific community, it is in fact not dangerous. The probability that the virus may pass to our species was insignificant compared to the benefits of the virus – an argument that many other experts rejected: first, because the relationship between risk and benefit is difficult to evaluate and second, because especially in these times, it is more prudent to not put into circulation an organism that can escape or be removed from the control of laboratories.

As soon as the broadcast was released it went viral on the Italian social media. Journalists and experts began explaining it away saying that the virus in the video was not COVID-19. Even the British journal Nature, which wrote the very publication on which the Italian show was based, clarified that the virus the broadcast talked about was not related to the “Natural” COVID-19.

However, that is beside the point. This is not to say that the viruses are literally the same. This is to say that the information presented in the video is consistent with the information that China could be doing a lot of research on bioweapons, and that the impact of the virus in the broadcast had a lot in common with mainstream information about the symptoms of COVID-19.

Moreover, Nature itself had done a piece in February 2017, on the BSL-4 laboratory in Wuhan, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, raising valid concerns and theories, and wondering out loud whether experimentation with deadly viruses was a good idea.

In January 2020 Nature returned to the subject adding an editor’s note to the top of the article, saying that there was in fact “no evidence” of this laboratory playing a role in the outbreak of coronavirus and that scientists believe that the source is likely “an animal market.”

However, an in-depth scientific investigation by GreatGameIndia  (Coronavirus Bioweapon – How China Stole Coronavirus From Canada And Weaponized It, GreatGameIndia – 26 January 2020) on the mysterious origins of Coronavirus – the COVID-19 Files (COVID19 Files – Scientific Investigation On Mysterious Origin Of Coronavirus, by GreatGameIndia, 21 February 2020 | Last modified on 22 March 2020) has shown that the “animal market” is not the actual source of the outbreak. In their investigation the scientists explored the sources of New Coronavirus from five major areas, including epidemiological investigation, virus gene comparison, cross-species infection research, key “intermediate hosts” and the findings on the Wuhan P4 laboratory, to provide readers with a deep and completely scientific perspective.

Interestingly, the Italian scientists at Milan University are investigating (E. Parodi, S. Aloisi, Italian scientists investigate possible earlier emergence of coronavirus, 27 March 2020) whether the coronavirus outbreak actually began in Italy in the last quarter of 2019. Milan and Lodi, cities of the Lombardy Region, reported a “significant” increase in the number of people hospitalised for pneumonia and flu in October and December of 2019. Meanwhile, amidst worldwide criticism, a $20 trillion lawsuit has been filed against China for waging biological war using Coronavirus: $20 Trillion Lawsuit Against China For Waging Biological War, 27 March 2020. (G. Taietti for GreatGameIndia, Chinese Coronavirus Experiments on Humans Exposed In 2015, 01.04.2020).

Continued Wednesday …

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

2 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Yes Minister

    I don’t believe this virus was planned by anyone, rather it was the result of humans thumbing their noses at Gaia and eventually Gaia doing her nana. It is merely a warning of what can happen if humans demonstrate the untold arrogance typical of the species. One could take the view that it is the big end of town stuffing up the planet, although the sheeple with their obsession with self-interest are what permits the big end of town to get away with whatever. That raises the point that the present situation is the new normal. What happened in 2019 is in the past and we aren’t going back there. In the fullness to time, bigger / badder viruses are inevitable, the end result being escalating attacks on humankind until the few who remain learn their manners. Personally I don;’t give a rats, I am 90% independent of ‘the system’, my carbon footprint is among the smallest created by examples of homo-sapiens and obviously what happens in the rat-race doesn’t affect me. As far as I’m concerned, the sooner the system falls flat on its face the better. When it happens. you’ll hear me cheering from a thousand kilometers away.

  2. Andrew J. Smith

    Like most viruses, they appear to emerge and evolve organically, not sure we need theories of being made by humans, whether by design or accident. For example (apparently) the common cold crossed over from horses…. so much theorising now and in the past seems more about confusing people and deflecting them from real or non abstract economic or business issues e.g. the emergence of radical right libertarian supported ‘sovereign citizens’ denying Covid-19 is an issue.

    Regarding ‘Gaia’, again interesting theory developed and proposed by James Lovelock, but at best simply a theory or idea; difficult to prove or disprove. Further, not sure of Lovelock’s credibility when he is a patron of Population Matters (UK, formerly Optimum Population Trust) along with Paul ‘population bomb’ Ehrlich, while their board includes Sustainable Population Australia’s Dr. Jane O’Sullivan (or maybe naive like David Attenborough?).

    By coincidence Population Matters is another Rockefeller related entity that also promotes (like the Club of Rome did) the ‘limits to growth’ PR construct masquerading as a theory for the environment and blaming humans, while ignoring impact of fossil fuels; it has been criticised for promoting ‘Eco-Malthusianism’.

    The link with Rockefellers is not just their guy Paul Ehrlich but also John ‘passive eugenics’ Tanton (whose connection disappeared from their website some years ago) but his paw print is till evident with their far less diplomatic ‘cousins’ Migration Watch UK which seems to have a direct line in advising the Home Office on immigration policies e.g. ‘hostile environment’, and tabloid newspapers (Population Watch presents as more middle class via ‘Torygraph’ and The Times by focusing upon ‘population’ and environment).

    Another similar link related to Tanton at Population Matters is William Ryerson, an American, who has worked for or with Tanton organisations in the US e.g. ZPG (like Ehrlich too), Progressive for Immigration Reform (a former Oz Labor MP was also involved there, Kalvin Thomson) etc..

    https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=William_N._Ryerson

    No coincidence that UK and US (plus Australian) attitudes and policies on eugenics based immigration and population are similar, especially with Brexit, Trump and Australia’s obsessions for past twenty years, after the rude interruption caused by the end of the white Australia policy and Labor governments.

    Again, many of these ‘theories’, movements etc. are merely fluff, like attacking climate science, promoting conspiracy theories etc., to distract from policy making for the top people and their quest to maintain future income streams, wealth and influence, especially those in fossil fuels related sectors.

    Here in Oz it’s quite brazen with the our own democratic, grass roots and equitable Covid-19 Commission that nobody knows much about but seemingly equal with government?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Return to home page
Scroll Up
%d bloggers like this: