It turns out that this “International COVID Summit” had little to do with the 705 men and women who call themselves “the European Parliament”. I learned this by stumbling upon an article attributed to “Dr. Adrian Wong”. The article presents 5 alleged facts which I have not thoroughly fact-checked. It’s fact #4 that I want to highlight...."
Anyone who has heard of the Rockefeller Institute's Simon Flexner polio scam knows that in reality there are no viruses. But how could that happen when 1.4 million people in Ukraine contracted hemorrhagic pneumonia in 14 days in 2009? At least that's what people were told.
May 19, 2023·edited May 24, 2023Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
Hi Christine, thanks you for all the truthful work you did to get the virus truth out.
I use 3 strategies to get truth out.
1) Like yours and Stefan Lanka's 'No virus' one. I now phrase it as 'viruses only exist as an idea, the true virus is the believe that they exist. Stefan Lanka has also made a video that the virus is a mental construct.
2) I use Tom Cowan's contagion myth: contagion could never be proven in experiments and Louis Pasteur admitted his scientific fraud which was the basis for immunology.
3) The effectiveness of the only harmful injections, which can be done in 1 image of a few graphs. Brandy from www.learntherisk.org probably got murdered for it.
Today I have send a letter to 'our' Dutch senators which are going to vote soon over a law that facilitates virus and climate lock downs, masks and more criminal nonsense.
In hindsight I should have chosen an English name as the quality of most Telegram channels about the virus fraud are not that great.
One other thing I like you to know is that a patent is just a claim on an idea, it does not have to exist or work. So we can't proof anything with patents other then the ideas exist since a certain date.
// In the mean time I created an English version and changed the like above.
I'm grateful for your work since idk a couple years ago when Cowan had you on re the FOIAs. A few personal experiences in life had me doubting the med community but I never thought it would become so bad. With so many reasons to doubt info I absorb it's been a privilege to feel as though one aspect of all this covid nonsense (in my opinion the most important) is a slam dunk : virology and all that's downstream of it is purely based in fraud. I was however overly optimistic that the concept would catch on at a faster pace than it has. I like Martin as well but have noticed him speaking out both sides of his mouth in ways you highlight here. For this reason I don't make his appearances a regular stop anymore. I'd be surprised if he's being purposefully misleading but after all he's the one who regularly preaches being deliberate with words we use. In this regard I'd like to know he's sincere and literally come to terms on his messaging and decide publicly to practice what he preaches. Who knows, maybe he's not who he says. I agree with Sam Bailey that this is THE most important issue to address if the masses are to successfully resist the tyrannical measures being leveled against us. It seems so fundamental. Thank you for your persistence!
Thank you for your post. I saw it days ago made a comment somewhere here. I listened to Tom Cowan cover this as well. The NorthernTracey blog he shared was excellent.
I'm trying not to lose my wits over this EU thing, these so called truthers & alternative covid docktors.
I can just imagine what it feels like to have done the work on all those FOI requests, to see these people just ignore it as they travel to Europe to dine, and chat. If you hear screaming, that's me!
There has to be pot of gold for these Leprechaun at the end of their viruses rainbow, reading from the same old script. Ugh, God, save us from the saviours.
I can't believe it, CM, I caught you with a typo... lol
"The additional procedures included PCR tests that don’t test for a virus (as David Icke calls them) and the “point and declare” electron microscopy method (also known as the McCullough method) wherein tiny particles are “just known” to be a virus, even if ..... [they look just other tiny things] .....that aren’t thought to be viruses.' Perhaps "just LIKE" ?
Otherwise, your usual brilliance and excellent writing! I shared this, because I, too, wanted to believe in David Martin as a Fighter for the Good... But I smed something stinky about him a while back, and the courts, using the COURTS... kind of a giveaway. I think they all (the C.O.) have the same script, and there's another clue...
WELL DONE, GRYFFINDOR, yet once again. LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I wouldn't characterize "ridiculous/cruel/horrific/pointless/unscientific/invalid/unnatural procedures" as entirely meaningless. What can be determined is you are propagating something in cell culture that is certainly inducing cytopathic effects and is the likely causative agent of mice getting sick and that came from a person meeting the (non-specific and artificial) "case definition of SARS." What it does not prove is that the thing you have causing mice to get sick is also what caused a person to get sick or that everyone with "SARS" got sick from the same thing or manner. Because these are standard cell lines, no control is needed because the control has already been done (i.e. cell line supernatant has already been used to inoculate mice and they don't get sick, and this is published as part of the literature that comes with the cell line).
A note on cytopathic effects: this is where Lanka/Kaufman are misleading everyone by saying the mitogens used to propagate the culture themselves induce the effects. They don't - and every virus induces cytopathic effects (i.e. a unique plaque) that are unique and can be differentiated in a Plaque Differentiation assay. One plaque might look cloudy, another might look more crystalline, and these can be characterized (Simian Virus 40 is named from being the "40th distinct cytopathic effect observed in from simian viruses inoculated in the same cell culture.").
Again, I agree SARS-cov2 hasn't been proven to exist and the tests are not validated, and it's really the propaganda style (if it looks like a psyop, it's probably a psyop) and the lack of excess mortality that is clear and convincing. But let's not get into "no viruses exist" because it's simply not true. There are 100+ cold viruses in circulation at any moment and some diseases such as Monkeypox behave exactly how virus theory predicts.
SO...when there's a law/laws against funding Gain of Function research in the US, & someone has taken US tax $$$$$ and set up bioweapons labs in various countries in order to thwart that law or laws, but "gain of function" doesn't exist because viruses don't exist, how is such a law to be enforced? Do the perps just get to keep the money? AND, they get to file patents for inventing new somethings on the assumed existence of the nonexistent virus, and our regressive tax $$$$$$$$$ are paying the US Patent Office to go along w/ this, etc. etc. Can they to be prosecuted for lying to Congress (can anyone BUT Congress do that?)? Are they to be charged merely with theft? embezzlement? Can that happen, when THE LAW PRESUMES that viruses are real--just as GMOs are presumed "safe" because a court SAID they were. Presumeably, there was actual MONEY, and it went SOMEWHERE. Seems to me that there are problems that "the virus isn't real" doesn't solve.
The article from which you pulled the paragraph, "Isolation and Characterization of SARS-CoV" is itself very educational on a number of levels. It's very long, so I didn't read the whole thing, but in the "TERMS" section, a couple of definitions caught my eye:
>Inhibiting or Treating a Disease: Inhibiting the full development of a disease or condition, for example, in a subject who is at risk for a disease such as SARS. “Treatment” refers to a therapeutic intervention that ameliorates a sign or symptom of a disease or pathological condition after it has begun to develop. As used herein, the term “ameliorating,” with reference to a disease, pathological condition or symptom, refers to any observable beneficial effect of the treatment. The beneficial effect can be evidenced, for example, by a delayed onset of clinical symptoms of the disease in a susceptible subject, a reduction in severity of some or all clinical symptoms of the disease, a slower progression of the disease, a reduction in the number of relapses of the disease, an improvement in the overall health or well-being of the subject, or by other parameters well known in the art that are specific to the particular disease.<
In other words, suppressing symptoms is the goal, not cure or finding an actual cause.
>Isolated: An “isolated” microorganism (such as a virus, bacterium, fungus, or protozoan) has been substantially separated or purified away from microorganisms of different types, strains, or species. Microorganisms can be isolated by a variety of techniques, including serial dilution and culturing.<
Interesting that this is their definition, even though they never actually fulfill it with regards to a virus!
Then there was this:
>Purified: The term “purified” does not require absolute purity; rather, it is intended as a relative term. Thus, for example, a purified protein preparation is one in which the subject protein is more pure than in its natural environment within a cell. Generally, a protein preparation is purified such that the protein represents at least 50% of the total protein content of the preparation.<
So 50% pure = purified in "science"!
I really encourage people who want to understand what "science" is talking about in the modern day, to read this whole article. It's so clear that the language is set up to sound very precise, but the practice that the language describes is anything but!
I've added an addendum to this article:
"June 3, 2023 Addendum:
It turns out that this “International COVID Summit” had little to do with the 705 men and women who call themselves “the European Parliament”. I learned this by stumbling upon an article attributed to “Dr. Adrian Wong”. The article presents 5 alleged facts which I have not thoroughly fact-checked. It’s fact #4 that I want to highlight...."
How did you manage to find a way to write to Malone? That in itself is quite a feat.
God bless.
Anyone who has heard of the Rockefeller Institute's Simon Flexner polio scam knows that in reality there are no viruses. But how could that happen when 1.4 million people in Ukraine contracted hemorrhagic pneumonia in 14 days in 2009? At least that's what people were told.
🔥
Hi Christine, thanks you for all the truthful work you did to get the virus truth out.
I use 3 strategies to get truth out.
1) Like yours and Stefan Lanka's 'No virus' one. I now phrase it as 'viruses only exist as an idea, the true virus is the believe that they exist. Stefan Lanka has also made a video that the virus is a mental construct.
2) I use Tom Cowan's contagion myth: contagion could never be proven in experiments and Louis Pasteur admitted his scientific fraud which was the basis for immunology.
3) The effectiveness of the only harmful injections, which can be done in 1 image of a few graphs. Brandy from www.learntherisk.org probably got murdered for it.
Today I have send a letter to 'our' Dutch senators which are going to vote soon over a law that facilitates virus and climate lock downs, masks and more criminal nonsense.
https://telegra.ph/Youve-been-lied-to-by-experts-who-dont-know-any-better--the-hard-virus-truth-05-20
I could not find a way to contact you on Telegram at https://t.me/ChristineMasseyFOIS
But you can contact me at t.me/GerbenNL if you like and my channel is t.me/NLvirusWAAN.
In hindsight I should have chosen an English name as the quality of most Telegram channels about the virus fraud are not that great.
One other thing I like you to know is that a patent is just a claim on an idea, it does not have to exist or work. So we can't proof anything with patents other then the ideas exist since a certain date.
// In the mean time I created an English version and changed the like above.
Mallone is suing the Breggins. He does a lot of suing.
I'm grateful for your work since idk a couple years ago when Cowan had you on re the FOIAs. A few personal experiences in life had me doubting the med community but I never thought it would become so bad. With so many reasons to doubt info I absorb it's been a privilege to feel as though one aspect of all this covid nonsense (in my opinion the most important) is a slam dunk : virology and all that's downstream of it is purely based in fraud. I was however overly optimistic that the concept would catch on at a faster pace than it has. I like Martin as well but have noticed him speaking out both sides of his mouth in ways you highlight here. For this reason I don't make his appearances a regular stop anymore. I'd be surprised if he's being purposefully misleading but after all he's the one who regularly preaches being deliberate with words we use. In this regard I'd like to know he's sincere and literally come to terms on his messaging and decide publicly to practice what he preaches. Who knows, maybe he's not who he says. I agree with Sam Bailey that this is THE most important issue to address if the masses are to successfully resist the tyrannical measures being leveled against us. It seems so fundamental. Thank you for your persistence!
Thank you for your post. I saw it days ago made a comment somewhere here. I listened to Tom Cowan cover this as well. The NorthernTracey blog he shared was excellent.
I'm trying not to lose my wits over this EU thing, these so called truthers & alternative covid docktors.
I can just imagine what it feels like to have done the work on all those FOI requests, to see these people just ignore it as they travel to Europe to dine, and chat. If you hear screaming, that's me!
There has to be pot of gold for these Leprechaun at the end of their viruses rainbow, reading from the same old script. Ugh, God, save us from the saviours.
Great work Christine. Expose the virus BS.
Keep up the amazing work of sounding the trumpet about the elephants in the room!
I’ve been calling these docs out since last October. You did it better. Thanks.
I can't believe it, CM, I caught you with a typo... lol
"The additional procedures included PCR tests that don’t test for a virus (as David Icke calls them) and the “point and declare” electron microscopy method (also known as the McCullough method) wherein tiny particles are “just known” to be a virus, even if ..... [they look just other tiny things] .....that aren’t thought to be viruses.' Perhaps "just LIKE" ?
Otherwise, your usual brilliance and excellent writing! I shared this, because I, too, wanted to believe in David Martin as a Fighter for the Good... But I smed something stinky about him a while back, and the courts, using the COURTS... kind of a giveaway. I think they all (the C.O.) have the same script, and there's another clue...
WELL DONE, GRYFFINDOR, yet once again. LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
xo xo
I wouldn't characterize "ridiculous/cruel/horrific/pointless/unscientific/invalid/unnatural procedures" as entirely meaningless. What can be determined is you are propagating something in cell culture that is certainly inducing cytopathic effects and is the likely causative agent of mice getting sick and that came from a person meeting the (non-specific and artificial) "case definition of SARS." What it does not prove is that the thing you have causing mice to get sick is also what caused a person to get sick or that everyone with "SARS" got sick from the same thing or manner. Because these are standard cell lines, no control is needed because the control has already been done (i.e. cell line supernatant has already been used to inoculate mice and they don't get sick, and this is published as part of the literature that comes with the cell line).
A note on cytopathic effects: this is where Lanka/Kaufman are misleading everyone by saying the mitogens used to propagate the culture themselves induce the effects. They don't - and every virus induces cytopathic effects (i.e. a unique plaque) that are unique and can be differentiated in a Plaque Differentiation assay. One plaque might look cloudy, another might look more crystalline, and these can be characterized (Simian Virus 40 is named from being the "40th distinct cytopathic effect observed in from simian viruses inoculated in the same cell culture.").
Again, I agree SARS-cov2 hasn't been proven to exist and the tests are not validated, and it's really the propaganda style (if it looks like a psyop, it's probably a psyop) and the lack of excess mortality that is clear and convincing. But let's not get into "no viruses exist" because it's simply not true. There are 100+ cold viruses in circulation at any moment and some diseases such as Monkeypox behave exactly how virus theory predicts.
SO...when there's a law/laws against funding Gain of Function research in the US, & someone has taken US tax $$$$$ and set up bioweapons labs in various countries in order to thwart that law or laws, but "gain of function" doesn't exist because viruses don't exist, how is such a law to be enforced? Do the perps just get to keep the money? AND, they get to file patents for inventing new somethings on the assumed existence of the nonexistent virus, and our regressive tax $$$$$$$$$ are paying the US Patent Office to go along w/ this, etc. etc. Can they to be prosecuted for lying to Congress (can anyone BUT Congress do that?)? Are they to be charged merely with theft? embezzlement? Can that happen, when THE LAW PRESUMES that viruses are real--just as GMOs are presumed "safe" because a court SAID they were. Presumeably, there was actual MONEY, and it went SOMEWHERE. Seems to me that there are problems that "the virus isn't real" doesn't solve.
Yeah, that was by Tracey Northern, an article she posted 6/29/21.
https://northerntracey213875959.wordpress.com/2021/06/30/the-amino-age-and-the-new-abnormal-doctors/
The Amino Age and The New abNormal Doctors, Northern Tracey. 6/3021.
The article from which you pulled the paragraph, "Isolation and Characterization of SARS-CoV" is itself very educational on a number of levels. It's very long, so I didn't read the whole thing, but in the "TERMS" section, a couple of definitions caught my eye:
>Inhibiting or Treating a Disease: Inhibiting the full development of a disease or condition, for example, in a subject who is at risk for a disease such as SARS. “Treatment” refers to a therapeutic intervention that ameliorates a sign or symptom of a disease or pathological condition after it has begun to develop. As used herein, the term “ameliorating,” with reference to a disease, pathological condition or symptom, refers to any observable beneficial effect of the treatment. The beneficial effect can be evidenced, for example, by a delayed onset of clinical symptoms of the disease in a susceptible subject, a reduction in severity of some or all clinical symptoms of the disease, a slower progression of the disease, a reduction in the number of relapses of the disease, an improvement in the overall health or well-being of the subject, or by other parameters well known in the art that are specific to the particular disease.<
In other words, suppressing symptoms is the goal, not cure or finding an actual cause.
>Isolated: An “isolated” microorganism (such as a virus, bacterium, fungus, or protozoan) has been substantially separated or purified away from microorganisms of different types, strains, or species. Microorganisms can be isolated by a variety of techniques, including serial dilution and culturing.<
Interesting that this is their definition, even though they never actually fulfill it with regards to a virus!
Then there was this:
>Purified: The term “purified” does not require absolute purity; rather, it is intended as a relative term. Thus, for example, a purified protein preparation is one in which the subject protein is more pure than in its natural environment within a cell. Generally, a protein preparation is purified such that the protein represents at least 50% of the total protein content of the preparation.<
So 50% pure = purified in "science"!
I really encourage people who want to understand what "science" is talking about in the modern day, to read this whole article. It's so clear that the language is set up to sound very precise, but the practice that the language describes is anything but!
https://patents.justia.com/patent/7220852?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email