Regarding Watt it is important to remember she isn't qualified to give legal arguments or provide legal analysis, anymore than she is to give medical or scientific ones. Yet she never says the former. She claims she did Constitutional Law, but almost certainly only did title searches and skip traces and docketings, because she was only a paralegal for a solo practictioner for a few years, 20 some odd years ago. She did not attend law school. She did not sit for the Bar. She has never litigated anything. And she almost always gets the fundamental way of how the American Common Law system actually works wrong. The people relying on her, like Sasha Latapova, go into circle the wagon mode if you try to correct glaring mistakes she makes, like for instance that case law is nonexsistant or subservient to legislation, and that agency rulings are equal to or greater than both legislation and case law. Like Karen Kingston with patents, she did a good statute pull, but she pulled no legislative or admin histories, she did no case law research on the statutes. She did what a paralegal does, pulled easy stuff, completely out of context. But she is cited as an expert at legal analysis and is even giving people pseudo legal forms she creates herself to use to accuse their primary care doctors of genocide (please don't do this, you'll end up on a watch list or Baker-Acted or in jail)--which barks pretty close to practicing law without a license. All the questions she dodged regarding the physical actuality of viruses will def be used in winning law suits, both state and fed, n which people were mandated, complied, and injured. Primarily, real lawyers aren't going to seek legal remedies but equitable ones in tort (not DIE equity but traditional Anglo American Common Law Equity), and the idea of forcing someone to take something "because trust me" doesn't fly. We have enough decent judges left who will be shocked to learn they've been misled their whole lives, even if they themselves can't quit "yes virus," they will allow the thin end of the "no virus" wedge to be used to provide equitable rememdies. In most cases, the definitive answer of yes or no virus will be stipulated too as beyond scope, but the questions regarding the fact they can't find them will be allowed. In some, however,, yes vs no virus will be allowed to be fully litigated. The Archons gnash their teeth at the prospect of loosing their favorite boggart. I now use yes vs no virus to quickly screen those not committed to ending this 600 year old death theater. Its both an intelligence test and an intgrity test. Thanks for all you do.
Your (and Bill Huston's) Q&A with Mary Holland was fascinating. It amazes me that a lawyer could baldly state a claim (that CHD takes no position on the virus question) so contradicted by openly available facts on their own website. Maybe next CHD'll do an Am. Acad. of Pediatrics, who started purging their website of all information showing that infants and children need to see faces to develop normally, after they took Pfizer's shilling and started shilling for Pfizer by insisting on masks for all children in America. But if CHD follows in the AAP's footsteps, they'll have to delete almost all their content, as almost every article embeds "the virus exists" as an unquestioned assumption.
I did agree with Stephen Frost's comment that the no-virus people shouldn't sound aggrieved. I think that he was trying to help (and agrees with the position). First, some among the virus pushers are not our friends, even though they seem to be, and are doing Pharma/Deep State deep work. And it doesn't help to show weakness before enemies. It just eggs them on, because they understand only power. Second, being totally calm and confident helps undecided honest viewers not get swept themselves into an emotional state, which shuts down reason. And we all know that it takes a lot of very calm reflection and reasoning to understand the depths of the virology fraud (at least, it did for me although others may have got there in quicker and more direct ways).
Regarding the lawyer demurring...as a lawyer, demurriing is what we're known for and why Shakespeare wanted us all dead first. Lawyers demure for 3 reasons: answering definitively will hurt our (most important) case, answering definitively will anger our (most valuable) client, or answering definitively will antagonize our (most critical) judge. CHD go out of business if viruses are a hoax. It's a dark game they play, they need viruses to exist so that vaccines can exist, so that they can fight for the vaccine injured children, and take in millions of dollars annually, yet never truly challenge the status quo. No viruses,, no CHD. Everyone assumes if it is a Kennedy it must be a good thing, but Kennedys passed a mentally ill MM around like a rag doll, and left a woman to drown in an upside down car and never even shed a fake tear, so...
I found Stephen's comment condescending and annoying. He defended Mary's ridiculous response and even falsely claimed that she had answered my question! It was a yes/no question, but instead of answering truthfully she pretended to be covering "both sides", when in fact they are clearly in the yes-virus camp knowing darn well they have no science on their side. She couldn't answer honestly because then she'd have to admit that they have taken a position based on pseudoscience. And this "both" sides claim doesn't even make sense. People need truth, not truth and pseudoscience.
Re emotions, for sure, and normally I am perfectly calm and was perfectly calm in all my emails with Mary, Robert (who ignored me entirely) and Jay Couey (as shown here: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/RFK-Jr-Holland-Dec-2022-PACKAGE-redacted.pdf). But on this day I was extremely tired and had a headache, and didn't even want to talk to Mary... but it was too big an opportunity to miss. So it is what it is, and I'm still glad I did it, and have had a lot of positive feedback, and was even told that my comments helped open the eyes of someone close to RFK Jr. I think after 3 years of this nonsense, some emotion is understandable.
Re Stephen, I asked him a few days ago to be allowed to give a presentation on why this issue matters immensely. He has ignored both my initial request and my follow up. He seems only interested in hosting a show, not in getting to the truth.
On reflection, I think that I agree with all your points. I didn't mean to sound critical, but I likely did. Apologies. You've done more than almost anyone to open our eyes to the depths of the fraud.
I am very glad that you did the interview. It pressures them to change, or exposes them as fakers if (when?) they don't. Their whole science focus is just a joke if their first rule of science is "question, but not too much!"
I don't know how much Stephen is the host any more. It may be more Charles Kovess (from whom the notifications come about the upcoming speaker). He is perhaps amenable to your coming on?
Charles actually specifically told me that "STEPHEN IS PRIMARILY IN CHARGE OF CHOOSING SPEAKERS". They were both copied on my emails 3 days ago asking to be able to do a presentation. No response from Stephen yet.
Apparently William Huston had an interesting phone convo with Charles, after our questioning of Mary, but I didn't hear it so can't say exactly what happened.
Could any of the good people share a link to Michael Bryant's paper (about Italy), which Tom Cowan went through in his video response to Broze/McCullough?
I want to understand. Why does CHD continue to accept germ theory, viruses and virology? So much of their content assumes the existence of a virus. They never mention the assumption. They never reveal any conflicts of interest.
They are not stupid.
Have they been threatened?
Are they afraid of alienating their base and a loss in revenue?
Have they been brainwashed?
I dunno. It’s like they like the tyranny of germs.
If viruses don't exist, neither does CHD. If there are no viruses, then there are no vaccines. If there are no vaccines, there is no reason to donate millions to CHD to advocate for safer vaccines and the vaccine injured. It's just self interest. Along with the fact that they like to brunch with Oxbridge Snooties, no Rhodes Scholar would ever dare question Virology, next you'll question the physical impossiblity of Dinosaurs just because they violate the Mass Cubed Law of Physics! But given that J J Couey goes on and on about viruses being ghosts that absolutely exsit, it might be that they may just not be that bright.
Yes, I believe it's as you suggested - they're afraid of alienating their base and imploding their 'business model' for drawing revenue.
The universal problem is that institutions everywhere don't want to tackle the no virus dilemma because it represents an existential crisis. They'd have to rethink everything. They'd have to wake up to expansive 'conspiracy theories' that would reverberate like tsunamis. It's a HUGE truth pill.
Mar 13, 2023·edited Mar 13, 2023Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
Thanks for adding a link to my Substack.
But don't you think my name should be on this post as AUTHOR, considering you lifted about 3,000 words of my authorship, and many graphics which took me many days, maybe weeks, of effort and research, VERBATIM, without credit or permission, representing this work as your own?
I'm honored that you enjoyed my writing enough to steal, but apparently I'm not noteworthy enough to warrant a byline?
I have added your name and more links to your Substack and made it more clear for readers where the information comes from, i hope this is to your satisfaction, if not and you would like any specific changes just let me know.
I can add absolutely add your name to the article and make it clear where the quotes come from, I'm just trying to share knowledge, not trying to claim or steal the work of others, your great articles show that the same tactics used against Dr Judy Wood are being used against those exposing the germ theory and Covid nonsense, i think that the information is important for people to know which is why i try to share it.
Bill's name is nowhere on your page, nor is the URL to his site showing, only a hyperlink attached to his article title, and there are no quotation marks around his work. You need to fix this.
Because of the theme settings my site uses it puts quotes into a different coloured box that can be a bit difficult to see rather than the normal thing it does when using the quote function, i will try to change the settings so that the box is more easy to see, as i said in my reply to Bill Huston i am not trying o claim or steal the work of others, just trying to share knowledge.
You are welcome, i just have to correct you a little, it is Dr Judy Wood, not Woods, this may seem like a trivial thing but it is also one of the tactics used by people who spread lies about 9/11, i'm not sure why they do it but even though they know her name they often say Woods rather than her actual name.
It's a way of downplaying their relevance / credibility / credentials. Also it makes it harder for people to search for them (I mean in a search engine). I've heard Cowan and Kaufman misnamed several times, enough to make me suspect at least a few were done deliberately.
I think you are bang on the money re: AE911/ CHD. Gain of function is the new thermite. Lab leak is the new 'trained on US bases'. Both cover ups planted misleading 'easter eggs' early on for truthers to discover and feel like they've solves the crime, and both rely on linguistic traps ('virus', 'pandemic', 'explode', 'collapse').
Solving both scams requires a grasp of science that - although fairly easy to get to grips with - requires an attention span and clarity of thinking that most people lack, preferring instead to take the 'emotionally satisfying' secondary cover up (the official unofficial story) that is provided by a fake truth movement ... a truth movement who take their followers round and round in circles, with endless events and tours and sensational updates ... while dismissing the actual science/ evidence (that puts an end to speculation and solves the case) as no more than 'an interesting theory' or 'divisive' or 'a losing strategy'.
It's practically the same template. It's a bit like watching different versions of 'The Office'. The same basic formula, the same characters, the same plot lines..... just tweaked for different countries and their own unique cultural references.
Yeah that makes sense, i'm not surprised that the same tactic has been deployed against those exposing the germ theory & Covid nonsense, it's a shame that most people who can see past the first layer of a scam often forget that there are usually more layers to uncover.
Yeah, it makes no sense to me. Ron Unz did a review of the book, said that RFK devoted 200 pages to the HIV/AIDS scam, apparently understood it was a media-driven hoax, but yet cannot see that Covid is basically the same scam all over again. And even more crazy--the same applies to Unz- he was able to get that HIV/AIDS was a scam, but thinks covid is the real deal. I honestly don't know how to make sense of this--controlled opposition, afraid if they tell the full truth about no virus they will sound crazy, or ???
Clues don't cut it at this point. As you've said, he's got to know. He has already made it clear (when pressed) that he can't defend virology. The only ethical thing to do is either embrace the no-virus, no novel-disease reality, or at least stop talking about these imaginary particles and imaginary pandemics.
It's really pitiful, that Watt did all that good work, however she will not look at the evidence that viruses do not exist as presented by the industry which profits from the false paradigm. They're extracellular debris, I heard Tom Cowan's speak of it in 2020 and I got it, why can't she and numerous activist see it. The planet is being electrified and we're being sprayed with aerosols and yet mum's the word on these facts. I guess they rather they didn't change their minds, never admit to stay in this WHO hell, let's not exit from this big pharma, and medics self serving prison.
And worse yet is admiring viruses are not the cause of disease or infection might set infants and children free of the 72+ toxins they'll be injected with over time, yes well apparently none of them, no one wants that. Thanks for your work, Christine it deserves a lot more eyes.
I agree, anyone defending children should be all over the fraud of virology. It's a no-brainer. And a legal expert who turns a blind eye to legal confessions... something is not right with that.
God love you, Christine for being able to read through my comment "admiring" is supposed to to be admitting, that aside, it's a very good, children are one of the best reasons to care to expose the virus fraud. I don't understand why people refuse to take a stand, I think it's more than a little obvious that this theory is of great danger to humanity. I spent close to 4 decades working with adults and children in a crowded space, one on one in personal space, I got sick twice in all those years, and it wasn't because of a virus.
My ex, a goalie coach would get sick every year when college hockey started and it correlated with his birthday, without fail he'd get what seem to be a cold or flu, now that I know better, I realize it's unresolved trauma he experienced when he was an infant.
There is no doubt viruses do not cause upper-respiratory infections, or idiopathic pneumonias attributed to covid-19, because even if they exist as per Dr. Racaniello's, or Dr. Malone's own admissions - the two gurus worshiped by the anti-vaxxers - viruses are dead particles that by some yet to be determined mechanism would have to become alive to do what they claim they do.
So, this is out of discussion.
However, there is very clear evidence that germ theory might be right. The terrain theory supporters, whom I respect greatly, are wrong and I can prove it. The presence of bacteria in a lifesystem with no symptoms at all doesn't mean the bacteria can’t cause "problems", like upper respiratory infections.
Hansen's disease (also known as leprosy) is an infection caused by slow-growing bacteria called Mycobacterium leprae. It is slow growing. So, it is not infectious, or causing any problems or symptoms, until the overgrowth happens. It is complex, I admit. Most immune systems can handle it but some don’t.
Thank you for your hard work exposing the fake pandemic!
Hmm, well the presence of bacteria, no matter how fast or slow they grow, is not proof that they are the cause of symptoms. And the fact that symptoms don't occur until there is lots of the bacteria is not proof that the bacteria are the cause of symptoms.
Controlled experiments would be needed to prove that. It is plausible that the bacteria are growing because the terrain allows them to, and the problems with the terrain (caused by poor diet or whatever) are the root cause of the bacteria growing and the symptoms.
This is the main problem with terrain theory and those who promote it. They don't have, or are unwilling to perform, the controlled experiments themselves.
Here is why:
In a hospital, or a nursing home setting, upper-respiratory infections spread like fire. Patients in the same rooms develop the same, or similar symptoms, within short periods of time. Diagnostic pictures, like X-rays etc. prove the infection is spreading even after isolating patients who have shown the symptoms. The isolation happened too late. To prove that the spread of upper-respiratory infections within a short period of time can be explained by terrain theory, such as toxins in food, water or chemicals don't stand the reason and that is why the terrain theorists, like Dr. Cowan, who sometimes reluctantly admits he and the terrain theorists may not be able to explain why people locked up in the same environment exhibit the same or similar symptoms of the upper-respiratory infections.
Bacteria causing infections are very easy to prove with controlled experiments and the best proof of bacteria causing infections is the phenomenon called antibiotic resistance. Simply put, the same bacteria causing infection clears with the same antibiotic while the other doesn’t. Why not? Because bacteria have the ability to swap antibiotic resistant loops of DNA called plasmids in the process called horizontal gene transfer (HGT). In other words, if the same bacteria responds to the same antibiotic and the other doesn't, you can make a prediction that the latter has developed antibiotic resistance due to horizontal gene transfer. While almost nothing in science is 100% proof, this is as good as it gets and can be verified by sequencing the bacterial genomes.
The onus is on those making the positive claim, end of story.
Patients in the same hospital/room has common exposures. You are simply making assumptions about causation. If isolated people still get "infection", then that hardly rules out terrain-style root causes.
You are simply adding on more, complicated claims to prop up a story. So now you have additional claims to prove. And lol, bacteria being killed by drugs doesn't not tell you the cause of the symptoms. Show us your controlled experiments. Unsubstantiated claims don't cut it.
I can cite more than science itself. Are you willing to believe it though? The question is not about science itself I'm afraid, because as we both know "science" can and has/is manipulated. Do you agree?
Sadly, it's hard to see how the no virus argument will ever be accepted under the continuing oppressive dystopian mainstream narrative. It's like trying to overturn entrenched accepted Orwellian medical unreality. They don't like common sense and critical thinking at any level of narrative nobbling.
We're now into the fourth year of the greatest globalist deception ever known. It's bad enough trying to convince anyone that there's been a massive globalist political fraud and plot against humanity. Questioning the existence of ANY virus threatens to demolish their toxic Scripted Spell. They can't allow that.
It seems that the only people who'll embrace the no virus reality are those of us in the 'awake and aware' sovereign tribes of the emerging parallel societies and consciousness - who are casting-off the entire strata of deep-rooted societal lies and deception. Good riddance to all that baggage!
" It's like trying to overturn entrenched accepted Orwellian medical unreality. "
Instead of trying to overturn germ theory, another strategy would be to lend a helping hand to virologists to help them find the virus in the name of public health and safety.
To 'oppose' virology (to oppose the status quo) automatically puts most people on the defensive. That's why the covid architects never 'opposed' our freedoms, bodily integrity, human rights etc..... they were smart enough to know that you never oppose the status quo, which is why all policies were framed in terms of 'helping us' to stay safe and protect our health.
The 'settling the virus debate' challenge was a step in the right direction, but it still relies on virologists accepting the challenge, which they are unlikely to do. And the public are not engaged enough to notice the significance of their refusal.
Maybe there is something more proactive that can be done? Something that puts the 'no virus' camp more in a 'helping to ensure health and safety' role (something the public can resonate with), and which forces the virology camp into the role of being 'in opposition'.
The problem with taking a purely scientific/ rational stance is that it just doesn't resonate with the general public who are only concerned with feeling safe and secure. They are not able to make the connection and realise that staying true to science is the only way to remain safe and secure (the only way to stay alive these days!). They need the battle against virology's pseudo-science to be framed in simple (and dare I say emotional) terms of helping to protect their health and keep them safe.
Sorry for rambling comment... just thinking out loud ...
I totally disagree with you on multiple levels. What? "Lend a helping hand to virologists to help them find the virus in the name of public health and safety." LOL! LOL! LOL! "The covid architects never 'opposed' our freedoms, bodily integrity, human rights etc." Where have you been these last three years??? I'm currently falling off my chair in disbelief! This must be an antagonistic wind-up?
We've experienced Orwellian treachery on unspeakable levels throughout the world. Unknown multitudes have been injured and killed by toxic wholly unnecessary injections - all stemming from the malevolent engineered quackery of virology and entrenched mass political deception.
As for "helping to ensure health and safety" and 'keeping people safe' - that's the weaponised political sludge-fudge crapaganda mentality that's been used against We The People by The Deep State across the entire Free World. It's all an engineered Globalist Political Plot. An Epic Political Plandemic. A sham and scam on humanity.
All we need to do to 'stay safe' and healthy is rediscover our individual empowered sovereignty, use practical common sense, switch off corrupt lamestream media, defy traitorous treacherous tyrannical globalist One World Government, eat healthy food, get some sunlight, take a few vitamins, exercise, laugh, smile, find joy, love and embrace life.
We need to enthusiastically and radiantly rebuild our communities - and reject the viral nonsense.
"Where have you been these last three years??? I'm currently falling off my chair in disbelief! This must be an antagonistic wind-up?"
I was talking about how all of this is played out in the public domain (on the TV).
"We've experienced Orwellian treachery on unspeakable levels throughout the world."
Right. But as soon as you start talking like that you lose most people because they are still living in the artificial reality created by TV. If you then start saying there are no viruses they will start walking backwards out the room. This is because they are still under the impression that virology is a science and everything that's happened over the last three years has been fundamentally about health and safety (marred only by incompetence and localised corruption). That's where most people are at, and I'm just suggesting there might be ways to help them cross the chasm, rather than expecting them to make the leap all by themselves, which they probably can't do. To get public engagement on these issues is what matters. As the saying goes "with public support you can achieve anything, without it you can achieve nothing".
What is the point of expertly felling the 'virology tree' in a deserted forest with nobody around to hear it fall? That seems to be the current situation. The challenge right now is not the science, it is to get the public to engage with the science. I am not suggesting any compromises to the science, I am just suggesting that some imagination and creativity might be needed to make the science less shocking and more palatable to the masses.
The scientific argument has already been won, the challenge now is to win the audience. Like I said, I don't have any answers, I'm just thinking out loud. I'm trying to define the specific problem which needs to be solved. To me that problem is lack of public engagement because of the huge chasm between the science and the public discourse.
I understand what you're saying but the way I see it is that we're now living in a dual reality world whereby the myopic masses are heavily under the Spell of the Dystopian False Narrative of corrupt mainstream media -and the rest of us, the 'awake and aware' conscious community are splitting off into a parallel society route. The Orwellian Media propaganda is the root problem.
Yes, we need creative solutions for waking more people up. However, sadly, nobody has solved that pressing need during the last two or three years. We're stuck in the 'Twilight Zone' with two versions of reality, one a distorted dystopia, the other an open-minded pathway to scientific enquiry and truth. It's a stark red-pill choice for people. There's no sugar-coating it.
There's lack of public engagement because they've all been brainwashed by military grade globalist propaganda. We're in a very real 5th generation Globalist War and most people don't even realise it. It's all about perception and discernment of the truth, seeing through the lies.
Personally, I don't take the purist no virus route as a solitary path. Whilst I believe that there's no virus (anywhere, ever) and virology is an elaborate fraudulent psuedo-science, the wider problem in our new-age dystopian society is a battle on many fronts, so there are many angles of argument to pursue, many approaches to take. The core problem is 24/7 media lies and propaganda on multiple levels. "They" lied about so many things and continue to do so as an ideological malevolent manipulation. We're facing waiste-high tyranny - we're wading through deep dark dystopian detritus.
"the way I see it is that we're now living in a dual reality "
Right. I guess what I'm suggesting is a duel approach to take that into account. Or a multi-faceted approach.
"There's no sugar-coating it."
The thing is though, the general public has only ever shown a willingness to follow sugar coated information.... which is why we've been bombarded with dancing nurses, global slavery concerts, rainbow stickers and celebrities performing musical numbers complete with backing singers in syringe costumes. And all of this has been under the overarching banner of 'health and safety'. This emotional framing (marketing) has won the hearts and minds of the masses, because it's a message nobody can argue against (who DOESN'T support health and safety?).
The 'no virus' (AKA scientifically rigorous) position is by far the better product. But it currently has no marketing. This would be fine if the general population was able to separate science from propaganda, or facts from feelings. But, as we all agree, they are not. If they were, they'd have never fallen for the propaganda in the first place.
If we are going to take a strictly scientific approach (discounting all that is illusory) shouldn't we also take a scientific (ie non idealistic) approach when it comes to how we communicate information effectively to a dumbed down population who have been conditioned to respond only to emotional arguments that align with their basic survival impulses?
Given that the scientific argument has already been won (because virology never had any scientific legitimacy to begin with), surely the emphasis should be on the 'marketing' side of things?
And given that the billions of dollars of 'covid' marketing over the last 3 years was all about promoting 'health and safety' (and NOT about installing medical fascism based on pseudo-science) there's no reason not to, in a sense, 'surf' on that wave of marketing to promote the far healthier and safer science of non-virology.
Because in the end all of that positivity and caution and care and uplifting piano melodies and reassuring commitment to 'staying safe' rightfully belongs to the no virus/ proper science camp (the only people who ACTUALLY care about anyone's health and safety). And that emotional, instinctual, drive to 'stay safe' is where most of the public's attention is fixated right now. Despite the superficial divisions in society, we are all basically on the same page. That's why I was suggesting we seek to reduce the perceived gap by focusing on our mutual (and unifying) drive for health and safety... and let the science sort itself out (which it already has!).
I guess I feel it's a huge missed opportunity to limit the scope of the 'no virus' campaign (or whatever we call it) to a purely intellectual endeavour, and act as if it has no heart and no connection to mainstream culture and the lives of everybody (even those still wearing masks).
I understand the need to separate 'facts from feelings' (especially in our current culture), but at the same time if we disregard human feelings it only gives the other side a monopoly on exploiting them for their own (unscientific and nefarious) agendas. Why do evil deceptions get to use uplifting piano melodies, but not the honest truth?!
The sign of a high civilisation is being able to maintain a clear distinction between facts (mind, discipline) and feelings (heart, expression), but without having to make any compromises to either. I am not sure most people will ever be able to 'hear' any of our scientific arguments in the absence of emotional marketing. It's like expecting them to hear the tree fall over in a vacuum.
I don't think you truly grasp the gravity of what has played out over the last three years. It was not a marketing drive for our health. It was billions of dollars spent towards *propagandising* Globalist Convid-1984, then Globalist 'Climate Change' followed by new Globalist Wars. Convid-1984 was a scripted layout, the beginning of an experimental transhumanist era at best or a phased mass de-population agenda at worst. A blatant attack on humanity.
It was never about our health. "They" don't care about our health.
The health narrative was a massive deception. They did everything to literally separate people from the essentials of good health - simple preventative treatments, sunlight, vitamins C, D3, etc. fresh air, exercise, mixing with family and friends. They globally oppressed free speech and replaced it with Orwellian totalitarianism. They globally suppressed ivermectin and hydroxychloraquine - safe and effective medicines already widely available. Instead they manufactured 'viral' false fear psychological propaganda 24/7 for 3+ years, derided common sense, degraded natural wellbeing and the genuine spiritual joyful togetherness of humanity.
It was all politically designed to make way for their unsafe unnecessary tyrannical toxic injections. It was a dystopian Pack of Lies from the outset. A political plot. Fascist totalitarian 'health' is an oxymoron created by vacuous morons who simply don't care about our health.
Convid-1984 was an evil globalist technocratic intervention to carve up the world, create huge profit streaming for the Globalist Cabal, the robbing of national and individual sovereignty and enslavement of the world populous. "They" want us to 'own nothing and be happy' whilst eating bugs in order to 'save the planet.' An obscene distortion and manipulation of reality. It was never about our health and wellbeing.
You nailed it to the wall. Narratives, world views, money and "security." The matrix, alive and "well." But it can't last. I can see at least one leg wobbling on that rotted table. Crazy glue can only do so much.
Admission of the fraud would undermine BILLIONS of dollars in sectors of a enormous industry that exists today. We are talking jobs, degrees, bonus incentives to Drs, “healthcare” that would otherwise not be needed (significantly less poisoned customers), and of course Pharma itself.
Probably hundreds of billions of dollars annually.
The WHO is tripling down, claiming an effort of 500 new vaccines by 2030.
The "epidemic" was engineered, advertised, promoted out of whole cloth. Collusion of corporations, governments, institutions to harm and defraud the public. International Corporatocracy - World Economic Forum and "Stakeholder capitalists". They spent years laying the groundwork.
I am saving this whole post until I have time to really go through it, but at a glance it looks like more of your outrageously excellent and useful work!!! Thank you, hugely, for doing what you do. You are a very very very sturdy spoke in the Wheel of Truthiness and a sort of Sword of Gryffindor in this battle...
The 2nd link is for "COVID-19 Genome Sequence Dataset". No amount of sequence data can prove the existing of a replicating infectious parasite that transmits disease from host to host via natural modes of exposure.
According to the abstract of the 1st paper, 2005, they claim to have identified another novel "coronavirus". But the methods listed are incapable of doing such:
PCR
antibodies
"isolation" of "the virus" using various cell lines (oxymoron)
intracerebral inoculation of suckling mice (unnatural exposure, and not with purified particles)
RNA was extracted from the NPA, urine, and fecal specimens (not FROM purified particles)
"Sequences were assembled and manually edited to produce a final sequence of the viral genome" HA HA HA
RE: CHD..... In the spirit of 'not taking sides' (which seems to be their argument) they could publish two versions of every article, book, lecture and video they produce. One version which assumes 'the virus' exists and one version which stays true to the scientific method.
Perhaps someone could offer to help them by producing scientific 'translations' of their existing content to cater to those who prefer dispassionate science over gain-of-psyop drama.
The no-virus versions of many articles -- for example, of one's on vaccine efficacy -- would become very short: "No virus, no efficacy, only poisoning. Skip the shot." So it may not be that much extra writing effort, even if it's a lot of extra intellectual effort.
Very well put together so much info and it's becoming increasingly obvious that the entire scientific community is mostly corrupt and fraudulent. Virology is going to collapse very soon..
Feel free to read my current article on the subject where I go over similar info.
Regarding Watt it is important to remember she isn't qualified to give legal arguments or provide legal analysis, anymore than she is to give medical or scientific ones. Yet she never says the former. She claims she did Constitutional Law, but almost certainly only did title searches and skip traces and docketings, because she was only a paralegal for a solo practictioner for a few years, 20 some odd years ago. She did not attend law school. She did not sit for the Bar. She has never litigated anything. And she almost always gets the fundamental way of how the American Common Law system actually works wrong. The people relying on her, like Sasha Latapova, go into circle the wagon mode if you try to correct glaring mistakes she makes, like for instance that case law is nonexsistant or subservient to legislation, and that agency rulings are equal to or greater than both legislation and case law. Like Karen Kingston with patents, she did a good statute pull, but she pulled no legislative or admin histories, she did no case law research on the statutes. She did what a paralegal does, pulled easy stuff, completely out of context. But she is cited as an expert at legal analysis and is even giving people pseudo legal forms she creates herself to use to accuse their primary care doctors of genocide (please don't do this, you'll end up on a watch list or Baker-Acted or in jail)--which barks pretty close to practicing law without a license. All the questions she dodged regarding the physical actuality of viruses will def be used in winning law suits, both state and fed, n which people were mandated, complied, and injured. Primarily, real lawyers aren't going to seek legal remedies but equitable ones in tort (not DIE equity but traditional Anglo American Common Law Equity), and the idea of forcing someone to take something "because trust me" doesn't fly. We have enough decent judges left who will be shocked to learn they've been misled their whole lives, even if they themselves can't quit "yes virus," they will allow the thin end of the "no virus" wedge to be used to provide equitable rememdies. In most cases, the definitive answer of yes or no virus will be stipulated too as beyond scope, but the questions regarding the fact they can't find them will be allowed. In some, however,, yes vs no virus will be allowed to be fully litigated. The Archons gnash their teeth at the prospect of loosing their favorite boggart. I now use yes vs no virus to quickly screen those not committed to ending this 600 year old death theater. Its both an intelligence test and an intgrity test. Thanks for all you do.
Your (and Bill Huston's) Q&A with Mary Holland was fascinating. It amazes me that a lawyer could baldly state a claim (that CHD takes no position on the virus question) so contradicted by openly available facts on their own website. Maybe next CHD'll do an Am. Acad. of Pediatrics, who started purging their website of all information showing that infants and children need to see faces to develop normally, after they took Pfizer's shilling and started shilling for Pfizer by insisting on masks for all children in America. But if CHD follows in the AAP's footsteps, they'll have to delete almost all their content, as almost every article embeds "the virus exists" as an unquestioned assumption.
I did agree with Stephen Frost's comment that the no-virus people shouldn't sound aggrieved. I think that he was trying to help (and agrees with the position). First, some among the virus pushers are not our friends, even though they seem to be, and are doing Pharma/Deep State deep work. And it doesn't help to show weakness before enemies. It just eggs them on, because they understand only power. Second, being totally calm and confident helps undecided honest viewers not get swept themselves into an emotional state, which shuts down reason. And we all know that it takes a lot of very calm reflection and reasoning to understand the depths of the virology fraud (at least, it did for me although others may have got there in quicker and more direct ways).
Regarding the lawyer demurring...as a lawyer, demurriing is what we're known for and why Shakespeare wanted us all dead first. Lawyers demure for 3 reasons: answering definitively will hurt our (most important) case, answering definitively will anger our (most valuable) client, or answering definitively will antagonize our (most critical) judge. CHD go out of business if viruses are a hoax. It's a dark game they play, they need viruses to exist so that vaccines can exist, so that they can fight for the vaccine injured children, and take in millions of dollars annually, yet never truly challenge the status quo. No viruses,, no CHD. Everyone assumes if it is a Kennedy it must be a good thing, but Kennedys passed a mentally ill MM around like a rag doll, and left a woman to drown in an upside down car and never even shed a fake tear, so...
I found Stephen's comment condescending and annoying. He defended Mary's ridiculous response and even falsely claimed that she had answered my question! It was a yes/no question, but instead of answering truthfully she pretended to be covering "both sides", when in fact they are clearly in the yes-virus camp knowing darn well they have no science on their side. She couldn't answer honestly because then she'd have to admit that they have taken a position based on pseudoscience. And this "both" sides claim doesn't even make sense. People need truth, not truth and pseudoscience.
Re emotions, for sure, and normally I am perfectly calm and was perfectly calm in all my emails with Mary, Robert (who ignored me entirely) and Jay Couey (as shown here: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/RFK-Jr-Holland-Dec-2022-PACKAGE-redacted.pdf). But on this day I was extremely tired and had a headache, and didn't even want to talk to Mary... but it was too big an opportunity to miss. So it is what it is, and I'm still glad I did it, and have had a lot of positive feedback, and was even told that my comments helped open the eyes of someone close to RFK Jr. I think after 3 years of this nonsense, some emotion is understandable.
Re Stephen, I asked him a few days ago to be allowed to give a presentation on why this issue matters immensely. He has ignored both my initial request and my follow up. He seems only interested in hosting a show, not in getting to the truth.
On reflection, I think that I agree with all your points. I didn't mean to sound critical, but I likely did. Apologies. You've done more than almost anyone to open our eyes to the depths of the fraud.
I am very glad that you did the interview. It pressures them to change, or exposes them as fakers if (when?) they don't. Their whole science focus is just a joke if their first rule of science is "question, but not too much!"
I don't know how much Stephen is the host any more. It may be more Charles Kovess (from whom the notifications come about the upcoming speaker). He is perhaps amenable to your coming on?
No worries, I didn't take offence :)
Charles actually specifically told me that "STEPHEN IS PRIMARILY IN CHARGE OF CHOOSING SPEAKERS". They were both copied on my emails 3 days ago asking to be able to do a presentation. No response from Stephen yet.
Apparently William Huston had an interesting phone convo with Charles, after our questioning of Mary, but I didn't hear it so can't say exactly what happened.
Could any of the good people share a link to Michael Bryant's paper (about Italy), which Tom Cowan went through in his video response to Broze/McCullough?
https://21stcenturywire.com/2023/03/07/italy-2020-inside-covids-ground-zero-in-europe/
Thanks! Not surprisingly, searching online hadn't pulled it up.
I ❤️ Christine Massey. Period.
Thank you Michael :) xoxo
I want to understand. Why does CHD continue to accept germ theory, viruses and virology? So much of their content assumes the existence of a virus. They never mention the assumption. They never reveal any conflicts of interest.
They are not stupid.
Have they been threatened?
Are they afraid of alienating their base and a loss in revenue?
Have they been brainwashed?
I dunno. It’s like they like the tyranny of germs.
If viruses don't exist, neither does CHD. If there are no viruses, then there are no vaccines. If there are no vaccines, there is no reason to donate millions to CHD to advocate for safer vaccines and the vaccine injured. It's just self interest. Along with the fact that they like to brunch with Oxbridge Snooties, no Rhodes Scholar would ever dare question Virology, next you'll question the physical impossiblity of Dinosaurs just because they violate the Mass Cubed Law of Physics! But given that J J Couey goes on and on about viruses being ghosts that absolutely exsit, it might be that they may just not be that bright.
And now RFK is expressing interest in running to be the Democratic Party’s nominee for President.
I was recently reminded RFK is also in cahoots with the Clintons. It’s not part of his carefully groomed image.
Yes, I believe it's as you suggested - they're afraid of alienating their base and imploding their 'business model' for drawing revenue.
The universal problem is that institutions everywhere don't want to tackle the no virus dilemma because it represents an existential crisis. They'd have to rethink everything. They'd have to wake up to expansive 'conspiracy theories' that would reverberate like tsunamis. It's a HUGE truth pill.
My view on the subject, maybe it will help you better understand: Are RFK Jr. & CHD Just Another AE911Truth? - https://tcttnews.com/2023/01/28/are-rfk-jr-chd-just-another-ae911truth/
You have plagiarized the work of Bill Huston on that page.
I have quoted from their articles and put links to their full articles.
Thanks for adding a link to my Substack.
But don't you think my name should be on this post as AUTHOR, considering you lifted about 3,000 words of my authorship, and many graphics which took me many days, maybe weeks, of effort and research, VERBATIM, without credit or permission, representing this work as your own?
I'm honored that you enjoyed my writing enough to steal, but apparently I'm not noteworthy enough to warrant a byline?
I have added your name and more links to your Substack and made it more clear for readers where the information comes from, i hope this is to your satisfaction, if not and you would like any specific changes just let me know.
I can add absolutely add your name to the article and make it clear where the quotes come from, I'm just trying to share knowledge, not trying to claim or steal the work of others, your great articles show that the same tactics used against Dr Judy Wood are being used against those exposing the germ theory and Covid nonsense, i think that the information is important for people to know which is why i try to share it.
Bill's name is nowhere on your page, nor is the URL to his site showing, only a hyperlink attached to his article title, and there are no quotation marks around his work. You need to fix this.
I have added Bill Huston's name and more links to their Substack and made the quotes more clear, if you have other suggestions just let me know.
Thank you. 🙏🙇❤️
Because of the theme settings my site uses it puts quotes into a different coloured box that can be a bit difficult to see rather than the normal thing it does when using the quote function, i will try to change the settings so that the box is more easy to see, as i said in my reply to Bill Huston i am not trying o claim or steal the work of others, just trying to share knowledge.
I hear you, and thank you. Cheers.
Thank you, Christine.
Thanks. I had not heard about Dr. Woods. This confirms my suspicion of RFK as controlled opposition, but with added evidence.
Hah! I thought Richard Gage was a brave guy for including Covid in his reporting. It’s just another intriguing plot twist!
Controlled opposition is ubiquitous.
Thanks 🙏
You are welcome, i just have to correct you a little, it is Dr Judy Wood, not Woods, this may seem like a trivial thing but it is also one of the tactics used by people who spread lies about 9/11, i'm not sure why they do it but even though they know her name they often say Woods rather than her actual name.
It's a way of downplaying their relevance / credibility / credentials. Also it makes it harder for people to search for them (I mean in a search engine). I've heard Cowan and Kaufman misnamed several times, enough to make me suspect at least a few were done deliberately.
I think you are bang on the money re: AE911/ CHD. Gain of function is the new thermite. Lab leak is the new 'trained on US bases'. Both cover ups planted misleading 'easter eggs' early on for truthers to discover and feel like they've solves the crime, and both rely on linguistic traps ('virus', 'pandemic', 'explode', 'collapse').
Solving both scams requires a grasp of science that - although fairly easy to get to grips with - requires an attention span and clarity of thinking that most people lack, preferring instead to take the 'emotionally satisfying' secondary cover up (the official unofficial story) that is provided by a fake truth movement ... a truth movement who take their followers round and round in circles, with endless events and tours and sensational updates ... while dismissing the actual science/ evidence (that puts an end to speculation and solves the case) as no more than 'an interesting theory' or 'divisive' or 'a losing strategy'.
It's practically the same template. It's a bit like watching different versions of 'The Office'. The same basic formula, the same characters, the same plot lines..... just tweaked for different countries and their own unique cultural references.
Yeah that makes sense, i'm not surprised that the same tactic has been deployed against those exposing the germ theory & Covid nonsense, it's a shame that most people who can see past the first layer of a scam often forget that there are usually more layers to uncover.
RFK’s book on Fauci is full of clues. His lengthy discussion of repeated fraud by Fauci & friends reveal the obvious fraud of virology.
He’s gotta know.
Has he been given permission to only go so far with his reporting and opinion?
Yeah, it makes no sense to me. Ron Unz did a review of the book, said that RFK devoted 200 pages to the HIV/AIDS scam, apparently understood it was a media-driven hoax, but yet cannot see that Covid is basically the same scam all over again. And even more crazy--the same applies to Unz- he was able to get that HIV/AIDS was a scam, but thinks covid is the real deal. I honestly don't know how to make sense of this--controlled opposition, afraid if they tell the full truth about no virus they will sound crazy, or ???
RFK very recently spoke on running for President.
It’s remarkable how many have joined this cult. They say they want freedom, but they remain trapped in the prison of virology.
I miss his uncle, JFK.
Clues don't cut it at this point. As you've said, he's got to know. He has already made it clear (when pressed) that he can't defend virology. The only ethical thing to do is either embrace the no-virus, no novel-disease reality, or at least stop talking about these imaginary particles and imaginary pandemics.
It's really pitiful, that Watt did all that good work, however she will not look at the evidence that viruses do not exist as presented by the industry which profits from the false paradigm. They're extracellular debris, I heard Tom Cowan's speak of it in 2020 and I got it, why can't she and numerous activist see it. The planet is being electrified and we're being sprayed with aerosols and yet mum's the word on these facts. I guess they rather they didn't change their minds, never admit to stay in this WHO hell, let's not exit from this big pharma, and medics self serving prison.
And worse yet is admiring viruses are not the cause of disease or infection might set infants and children free of the 72+ toxins they'll be injected with over time, yes well apparently none of them, no one wants that. Thanks for your work, Christine it deserves a lot more eyes.
I agree, anyone defending children should be all over the fraud of virology. It's a no-brainer. And a legal expert who turns a blind eye to legal confessions... something is not right with that.
God love you, Christine for being able to read through my comment "admiring" is supposed to to be admitting, that aside, it's a very good, children are one of the best reasons to care to expose the virus fraud. I don't understand why people refuse to take a stand, I think it's more than a little obvious that this theory is of great danger to humanity. I spent close to 4 decades working with adults and children in a crowded space, one on one in personal space, I got sick twice in all those years, and it wasn't because of a virus.
My ex, a goalie coach would get sick every year when college hockey started and it correlated with his birthday, without fail he'd get what seem to be a cold or flu, now that I know better, I realize it's unresolved trauma he experienced when he was an infant.
Children's Health (Department of) Defense.
Bingo.
Christine,
There is no doubt viruses do not cause upper-respiratory infections, or idiopathic pneumonias attributed to covid-19, because even if they exist as per Dr. Racaniello's, or Dr. Malone's own admissions - the two gurus worshiped by the anti-vaxxers - viruses are dead particles that by some yet to be determined mechanism would have to become alive to do what they claim they do.
So, this is out of discussion.
However, there is very clear evidence that germ theory might be right. The terrain theory supporters, whom I respect greatly, are wrong and I can prove it. The presence of bacteria in a lifesystem with no symptoms at all doesn't mean the bacteria can’t cause "problems", like upper respiratory infections.
Hansen's disease (also known as leprosy) is an infection caused by slow-growing bacteria called Mycobacterium leprae. It is slow growing. So, it is not infectious, or causing any problems or symptoms, until the overgrowth happens. It is complex, I admit. Most immune systems can handle it but some don’t.
Thank you for your hard work exposing the fake pandemic!
Hmm, well the presence of bacteria, no matter how fast or slow they grow, is not proof that they are the cause of symptoms. And the fact that symptoms don't occur until there is lots of the bacteria is not proof that the bacteria are the cause of symptoms.
Controlled experiments would be needed to prove that. It is plausible that the bacteria are growing because the terrain allows them to, and the problems with the terrain (caused by poor diet or whatever) are the root cause of the bacteria growing and the symptoms.
Cheers
This is the main problem with terrain theory and those who promote it. They don't have, or are unwilling to perform, the controlled experiments themselves.
Here is why:
In a hospital, or a nursing home setting, upper-respiratory infections spread like fire. Patients in the same rooms develop the same, or similar symptoms, within short periods of time. Diagnostic pictures, like X-rays etc. prove the infection is spreading even after isolating patients who have shown the symptoms. The isolation happened too late. To prove that the spread of upper-respiratory infections within a short period of time can be explained by terrain theory, such as toxins in food, water or chemicals don't stand the reason and that is why the terrain theorists, like Dr. Cowan, who sometimes reluctantly admits he and the terrain theorists may not be able to explain why people locked up in the same environment exhibit the same or similar symptoms of the upper-respiratory infections.
Bacteria causing infections are very easy to prove with controlled experiments and the best proof of bacteria causing infections is the phenomenon called antibiotic resistance. Simply put, the same bacteria causing infection clears with the same antibiotic while the other doesn’t. Why not? Because bacteria have the ability to swap antibiotic resistant loops of DNA called plasmids in the process called horizontal gene transfer (HGT). In other words, if the same bacteria responds to the same antibiotic and the other doesn't, you can make a prediction that the latter has developed antibiotic resistance due to horizontal gene transfer. While almost nothing in science is 100% proof, this is as good as it gets and can be verified by sequencing the bacterial genomes.
The onus is on those making the positive claim, end of story.
Patients in the same hospital/room has common exposures. You are simply making assumptions about causation. If isolated people still get "infection", then that hardly rules out terrain-style root causes.
You are simply adding on more, complicated claims to prop up a story. So now you have additional claims to prove. And lol, bacteria being killed by drugs doesn't not tell you the cause of the symptoms. Show us your controlled experiments. Unsubstantiated claims don't cut it.
I thought you and the terrain theorists were interested in finding the truth, no?
Or, you are just interested in the truth, as you see it, or as you would like to be?
In any case this is silly...
Cite the science, if you have any.
I can cite more than science itself. Are you willing to believe it though? The question is not about science itself I'm afraid, because as we both know "science" can and has/is manipulated. Do you agree?
Sadly, it's hard to see how the no virus argument will ever be accepted under the continuing oppressive dystopian mainstream narrative. It's like trying to overturn entrenched accepted Orwellian medical unreality. They don't like common sense and critical thinking at any level of narrative nobbling.
We're now into the fourth year of the greatest globalist deception ever known. It's bad enough trying to convince anyone that there's been a massive globalist political fraud and plot against humanity. Questioning the existence of ANY virus threatens to demolish their toxic Scripted Spell. They can't allow that.
It seems that the only people who'll embrace the no virus reality are those of us in the 'awake and aware' sovereign tribes of the emerging parallel societies and consciousness - who are casting-off the entire strata of deep-rooted societal lies and deception. Good riddance to all that baggage!
" It's like trying to overturn entrenched accepted Orwellian medical unreality. "
Instead of trying to overturn germ theory, another strategy would be to lend a helping hand to virologists to help them find the virus in the name of public health and safety.
To 'oppose' virology (to oppose the status quo) automatically puts most people on the defensive. That's why the covid architects never 'opposed' our freedoms, bodily integrity, human rights etc..... they were smart enough to know that you never oppose the status quo, which is why all policies were framed in terms of 'helping us' to stay safe and protect our health.
The 'settling the virus debate' challenge was a step in the right direction, but it still relies on virologists accepting the challenge, which they are unlikely to do. And the public are not engaged enough to notice the significance of their refusal.
Maybe there is something more proactive that can be done? Something that puts the 'no virus' camp more in a 'helping to ensure health and safety' role (something the public can resonate with), and which forces the virology camp into the role of being 'in opposition'.
The problem with taking a purely scientific/ rational stance is that it just doesn't resonate with the general public who are only concerned with feeling safe and secure. They are not able to make the connection and realise that staying true to science is the only way to remain safe and secure (the only way to stay alive these days!). They need the battle against virology's pseudo-science to be framed in simple (and dare I say emotional) terms of helping to protect their health and keep them safe.
Sorry for rambling comment... just thinking out loud ...
I totally disagree with you on multiple levels. What? "Lend a helping hand to virologists to help them find the virus in the name of public health and safety." LOL! LOL! LOL! "The covid architects never 'opposed' our freedoms, bodily integrity, human rights etc." Where have you been these last three years??? I'm currently falling off my chair in disbelief! This must be an antagonistic wind-up?
We've experienced Orwellian treachery on unspeakable levels throughout the world. Unknown multitudes have been injured and killed by toxic wholly unnecessary injections - all stemming from the malevolent engineered quackery of virology and entrenched mass political deception.
As for "helping to ensure health and safety" and 'keeping people safe' - that's the weaponised political sludge-fudge crapaganda mentality that's been used against We The People by The Deep State across the entire Free World. It's all an engineered Globalist Political Plot. An Epic Political Plandemic. A sham and scam on humanity.
All we need to do to 'stay safe' and healthy is rediscover our individual empowered sovereignty, use practical common sense, switch off corrupt lamestream media, defy traitorous treacherous tyrannical globalist One World Government, eat healthy food, get some sunlight, take a few vitamins, exercise, laugh, smile, find joy, love and embrace life.
We need to enthusiastically and radiantly rebuild our communities - and reject the viral nonsense.
"Where have you been these last three years??? I'm currently falling off my chair in disbelief! This must be an antagonistic wind-up?"
I was talking about how all of this is played out in the public domain (on the TV).
"We've experienced Orwellian treachery on unspeakable levels throughout the world."
Right. But as soon as you start talking like that you lose most people because they are still living in the artificial reality created by TV. If you then start saying there are no viruses they will start walking backwards out the room. This is because they are still under the impression that virology is a science and everything that's happened over the last three years has been fundamentally about health and safety (marred only by incompetence and localised corruption). That's where most people are at, and I'm just suggesting there might be ways to help them cross the chasm, rather than expecting them to make the leap all by themselves, which they probably can't do. To get public engagement on these issues is what matters. As the saying goes "with public support you can achieve anything, without it you can achieve nothing".
What is the point of expertly felling the 'virology tree' in a deserted forest with nobody around to hear it fall? That seems to be the current situation. The challenge right now is not the science, it is to get the public to engage with the science. I am not suggesting any compromises to the science, I am just suggesting that some imagination and creativity might be needed to make the science less shocking and more palatable to the masses.
The scientific argument has already been won, the challenge now is to win the audience. Like I said, I don't have any answers, I'm just thinking out loud. I'm trying to define the specific problem which needs to be solved. To me that problem is lack of public engagement because of the huge chasm between the science and the public discourse.
I understand what you're saying but the way I see it is that we're now living in a dual reality world whereby the myopic masses are heavily under the Spell of the Dystopian False Narrative of corrupt mainstream media -and the rest of us, the 'awake and aware' conscious community are splitting off into a parallel society route. The Orwellian Media propaganda is the root problem.
Yes, we need creative solutions for waking more people up. However, sadly, nobody has solved that pressing need during the last two or three years. We're stuck in the 'Twilight Zone' with two versions of reality, one a distorted dystopia, the other an open-minded pathway to scientific enquiry and truth. It's a stark red-pill choice for people. There's no sugar-coating it.
There's lack of public engagement because they've all been brainwashed by military grade globalist propaganda. We're in a very real 5th generation Globalist War and most people don't even realise it. It's all about perception and discernment of the truth, seeing through the lies.
Personally, I don't take the purist no virus route as a solitary path. Whilst I believe that there's no virus (anywhere, ever) and virology is an elaborate fraudulent psuedo-science, the wider problem in our new-age dystopian society is a battle on many fronts, so there are many angles of argument to pursue, many approaches to take. The core problem is 24/7 media lies and propaganda on multiple levels. "They" lied about so many things and continue to do so as an ideological malevolent manipulation. We're facing waiste-high tyranny - we're wading through deep dark dystopian detritus.
"the way I see it is that we're now living in a dual reality "
Right. I guess what I'm suggesting is a duel approach to take that into account. Or a multi-faceted approach.
"There's no sugar-coating it."
The thing is though, the general public has only ever shown a willingness to follow sugar coated information.... which is why we've been bombarded with dancing nurses, global slavery concerts, rainbow stickers and celebrities performing musical numbers complete with backing singers in syringe costumes. And all of this has been under the overarching banner of 'health and safety'. This emotional framing (marketing) has won the hearts and minds of the masses, because it's a message nobody can argue against (who DOESN'T support health and safety?).
The 'no virus' (AKA scientifically rigorous) position is by far the better product. But it currently has no marketing. This would be fine if the general population was able to separate science from propaganda, or facts from feelings. But, as we all agree, they are not. If they were, they'd have never fallen for the propaganda in the first place.
If we are going to take a strictly scientific approach (discounting all that is illusory) shouldn't we also take a scientific (ie non idealistic) approach when it comes to how we communicate information effectively to a dumbed down population who have been conditioned to respond only to emotional arguments that align with their basic survival impulses?
Given that the scientific argument has already been won (because virology never had any scientific legitimacy to begin with), surely the emphasis should be on the 'marketing' side of things?
And given that the billions of dollars of 'covid' marketing over the last 3 years was all about promoting 'health and safety' (and NOT about installing medical fascism based on pseudo-science) there's no reason not to, in a sense, 'surf' on that wave of marketing to promote the far healthier and safer science of non-virology.
Because in the end all of that positivity and caution and care and uplifting piano melodies and reassuring commitment to 'staying safe' rightfully belongs to the no virus/ proper science camp (the only people who ACTUALLY care about anyone's health and safety). And that emotional, instinctual, drive to 'stay safe' is where most of the public's attention is fixated right now. Despite the superficial divisions in society, we are all basically on the same page. That's why I was suggesting we seek to reduce the perceived gap by focusing on our mutual (and unifying) drive for health and safety... and let the science sort itself out (which it already has!).
I guess I feel it's a huge missed opportunity to limit the scope of the 'no virus' campaign (or whatever we call it) to a purely intellectual endeavour, and act as if it has no heart and no connection to mainstream culture and the lives of everybody (even those still wearing masks).
I understand the need to separate 'facts from feelings' (especially in our current culture), but at the same time if we disregard human feelings it only gives the other side a monopoly on exploiting them for their own (unscientific and nefarious) agendas. Why do evil deceptions get to use uplifting piano melodies, but not the honest truth?!
The sign of a high civilisation is being able to maintain a clear distinction between facts (mind, discipline) and feelings (heart, expression), but without having to make any compromises to either. I am not sure most people will ever be able to 'hear' any of our scientific arguments in the absence of emotional marketing. It's like expecting them to hear the tree fall over in a vacuum.
I don't think you truly grasp the gravity of what has played out over the last three years. It was not a marketing drive for our health. It was billions of dollars spent towards *propagandising* Globalist Convid-1984, then Globalist 'Climate Change' followed by new Globalist Wars. Convid-1984 was a scripted layout, the beginning of an experimental transhumanist era at best or a phased mass de-population agenda at worst. A blatant attack on humanity.
It was never about our health. "They" don't care about our health.
The health narrative was a massive deception. They did everything to literally separate people from the essentials of good health - simple preventative treatments, sunlight, vitamins C, D3, etc. fresh air, exercise, mixing with family and friends. They globally oppressed free speech and replaced it with Orwellian totalitarianism. They globally suppressed ivermectin and hydroxychloraquine - safe and effective medicines already widely available. Instead they manufactured 'viral' false fear psychological propaganda 24/7 for 3+ years, derided common sense, degraded natural wellbeing and the genuine spiritual joyful togetherness of humanity.
It was all politically designed to make way for their unsafe unnecessary tyrannical toxic injections. It was a dystopian Pack of Lies from the outset. A political plot. Fascist totalitarian 'health' is an oxymoron created by vacuous morons who simply don't care about our health.
Convid-1984 was an evil globalist technocratic intervention to carve up the world, create huge profit streaming for the Globalist Cabal, the robbing of national and individual sovereignty and enslavement of the world populous. "They" want us to 'own nothing and be happy' whilst eating bugs in order to 'save the planet.' An obscene distortion and manipulation of reality. It was never about our health and wellbeing.
You nailed it to the wall. Narratives, world views, money and "security." The matrix, alive and "well." But it can't last. I can see at least one leg wobbling on that rotted table. Crazy glue can only do so much.
Admission of the fraud would undermine BILLIONS of dollars in sectors of a enormous industry that exists today. We are talking jobs, degrees, bonus incentives to Drs, “healthcare” that would otherwise not be needed (significantly less poisoned customers), and of course Pharma itself.
Probably hundreds of billions of dollars annually.
The WHO is tripling down, claiming an effort of 500 new vaccines by 2030.
omg
The "epidemic" was engineered, advertised, promoted out of whole cloth. Collusion of corporations, governments, institutions to harm and defraud the public. International Corporatocracy - World Economic Forum and "Stakeholder capitalists". They spent years laying the groundwork.
Bingo!
Well done, CM!!!!!
I am saving this whole post until I have time to really go through it, but at a glance it looks like more of your outrageously excellent and useful work!!! Thank you, hugely, for doing what you do. You are a very very very sturdy spoke in the Wheel of Truthiness and a sort of Sword of Gryffindor in this battle...
Cheers!
Thank you :)
xo
Google won’t let me read the attached pdfs.
Oh that's weird. Can you copy and paste them into your browser or a search engine like https://www.qwant.com/?
Very interesting. From early 2020 I argued against this “epidemic” on scientific grounds from multiple viewpoints
I receive this from a tech executive. I thought it interesting but certainly not reassuring or confirmatory of anything. For what they are worth:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC538593/ Nn
https://registry.opendata.aws/ncbi-covid-19/
The 2nd link is for "COVID-19 Genome Sequence Dataset". No amount of sequence data can prove the existing of a replicating infectious parasite that transmits disease from host to host via natural modes of exposure.
According to the abstract of the 1st paper, 2005, they claim to have identified another novel "coronavirus". But the methods listed are incapable of doing such:
PCR
antibodies
"isolation" of "the virus" using various cell lines (oxymoron)
intracerebral inoculation of suckling mice (unnatural exposure, and not with purified particles)
RNA was extracted from the NPA, urine, and fecal specimens (not FROM purified particles)
"Sequences were assembled and manually edited to produce a final sequence of the viral genome" HA HA HA
Thanks agree 100% - three years ago and currently
RE: CHD..... In the spirit of 'not taking sides' (which seems to be their argument) they could publish two versions of every article, book, lecture and video they produce. One version which assumes 'the virus' exists and one version which stays true to the scientific method.
Perhaps someone could offer to help them by producing scientific 'translations' of their existing content to cater to those who prefer dispassionate science over gain-of-psyop drama.
Lol, great idea :) I might forward that to Mary :)
The no-virus versions of many articles -- for example, of one's on vaccine efficacy -- would become very short: "No virus, no efficacy, only poisoning. Skip the shot." So it may not be that much extra writing effort, even if it's a lot of extra intellectual effort.
Lol. Exactly.
Very well put together so much info and it's becoming increasingly obvious that the entire scientific community is mostly corrupt and fraudulent. Virology is going to collapse very soon..
Feel free to read my current article on the subject where I go over similar info.
https://shanhenry.substack.com/p/virology-witchcraft
Thanks Shan.
It is never with complete confidence that I would declare something as incontrovertible...
but what you've amassed as evidence is pretty damn close.
(tired of
hearing it out
in the midst of
revivified,
demystified, myths of,
lab-leaks (de-liberate),
' viral gain '
of the potentate...
when
slaps on the wrist
for dolts botching shit
is undoubtedly
a correlate...)