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).
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.
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.
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!
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!
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...
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.
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.
Excellent analysis of Watt. Thank you!
A helpful analysis of RFK Jr's presidential run as a psyop to cover up the plandemic. https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=1NDA7GX6MSO7
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).
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 ❤️ Christine Massey. Period.
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.
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.
Children's Health (Department of) Defense.
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!
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!
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.
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!
Google won’t let me read the attached pdfs.
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/
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.
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