BILL GATES CRIMES: U.S. patents show CDC ownership of Coronavirus. Both China and the U.S. involved in the creation of Wuhan SARS-CoV-2. Gates and CCP controlled WHO appoints criminal Tedros. CDC, FDA, CIA, NIH, Gates, Fauci, Baric, Rockefeller are all involved in Federal Crimes.
Bill Gates and the Rockefeller foundation paid Google, Facebook, Politico, Wikipedia, Fact Checkers in order to censor and control all the information.
The CIA has been using Operation Mockingbird for years and has over 3,000 agents implanted in Mainstream Media to control the population.
Event 201 was sponsored by Bill Gates, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security (CIA) and the World Economic Forum to enforce a worldwide Pandemic response 5 months before the WHO fraudulently declared a global pandemic. It was a planned coordinated criminal effort worldwide.
In January 2017 Anthony Fauci said there will be a surprise virus outbreak before the end of 2020. Bill Gates in 2015 talked of a future pandemic and lied in April 2020 when he said they did not simulate or practice for a pandemic.
Klaus Schwab in his book Covid-19 The Great Reset shows Covid was the Trojan Horse to Reset the World according to the UN 2030 Agenda. Build Back Better slogan is a criminal coordinated effort to remove human rights and institute a one world government.
Bill Gates and the Rockefeller foundation bribes the WHO, NIH, NIAID, CDC, FDA, Medical Schools and Journals to control the health industry and public health policy.
WHO Chief Tedros involved in genocide killing and torture in Ethiopia. Tedros is a known member of the communist party. He is Beijing’s and Bill Gates puppet. As a Health Minister he was accused of covering up three Cholera Epidemics and committing crimes against humanity. The CCP and Bill Gates helped put Tedros in charge of the WHO.
John D. Rockefeller over 100 years ago seized the U.S. Media and took control over public health using toxic petroleum based drugs for profit and controlled the American Medical Association blacklisting and expelling any doctors who practiced natural medicine.
Rockefeller’s poison injections and medicines started causing cancer in early years and to cover it up formed the American Cancer Society. Medical error is the 3rd leading cause of death in America.
Bill Gates used India and Africa as guinea pigs for pharmaceutical companies to make a financial killing while killing a lot of people in the process including killing innocent children and babies with vaccines. Bill Gates controls GAVI The Vaccine Alliance to vaccinate the world with his poisons.
National Security Study Memorandum NSSM 200 Implications of Worldwide Population Growth For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests December 10, 1974 (THE KISSINGER REPORT) shows the intention of governments to reduce the population.
Bill Gates is one of the key funders in the Stratosphere experiment to block out the sun for Climate Change by releasing poisons in the air. Environmental Scientist call it global genocide experiment. Gates has invested over one billion dollars in the Earth Now Global Surveillance project to launch hundreds of satellites to monitor people everywhere 24/7 a day.
In partnership with MIT Bill Gates has developed a new technology that allows vaccines to be injected under your skin along with your medical records. Bill Gates Gates funded genetically modified mosquitoes released in the USA to allow human immunization by means of mosquito bites “Flying Syringes.”
Bill Gates had business dealings and a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted child sex criminal. Why would he choose to partner with the world’s most notorious pedophile? To Blackmail?
Bill Gates is the top financial donor of the WHO and CDC. No one person has more power than Gates to influence and control the health and medical freedom of all people. Bill Gates and all mRNA Vaccines must be stopped. This is a global genocide experiment and a takeover of the world.
Following The HighWire’s exposé spotlighting the large role WHO Chief Scientist Jeremy Farrar had in suppressing the lab origin debate in 2020, a Congressional Committee, and now the rest of the mainstream media, are zeroing in on the former Director of the Wellcome Trust, calling for his resignation from the W.H.O.
Stiff resistance is building against the incoming chief scientist of the World Health Organization because of his ties to a February 2020 paper that quashed a theory the coronavirus originated from a lab in Wuhan, China.
Many experts are calling for Dr. Jeremy Farrar, former director of the Wellcome Trust nonprofit in London, to be fired even before he takes over his post as the WHO’s chief scientist in the second quarter of this year, The Daily Mail reported Tuesday.
Emails uncovered by the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic showed the British doctor made direct edits to a scientific paper called “Proximal Origin,” which was prompted by Dr. Anthony Fauci, then the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, and written in February 2020 to quash the theory the coronavirus escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
A memo by the subcommittee dated Sunday said, “Dr. Farrar is not credited as having any involvement in the drafting and publication of Proximal Origin. According to new evidence obtained by the Select Subcommittee, Dr. Farrar led the drafting process and in fact made direct edits to the substance of the publication.”
Dr. Richard Ebright, a microbiologist at Rutgers University, told The Daily Mail, “In this context, the appointment of Dr. Farrar as a chief scientist at the WHO is a major unforced error. The WHO would do well to review and revoke the appointment.”
Dr. David Livermore, a microbiologist at the University of East Anglia in Great Britain, also said the agency might want to reconsider hiring Farrar.
”If he is to lead the WHO, it would be wise for Dr Farrar to commission investigations of COVID’s origins entirely independent of the organization’s hierarchy, himself included,” Livermore told The Daily Mail.
The select subcommittee said in the memo Farrar made a crucial edit on Feb. 17, 2020, the day Proximal Origin was to be published. In an email to Kristian Andersen, a professor at Scripps Research, Farrar suggested to change from “unlikely” to “improbable” that “SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of an existing SARS-related coronavirus.”
Robert Moffit, who has written extensively on the origins of the coronavirus for the Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Mail, “I don’t think he should take the job.”
“He should refrain from taking any position like that until these matters are cleared up and published,” Moffit said. “We don’t want someone to take over the WHO who may… refrain from taking a position until all these issues [on Covid origins] are cleared up.”
House votes to declassify info about origins of COVID-19
By LISA MASCARO
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House voted unanimously Friday to declassify U.S. intelligence information about the origins of COVID-19, a sweeping show of bipartisan support near the third anniversary of the start of the deadly pandemic.
The 419-0 vote was final congressional approval of the bill, sending it to President Joe Biden’s desk. It’s unclear whether the president will sign the measure into law, and the White House said the matter was under review. … If signed into law, the measure would require within 90 days the declassification of “any and all information relating to potential links between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origin of the Coronavirus Disease.”
That includes information about research and other activities at the lab and whether any researchers grew ill.
WASHINGTON—The Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic held a hearing on “Investigating the Origins of COVID-19” to gather facts about the origination of the virus that has claimed nearly seven million lives globally. At the hearing, several of the witnesses pointed to how the science, facts, and evidence point to a lab leak in Wuhan.
Key Hearing Takeaways
Knowing the origin of COVID-19 is fundamental to helping predict and prevent future pandemics.
Select Subcommittee Chairman Brad Wenstrup opened the hearing by emphasizing how knowing the origin of the virus is essential to helping predict and prevent future pandemics, protecting health and national security, and preparing the United States for the future. He pledged that the Select Subcommittee will thoroughly, responsibly, and honestly investigate the origin of COVID-19.
Dr. Jamie Metzl, Ph.D., senior fellow at the Atlantic Council said in an opening statement, “If we do not get to the bottom of what went wrong with the COVID-19 pandemic, if we fail in our efforts to fearlessly understand all shortcomings and shore up the vulnerabilities this crisis has so clearly exposed, the victims of the next pandemic, our children and grandchildren, will ask us why we failed to protect when we knew what was at stake and had the chance.”
Mounting evidence continues to show that COVID-19 may have originated from a lab in Wuhan, China.
Dr. Robert Redfield, former director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), testified how science indicates COVID-19 infections were likely the result of an accidental lab leak in Wuhan. His conclusion is based on the biology of the virus itself and unusual actions in and around Wuhan in 2019, including gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
Nicholas Wade—the former science and health editor at the New York Times, and former editor of Science and Nature—testified how Drs. Fauci and Collins used unverified data to dismiss the lab leak theory in favor of natural transmission.
Jamie Metzl testified how China’s government destroyed samples, hid records, imprisoned Chinese journalists, prevented Chinese scientists from saying or writing anything on pandemic origins without prior government approval, actively spread misinformation, and prevented an evidence-based investigation.
The mainstream media downplayed—and even denied—the scientific theory that COVID-19 emerged from the WIV.
Nicholas Wade testified about the campaign to discredit the lab leak theory. He pointed out that scientists kept in line with the natural origin camp led by Drs. Fauci and Collins because of their dependence on government grants and that the media failed to challenge the forced narrative.
All witnesses agreed that the possibility of COVID-19 originating from a lab is not a conspiracy theory.
Subcommittee Chairman Dr. Wenstrup (R-Ohio.) asked witnesses whether it is critical to investigate the origin of COVID-19. All witnesses answered yes. Chairman Wenstrup also raised concern about gain-of-function research, which Dr. Redfield defined during the hearing as altering a pathogen to increase either transmissibility or pathogenicity.
Subcommittee Chairman Wenstrup: “In your expert opinion was the Wuhan Institute conducting gain-of-function research on a batch of coronaviruses?”
Dr. Redfield: “Absolutely.”
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.) noted that after raising concerns to experts and the World Health Organization that COVID-19 may have originated in a lab in Wuhan, China, and urging Dr. Fauci to investigate the origins of the pandemic, Dr. Redfield was excluded from calls related to the origins of the pandemic.
Rep. Malliotakis: “Why do you think you were excluded from those calls?”
Dr. Redfield: “It was told to me that they wanted a single narrative and that I obviously had a different point of view.”
Dr. Redfield added: “If you really want to be truthful, it’s antithetical to science. Science has debate, and they squashed any debate.”
Scientists, including Dr. Fauci, then drafted a paper arguing COVID-19’s proximal origins to animals at a wet market.
Rep. Malliotakis: “Do you think that this paper does hide the truth?”
Dr. Redfield: “I think it’s an inaccurate paper that basically was part of a narrative that they were creating.”
Rep. Malliotakis also warned that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) may have been funding gain-of-function research on coronaviruses at the WIV.
Rep. Malliotakis: “Is it likely that American tax dollars funded the gain-of-function research that created this virus?”
Dr. Redfield: I think it did, not only from NIH, but from the State Department, USAID and DOD.”
Rep. Miller-Meeks (R-Iowa), who has expertise publishing in peer-reviewed scientific journals, asked why the scientific community dangerously suppressed evidence that COVID-19 may have originated from a lab.
“There is, as you said Dr. Metzl, extraordinary circumstantial evidence that this came from a lab.
“I don’t know why the authors didn’t want to state this, they did not want to have the scientific conversation and dialogue, why they wanted to obfuscate and suppress the truth, or even have a debate about the origins of COVID-19.
“Was it for personal financial gain? Was it to hide U.S. financial interest into the Wuhan Institute of Virology indirectly? Was it to suppress the revelation that there was perhaps gain-of-function research that had been prohibited in the United States? Or were they concerned that a conspiracy would develop that it was bioterrorism?
“I would state that their suppression and obfuscation has led to the exact mistrust and conspiracy theories that they may have tried to avoid.”
Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Colo.) and Dr. Redfield discussed unusual actions at the WIV in September 2019.
Rep. Lesko: “Do you believe we can have certainty that the virus did not come from the Wuhan lab and that U.S. funding was not used for coronavirus research?”
Dr. Redfield: “Absolutely we cannot do that. It’s now declassified now, but in September 2019, three things happened in that lab.One, they deleted the sequences. That is highly irregular—researchers don’t usually like to do that. Second, they commanded the command and control of the lab from civilian control to military control. Highly unusual. And the third thing they did, which I think is really telling, is they let a contractor re-do the ventilation system in that laboratory. There is strong evidence there was a significant event in that laboratory in September 2019.”
Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) warned that the media downplayed, discredited, and silenced voices of experts sounding the alarm that COVID-19 may have originated from a lab in Wuhan, China.
Chairman Comer: “Would you agree that the scientific establishment used the media to downplay the lab leak theory?”
Mr. Wade: “I think the media was used in this particular campaign to establish the natural origin theory.”
“The scientific community is very afraid to speak up on political issues. I think the reason is that government grants are handed out through the system of peer-reviewed committees. You don’t want any single scientist on your peer-review committee to vote against, because you won’t get your grant – it’s so competitive. Therefore, scientists are very reluctant to say anything that’s politically divisive or turn other scientists off against them. This means that they cannot be relied upon in the way that we would like them to be independent and forthright and call it as they see it.”
Comer: “Was there science available to make such an unequivocal statement against the possibility of a lab leak that early on in February of 2020?”
Witnesses Dr. Metzl, Mr. Wade, and Dr. Redfield all answered,“No.”
Comer: “Is the possibility COVID-19 leaked from a lab a conspiracy theory?”
Dr. Fauci maintains COVID outbreak caused by ‘natural occurrence’
By Jesse O’Neill March 12, 2023 3:34pm … The 82-year-old now said he was still keeping a “completely open mind” to the origin of the virus, while explaining how a lab leak still could be considered a “natural occurrence.”
“A lab leak could be that someone was out in the wild, maybe looking for different types of viruses in bats, got infected, went into a lab and was being studied in the lab and then came out of the lab,” Fauci told anchor Jim Acosta.
“But if that’s the definition of a lab leak Jim, then that’s still a natural occurrence.”
Fauci said it could also be possible that a lab leak occurred after someone took a virus from the environment and manipulated it before accidentally infecting another person, kickstarting the outbreak, which has killed nearly seven million people worldwide.
He also made a point of noting that no investigative agency tasked with investigating the origins of the virus by President Biden in 2021 found evidence of nefarious activity at the lab.
Almost all of America’s leaders have gradually pulled back their COVID mandates, requirements, and closures—even in states like California, which had imposed the most stringent and longest-lasting restrictions on the public. At the same time, the media has been gradually acknowledging the ongoing release of studies that totally refute the purported reasons behind those restrictions. This overt reversal is falsely portrayed as “learned” or “new evidence.” Little acknowledgement of error is to be found. We have seen no public apology for promulgating false information, or for the vilification and delegitimization of policy experts and medical scientists like myself who spoke out correctly about data, standard knowledge about viral infections and pandemics, and fundamental biology.
The historical record is critical. We have seen a macabre Orwellian attempt to rewrite history and to blame the failure of widespread lockdowns on the lockdowns’ critics, alongside absurd denials of officials’ own incessant demands for them. In the Trump administration, Dr. Deborah Birxwas formally in charge of the medical side of the White House’s coronavirus task force during the pandemic’s first year. In that capacity, she authored all written federal policy recommendations to governors and states and personally advised each state’s public health officials during official visits, often with Vice President Mike Pence, who oversaw the entire task force. Upon the inauguration of President Joe Biden, Dr. Anthony Fauci became chief medical advisor and ran the Biden pandemic response.
We must acknowledge the abject failure of the Birx-Fauci policies. They were enacted, but they failed to stop the dying, failed to stop the infection from spreading, and inflicted massive damage and destruction particularly on lower-income families and on America’s children.
More than 1 million American deaths have been attributed to that virus. Even after draconian measures, including school closures, stoppage of non-COVID medical care, business shutdowns, personal restrictions, and then the continuation of many restrictions and mandates in the presence of a vaccine, there was an undeniable failure—over two presidential administrations—to stop cases from rapidly escalating.
Numerous experts—including John Ioannidis, David Katz, and myself—called for targeted protection, a safer alternative to widespread lockdowns, in national media beginning in March of 2020. That proposal was rejected. History’s biggest public health policy failure came at the hands of those who recommended the lockdowns and those who implemented them, not those who advised otherwise.
The tragicfailure of reckless, unprecedented lockdowns that were contrary to established pandemic science, and the added massive harms of those policies on children, the elderly, and lower-income families, are indisputable and well-documented in numerousstudies. This was the biggest, the most tragic, and the most unethical breakdown of public health leadership in modern history.
In a democracy, indeed in any ethical and free society, the truth is essential. The American people need to hear the truth—the facts, free from the political distortions, misrepresentations, and censorship. The first step is to clearly state the harsh truth in the starkest possible terms. Lies were told. Those lies harmed the public. Those lies were directly contrary to the evidence, to decades of knowledge on viral pandemics, and to long-established fundamental biology.
Here are the 10 biggest falsehoods—known for years to be false, not recently learned or proven to be so—promoted by America’s public health leaders, elected and unelected officials, and now-discredited academics:
1. SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus has a far higher fatality rate than the flu by several orders of magnitude.
2. Everyone is at significant risk to die from this virus.
3. No one has any immunological protection, because this virus is completely new.
4. Asymptomatic people are major drivers of the spread.
5. Locking down—closing schools and businesses, confining people to their homes, stopping non-COVID medical care, and eliminating travel—will stop or eliminate the virus.
6. Masks will protect everyone and stop the spread.
7. The virus is known to be naturally occurring, and claiming it originated in a lab is a conspiracy theory.
8. Teachers are at especially high risk.
9. COVID vaccines stop the spread of the infection.
10. Immune protection only comes from a vaccine.
None of us are so naïve as to expect a direct apology from critics at my employer, Stanford University, or in government, academic public health, and the media. But to ensure that this never happens again, government leaders, power-driven officials, and influential academics and advisors often harboring conflicts of interest must be held accountable. Personally, I remain highly skeptical that any government investigation or commission can avoid politicization. Regardless of their intention, all such government-run inquiries will at least be perceived as politically motivated and their conclusions will be rejected outright by many. Those investigations must proceed, though, if only to seek the truth, to teach our children that truth matters, and to remember G.K. Chesterton’s critical lesson that “Right is right, even if nobody does it. Wrong is wrong, even if everybody is wrong about it.”
Scott W. Atlas, MD is the Robert Wesson Senior Fellow in health policy at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, Co-Director of the Global Liberty Institute, Founding Fellow of Hillsdale’s Academy for Science & Freedom, and author of A Plague Upon Our House: My Fight at the Trump White House to Stop COVID from Destroying America (Bombardier Press, 2022).
The views expressed in this article are the writer’s own.
Adults have sharply higher risks of being diagnosed with heart, skin, and psychiatric conditions for at least 90 days after they receive Covid jabs, a peer-reviewed study of almost 300,000 people in California has shown.
The researchers examined new diagnoses given to the same people before and after they were vaccinated to see whether the shots changed the risk of new health problems.
They found that people were about 21 percent more likely to receive a new diagnosis in the three months after a shot, compared to the three months before. With almost 240 million American adults jabbed, the rise translates into millions of extra new medical problems found in the months after vaccination, and tens of millions worldwide.
Serious conditions such as hypertension were about 25 percent more likely to be diagnosed in the three months following a shot than the three months before, the researchers found.
Depression, eczema, diabetes, and cellulitis were 10 to 20 percent more likely.
Myocarditis diagnoses had the highest additional risk. They were about 2.6 times as likely overall, with an even higher risk in men. Myocarditis is a known side effect of the mRNAs, so the fact it had a particularly high rate of extra diagnoses provides strong evidence that the signal the researchers found was real.
Overall, the researchers reported that the 284,000 Covid-vaccinated adults they examined received almost 6,000 additional diagnoses of health conditions in the 90 days after being jabbed compared to the 90 days before.
With about 237 million American adults vaccinated, that estimate would translate into about 5 million extra diagnoses for problems like diabetes in the three months following the shots. Worldwide, the number could be up to 25 million.
In the chart below, the blue column is the risk someone will be diagnosed with a new condition following vaccination, compared to the risk before.
For example, about 2,560 out of the 284,000 people were diagnosed with hypertension up to three months after vaccination, compared to 2,080 of the same people up to three months before. The extra 480 cases translated into a 23 percent higher risk of hypertension following vaccination. Because the number of cases was so high, the risk was highly statistically significant, meaning the finding probably was not due to chance.
The study’s researchers are a group from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, a big hospital system in Los Angeles. Their findings were published in Nature Cardiovascular Research in December. But the paper has received almost no attention, a common response to reports that raise questions about the safety of the vaccines.
The researchers also noted that in a smaller sample of adults infected with Covid, new diagnoses for health conditions rose about 40 percent in the three months after infection compared to the three months before.
That fact should come as no surprise. Viral infections are both a marker for and a potential cause of ill-health. Further, people are likely visit their doctors both while they are sick with Covid and shortly after they recover. Those contacts provide a chance for them to receive new diagnoses.
In contrast, people generally receive Covid shots at clinics or pharmacies, not from their doctors, so the chance that the process of receiving a new shot will lead to a diagnosis is minimal.
Thus, if Covid jabs are not harmful, mass vaccinations should not impact the timing of illnesses or their diagnoses. New diagnoses should be scattered randomly before and after the shots.
In fact, people who are feeling ill when they are due for a vaccination may be likely to delay the jab and go to a physician instead. They may then receive a diagnosis that would be counted as occurring before the shot, not after.
This “healthy vaccinee bias” should mean that new illness diagnoses are less likely for a few days after vaccination than before, even if the shots have no effect. As a result, the 20 percent increase in common diagnoses after vaccination is particularly stunning.
Meanwhile, researchers in Hong Kong independently found an even sharper increase in autoimmune “flares” following Covid shots.
The risk of new episodes of lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, and other serious autoimmune conditions roughly doubled following the shots in a group of 562 patients with those conditions they followed, compared to 1,055 who did not. The paper was published February 17 in the Journal of Clinical Rheumatology and Immunology.
Only mRNA shots did. Chinese-style inactivated virus vaccines did not. Hong Kong used both types of jabs, making a direct comparison possible. The researchers suggested that the mRNA shots cause the flares by stimulating a specific immune receptor that causes the release of inflammatory cytokines.
“Risk-benefit considerations in patients with active rheumatic disease may favor inactivated virus rather than mRNA vaccines to avoid the risk of flare-ups of any severity,” the researchers wrote.
Americans do not have that option, as the United States does not allow the use of Chinese inactivated Covid vaccines.
THE COVID CRIMINALS: The Pandemic was created and orchestrated fraudulently by a Global Criminal Organization led by Bill Gates, Fauci, Tedros, Drosten, Klaus Schwab, Rothschilds, Pfizer, BlackRock, …
— Read on