CORONA Was the Corona Virus engineered?

[Knoxville's Joker]

Corona virus. Was it engineered? First lets look at this article:

Bioweapons … for dummies?

Ignore the hype. Novice biologists aren’t likely to construct advanced weapons any time soon.

thebulletin.org

Basically for about 30k you can build a bioweapons research facility in your very own home:
A practical bioweapons facility needs to move beyond such improvisations. I estimate that a basic setup using last-century equipment would cost at least $15,000. Reagent kits, often hundreds of dollars for only a few reactions, and other disposable equipment would raise the cost to $30,000. Using newer, more reliable machines would cost perhaps ten times as much.
Pay attention to your neighboors as that odd recluse might be doing something not so good.
Now lets factor in China's track record in bioethics:

China Will Always Be Bad at Bioethics

It’s no accident that the Chinese government is leading the world in medical advances — and in dangerous ethical lapses.

foreignpolicy.com

Weaponizing Biotech: How China's Military Is Preparing for a 'New Domain of Warfare'

Under Beijing's civil-military fusion strategy, the PLA is sponsoring research on gene editing, human performance enhancement, and more.

www.defenseone.com

Even Russia has had its share of containment issues:

Russian Lab Explosion Raises Question: Should Smallpox Virus Be Kept Or Destroyed?

The lab is one of two known places that store live samples of the virus that causes the disease. Scientists use them for research. But there is concern about accidental or intentional release.

www.npr.org

Oddly that explosion happend a little bit after we had a containment breach here stateside that shutdown a research lab:

Deadly Germ Research Is Shut Down at Army Lab Over Safety Concerns (Published 2019)

Problems with disposal of dangerous materials led the government to suspend research at the military’s leading biodefense center.

www.nytimes.com

Then there is the fact that historical african american get the short end of the stick and low income areas end up being used as test beds as virological research:

History of African-Americans and Medical Research Goes Beyond Henrietta Lacks

The story is as old as the nation is, an expert tells TIME

time.com

And the US even apologized for testing syphilis on patients in guatemala in decades past:

U.S. apologizes for Guatemala STD experiments

U.S. government medical researchers intentionally infected hundreds of people in Guatemala, including institutionalized mental patients, with gonorrhea and syphilis without their knowledge or permission more than 60 years ago.

www.nbcnews.com

Now lets throw in Agenda 21/2030:

Agenda 21/Agenda 2030 There is No Difference

Editor’s Note: Many times in the past year, when I have continued to use the term Agenda 21, people will rush in to correct me – “It’s Agenda 2030 now!” Well, yes and no. This is what the UN does – it changes names and titles like a judo move – but the plan is the same. Remember, that’s just what I

americanpolicy.org

Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development .:. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform

sustainabledevelopment.un.org

Agenda 21 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

How Is Agenda 21 Being Implemented Worldwide?

Agenda 21 is an action plan devised by the U.N. to depopulate 95% of the world population by 2030. How is it implemented locally worldwide?

massawakening.org

The big conspiracy with Agenda 21 is the 90/95% depopulation claim:

Agenda 21? The Plan To Depopulate 95% Of The World By 2030 | "Global Possibilities"

globalpossibilities.org

I would discount that latter out right but the darn thing keeps coming up over, and over, and over, and over. And oddly Agenda 21 keeps coming up and here lately 2030 and 2050 are used in place of Agenda 21.

Biological Weapons, Bioterrorism, and Vaccines

A biological attack may seem more like a plot element in an action film than a realistic threat. Biological attacks, however, have occurred in the past.

www.historyofvaccines.org

12/4/17: GENOMIC WARHEAD - GENETIC EXTINCTION TECHNOLOGY

We are all literally living through and witnessing an active genocidal Holocaust taking place right now, and it’s all being carried out in the name of “science” while touting vaccines…

www.groundzeromedia.org

WUHAN CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC BIOENGINEERED: Who’s behind it, why now and why China? | SOTN: Alternative News, Analysis & Commentary

stateofthenation.co

“Mystery virus” spreading like wildfire across U.S. population, putting people in bed for a MONTH… is this a depopulation experiment? - DC Dirty Laundry

What is the source of this virus?

dcdirtylaundry.com

waronwethepeople.com

www.waronwethepeople.com

Over the years I have seen many heated arguments that the following diseases were created to depopulate certain population segments:
AIDS
Ebola
Zika
Swine Flu
Regular Flu
SARS
MARS
NxHx (pick your numbers)
Corona Virus
The only corroborating piece is that some of these viruses hit specific population segments and specific age groups, very, very hard. No other evidence conclusively proves that they were engineered other than the occasional researcher occasionally saying that they were engineered.
If it looks like cheese and it has holes, and you keeps slicing it and it has holes you ahve swiss cheese. That is typically the summation when you start trying to piece together the full story. Without sufficient facts available to the public we will never know the true story on things. But it is always a best practice to question the facts, the source, and the commonality of information repeatedly appearing from difference sources that are not sharing the same source.
With all things remember the trifecta of truth: if you see it from three different sources, each with a different source that is not really connected there is a good possibility it might be true.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

Apologies if some of these are from unsanctioned sources, I was just trying to get a quick and dirty summary put together. They appear coherent enough but were one among lists of many saying the same basic things on each cited site.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

And all the listed articles at length:

Bioweapons … for dummies?

Ignore the hype. Novice biologists aren’t likely to construct advanced weapons any time soon.

thebulletin.org

Bioweapons … for dummies?
By Zian Liu, September 28, 2015

Recent advances in bioengineering and the rise of open-access literature have made genetic engineering accessible beyond academia. While many synthetic biologists, who fabricate or re-design biological systems, welcome community interest in their discipline, some biosecurity scholars worry that even teenagers can now make bioweapons.
Their concerns are understandable. Bioengineers have already used artificial DNA to reconstruct the polio virus, the 1918 influenza virus, and other pathogens. Even high schools are starting to cover recombinant DNA in their curricula. Meanwhile, a large, unregulated, amateur “biohacking” community has emerged, and its members aim to engineer new organisms that previously could be built only by highly trained scientists. Superficially, at least, it seems plausible that a rogue biohacker could make bioweapons.

In fact, though, this scenario remains very unlikely. I should know. I recently spent 13 months as an undergraduate researcher at the Department of Energy's state-of-the-art Joint BioEnergy Institute. There I learned that designing and executing cutting-edge biology experiments is difficult, especially for novices—and simple, low-cost policy interventions can make it harder still.

The rise of synthetic biology. Synthetic biology aims to create new organisms and biological functions by putting together interchangeable DNA parts with LEGO-like modularity. Beyond serving as blueprints for development, genes also encode mechanisms to regulate the expression of other genes, resulting in circuit-like interactions between genes. Starting around 2000, the new discipline of synthetic biology has rewired microbes to follow man-made genetic circuits. While early research focused on understanding gene interactions, more recent research has yielded practical “genetic devices” such as yeast and bacteria that synthesize drugs, produce biofuels, and detect environmental contaminants.
By now, synthetic biology has spread beyond the classroom. Since 2004, more and more students have tried their hand at the International Genetically Engineered Machines competition, with 280 university and high school teams participating in 2015. With few requirements beyond registration fees, safety forms, and documentation, competitors—often advised by more senior researchers—are free to devise their own projects: for example, engineering yeast to synthesize indigo, or programming genetic circuits to control whether bacteria sink or float. Experimental protocols and gene sequences from the competition, published openly online, have fueled a growing “biohacking” community of enthusiasts who are building their own laboratories to grow and manipulate microbes. Some want to advance biology; others want to make beer.
Biosecurity experts have long warned that biohackers, armed with the powerful tools of synthetic biology, will eventually engineer pathogens in the same way that computer enthusiasts in the 1970s developed viruses and adware. So far, however, there has been no convincing example. Evidently, garage biology is not as easy as it sounds.

Steps, and barriers, to weaponization. A bioweapons project requires five basic steps. The first is to build a safe facility that can keep the scientist alive long enough to build a bioweapon. This is demanding, because the whole point of bioweapons is to make something that kills in microscopic doses. The Soviet bioweapons program Biopreparat managed the risk by repeatedly vaccinating workers and acquiring operating-room-quality filtration systems and protective gear that sometimes rivaled spacesuits, according to Ken Alibek’s 1999 book Biohazard: The Chilling True Story of the Largest Covert Biological Weapons Program in the World—Told from the Inside by the Man Who Ran It. Because purchasing advanced-grade filters and requesting vaccines for rare diseases would likely attract suspicion, a biohacker would have trouble matching his equipment to these standards—and even with proper protection, at least one Soviet bioweapon effort ended with the researcher’s death.

Second, biohackers need to purchase laboratory instruments. This seems simple. In principle, a biohacker only needs a PayPal account and shipping address to obtain everything he needs to build a weapon. In practice, though, most biohackers only purchase the bare minimum, and they improvise to save money. For instance, many sleep with test tubes under their armpits to avoid buying expensive incubators. This is fine for growing bacteria that glow in the dark, but trying the same shortcut with weaponized strains would likely lead to infection, and a trip to the hospital would immediately end the project.

A practical bioweapons facility needs to move beyond such improvisations. I estimate that a basic setup using last-century equipment would cost at least $15,000. Reagent kits, often hundreds of dollars for only a few reactions, and other disposable equipment would raise the cost to $30,000. Using newer, more reliable machines would cost perhaps ten times as much.

The third step would be to obtain the base bacteria or virus strains for modification or production. The most straightforward approach is to order and grow a known infectious strain, but this requires documentation. My supervisor at the Joint BioEnergy Institute—who works at one of the country’s premier laboratories—encountered so much paperwork trying to obtain an infectious yeast strain that he eventually gave up. Would-be terrorists, with much shakier credentials, would encounter even more difficulties, along with a high risk of exposure.

My supervisor instead ordered synthetic genes and created a novel organism to perform the functions needed. But companies that sell synthetic DNA check all sequences for “risky” genes, in accordance with the International Association of Synthetic Biology’s 2009 code of conduct for gene synthesis. My supervisor’s order, which encoded proteins that synthesize fat, went through fine. But a biohacker requesting multiple “suspicious” parts would almost certainly trigger alarms.
Fourth, a would-be bioweaponeer would have to design and execute a project. Most undergraduate “pipette monkeys” rely on more-senior researchers to design experiments. Indeed, even PhD-level researchers typically start by modifying experiments culled from existing literature. But of course bioweapon projects are classified. An aspiring bioweaponeer would have to find and modify a published project with “dual-use” potential.

For example, a biohacker might try to modify a project like a recent Berkeley publication describing how scientists engineered bacteria to enter and deliver drugs to human cells. Unlike researchers at established institutions, though, our rogue biohacker could not simply build atop the design by requesting specifications, and would instead need to re-invent the many details that invariably go unpublished. While modularity would help, trying to recreate unpublished sequences by trial and error would be like assembling an IKEA bed from a kit consisting entirely of bolts and small parts. The Berkeley drug-delivery bacterium has five modules, each with up to six parts. Weaponizing it would require still more modules and parts. In theory, this is simple. But in practice, I spent a month experimenting with assembly protocols to build one four-part module, and even then, it was unclear whether it was functional. A biohacker, working with limited resources and less-accurate equipment, would need years to re-engineer and weaponize a drug-delivery bacterium.

Fifth and finally, a weapon created by a biohacker would probably need to be tested before being deployed on human targets. During the Cold War, nation-states had isolated bioweapon-testing facilities, with the Soviets testing their strains on monkeys on an isolated island, but individuals would have a harder time ordering primates or other animals in large quantities without raising questions.

Observers often speculate that bioweaponeers could simply forgo testing and attack immediately. But bioweapons hardly ever work the first time. In the 1990s, the Japanese terrorist group Aum Shinrikyo developed strains of anthrax from vaccines, but because these strains were weak and their delivery methods ineffective, all of the group’s known anthrax attacks failed. While genetic engineering has indeed become more efficient since the 1990s, increased biosecurity regulations limit biohackers to working with far more innocuous organisms. Introducing pathogenic traits to these organisms probably poses a larger challenge than restoring virulence to vaccines, and in the meantime, each failed attack would dramatically increase the risk of apprehension.

Policy chokepoints. Even if biohackers clear these hurdles, biology remains so heavily chance-dependent that many experiments cannot be reproduced. This makes bioweapons even less attractive to potential amateurs. Nevertheless, the converse is also true—even clumsy bioweaponeers could simply “get lucky.” Government regulators should reduce this chance by imposing sensible chokepoints.

First, the government should build community by subsidizing the “biohacking labs” that have already emerged across the United States. This is worth doing on social and economic grounds alone, but it also has a security value: Suspicious behavior is much more likely to be noticed and reported when it takes place within a strong, tightly knit community. Federal funding would encourage legitimate enthusiasts to come into the open—and report security risks in real time. While lone wolves would not be eliminated, they would receive far less help from friends—and would stick out more than under the current system, where going it alone is essentially the only option.

Second, regulators should place more restrictions on purchasing lab equipment. Requiring discarded-equipment buyers to submit credentials would only impose minor costs on legitimate laboratories and start-ups. Most biohackers would be unaffected. Many perform experiments that tolerate the inaccuracies of improvised equipment, and others could reach out to regulated local biohacking labs.

Lastly, the government should tighten regulations on synthetic DNA. Many scientists have argued that the United States, like Europe, should require licenses for using synthetic DNA. Granted, genuine synthetic biology enthusiasts would suffer. Few European biohackers engineer organisms, despite similar interests among academics, suggesting that such policy would significantly hinder the legitimate biohacking movement.

Incremental changes in accessibility and cost are unlikely to lower the barriers that currently prevent amateurs from developing bioweapons. Only fundamental technological advancements, such as significantly increasing the efficiency of DNA recombination or bringing long-strand DNA synthesis within the reach of individuals, can do that. Novice biologists are not likely to construct advanced weapons any time soon.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

China Will Always Be Bad at Bioethics

It’s no accident that the Chinese government is leading the world in medical advances — and in dangerous ethical lapses.

foreignpolicy.com

Argument
China Will Always Be Bad at Bioethics

It’s no accident that the Chinese government is leading the world in medical advances — and in dangerous ethical lapses.
By Yangyang Cheng | April 13, 2018, 4:45 PM

A lab worker in China displays the newly developed Inactivated Vaccine for Streptococcal Disease (Type 2) in Swine at Guangdong Winsun Bio Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd on July 31, 2005 in Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China. (China Photos/Getty Images)

This April, potential sperm donors at one of Beijing’s top hospitals found themselves facing a set of tough new standards. Listed as the first criteria, before any mention of infectious or hereditary diseases, was the requirement that potential donors have “a love for socialism and the motherland” and be “supportive of the leadership of the party.”
By itself, this would be just one more incident of political excess in a country where full-blown Chinese Communist Party ideology is making a fierce comeback. But unlike the demands that students dump “Western” textbooks or that singers parrot their love for President Xi Jinping, China’s bioethical standards are more than a curiosity for outsiders. They may shape the future of humanity.

Chinese scientists, in January, produced the world’s first cloned primates through somatic cell nuclear transfer, the same technique that created Dolly the sheep in Scotland in 1996. In the summer of 2017, the gene-editing technology CRISPR was successfully used for the first time to edit a gene associated with a disease in human embryos by an international team of scientists from the United States, China, and South Korea; that was just two years after Chinese scientists shocked the world by making the first such attempt. While the United States is just starting to look for the first patient for such studies, at least eight clinical trials are underway in China using CRISPR technology to treat cancer.
As China’s advances in biotechnology come closer to the secrets of life, they pose tantalizing prospects for the future. But when standards for research on the latest technological frontiers are being set by a government that has always prioritized power over ethics, there’s also plenty of cause for concern.

It was not until 1998 that the Chinese Ministry of Health established an ethics committee and issued the first set of guidelines on medical ethics in China. Over the past two decades, China has made earnest efforts toward the ethical practice of biomedicine. After years of denial, the Chinese government acknowledged in 2006 its decades-long practice of harvesting organs from executed prisoners, and it has progressed toward a registry with volunteer donors. Nevertheless, many of the country’s rules and regulations, as in other fields, exist more on paper than in practice.
While the Chinese Communist Party has a branch office at every school and every hospital, the presence of ethics boards is optional. According to a presentation at the World Health Organization by one of China’s leading medical ethicists, Hu Qingli, only about half of Chinese provinces had set up ethics committees by the early 2010s; the same went for individual hospitals. Even when ethics boards exist, conflicts of interest are rife. While the Ministry of Health’s ethics guidelines state that ethical reviews are “based upon the principles of ethics accepted by the international community,” they lack enforcement mechanisms and provide few instructions for investigators. As a result, the ethics review process is often reduced to a formality, “a rubber stamp” in Hu’s words. The lax ethical environment has led many to consider China the “Wild East” in biomedical research. Widely criticized and rejected by Western institutions, the Italian surgeon Sergio Canavero found a home for his radical quest to perform the first human head transplant in the northern Chinese city of Harbin. Canavero’s Chinese partner, Ren Xiaoping, although specifying that human trials were a long way off, justified the controversial experiment on technological grounds, “I am a scientist, not an ethical expert.” As the Chinese government props up the pseudoscience of traditional Chinese medicine as a valid “Eastern” alternative to anatomy-based “Western” medicine, the utterly unscientific approach makes the establishment of biomedical regulations and their enforcement even more difficult.

The fragile bioethics system in China is further weakened by rampant corruption. In 2006, a large-scale investigation into the Chinese State Food and Drug Administration resulted in arrests and imprisonment of several of its highest officials for allegedly accepting bribes, including the administration’s Director Zheng Xiaoyu, who was ultimately executed. As with much of the anti-corruption effort in China, the crackdown started after dozens died due to unsafe drugs in highly publicized cases; the actual figures remain unknown.

And in medicine, as with much else in China, authorities will often evade laws that exist on paper if there are customers (or, in this case, patients) willing to pay. China long ago banned doctors from revealing the sex of embryos to patients, but the practice remains common and contributes to gender-based abortion. Another example is the clinical use of stem cells. The Chinese Ministry of Health classified stem cell treatments as “high risk” and banned its clinical usage without approval in 2009. However, a Nature investigation in 2012 revealed that despite increased regulatory clampdowns, stem cell clinics were still popping up across the country, charging patients thousands of dollars for unauthorized therapies.

The willingness to overlook safety for financial gain hints at a greater challenge with bioethics in China — not just structural, but ideological. Authoritarian states naturally prioritize the strength of their own power, including the size of their economy, above all else; this runs contrary to, and inevitably undermines, the healing purpose of medicine.
China’s record attests to this. Claiming the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese people” as its ultimate mission, the Chinese government has conducted massive social engineering campaigns to control and “improve” its population. The one-child policy was carried out with forced abortions, compulsory sterilization, and female infanticide, leading to an aging population and severe gender imbalance. Faced with the resulting demographic crisis, the Chinese government has now turned to campaigns encouraging “the right quality” of women — namely younger, urban women with a college education — to have more children, while imposing constraints on reproduction for ethnic minorities and in particular the Uighurs. The Maternal and Infant Health Care Law of 1995, initially named the “Eugenics and Health Protection Law” with the explicit purpose to “prevent new births of inferior quality,” effectively mandated childlessness for people with genetic disorders, certain infectious diseases, and mental illness.

Communism bases much of its legitimacy on its claims of resting on a foundation of science — but its understanding of science centers far more on authority than skepticism. “Scientific” in China’s party editorials is virtually synonymous with “politically approved.” The party’s journals are filled with glowing evaluations of Mao Zedong’s “scientific” legacy. The constitution’s latest addition, Xi Jinping Thought, lists early in its 14-point manifesto “adopting science-based ideas” for development. The suggestion is that if a government is “scientific,” then the state’s grasp on power must be as absolute and above criticism as the laws of the universe — even when that power is used to persecute scientists and crush entire branches of research considered contrary to political ideology, as the Chinese government has repeatedly done.
When science is used in service of legitimizing an authoritarian system, the resulting research, however successful it might appear to be, inevitably abandons cosmopolitan ideals. The first two monkey clones born in a Chinese lab in January were named Zhong Zhong and Hua Hua; zhonghua means the Chinese nation and its people. The macaque twins were not just portrayed as the product of science, but of Chinese science.

This politicized approach to science also abets the trampling of ethical boundaries. Communism emphasizes the idea of “constant struggle,” not only between classes, but also against nature. China, like the Soviet Union before it, has already paid a harsh environmental cost for this approach to development policy. During the Great Leap Forward, sparrows were initially listed among the “four pests” to be extinguished, and the drastic reduction in sparrow population led to an increase in crop pests that worsened ongoing famine.

Most concerning of all is how the Chinese state’s understanding of science discounts the autonomy of an individual body for the collective notion of a strong national body. The legacy of social Darwinism still permeates China, evident in the government’s swift and brutal campaign this past winter to rid the city of Beijing of its migrant workers and their families, callously referred to in official documents as the “low-end population.”

But the justification of individual sacrifice for the greater good is contrary to any principle-based bioethics framework. When Jesse Gelsinger died at the University of Pennsylvania as the first casualty of gene therapy in 1999, the tragedy halted this type of experimental treatment on humans for several years in the United States, and it still serves as a somber reminder for the medical community. Had the death occurred in China, it would most likely have been either covered up or turned into propaganda depicting Gelsinger as a national martyr.

With the Chinese government’s intensifying explicit push for “civil-military fusion,” one should also take it at its word and assume any of its new technology will be dual-use — with military uses applying both to national defense and internal suppression. The Chinese government is already collecting DNA samples among other biometrics data in its far-west province of Xinjiang, where ethnic minorities like the Uighurs are already subject to systematic discrimination, and building up a massive surveillance state using artificial intelligence.

The introduction of AI into health care in China, spearheaded by Chinese tech giants including Tencent and Alibaba, can help with an overburdened hospital system, but it also raises serious privacy concerns in a state where data privacy is nonexistent. Biotechnology will become a powerful tool in the Chinese security state.

In ninth-century China, Taoist alchemists searching for the elixir of life found a dark mixture that was highly combustible. They named it huoyao, “fire medicine.” In the pursuit of immortality, the Chinese invented gunpowder.
In the face of China’s advances in biotechnology today, the world must be vigilant. At the same time, paranoia can, and should, be avoided; the correct approach is principled engagement, not isolation. A secure future demands that all stakeholders come together in good faith to reach a collective agreement in the development and utilization of biotechnology.

The International Summit on Human Gene Editing in 2015 — co-hosted by the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine in the United States, the Royal Society in the United Kingdom, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences — and the National Academies of Science and Medicine’s 2017 report by 22 science and ethics experts from multiple countries laying out guidelines for human genome editing are both encouraging examples in the direction toward global governance and shared responsibility.

Biological threats recognize no human borders. Disparity in bioethics anywhere weakens bioethics everywhere. Liberal democracies must take advantage of the openness of their system to educate the public, live up to the highest ethical standards in protecting human rights and safeguarding the environment, and make such standards the bedrock of universal principles. China is most likely to abide by such standards when its membership in the global political and scientific community depends on it — in other words, when it has no other choice.

Yangyang Cheng is a postdoctoral research associate at Cornell University’s Cornell Laboratory for Accelerator-based ScienceS and Education (CLASSE), and a member of the CMS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

Weaponizing Biotech: How China's Military Is Preparing for a 'New Domain of Warfare'

Under Beijing's civil-military fusion strategy, the PLA is sponsoring research on gene editing, human performance enhancement, and more.

www.defenseone.com

By Elsa B. Kania Adjunct Fellow, CNAS Wilson VornDick August 14, 2019 China Biowarfare AP Photo/Andy Wong
Under Beijing's civil-military fusion strategy, the PLA is sponsoring research on gene editing, human performance enhancement, and more.
We may be on the verge of a brave new world indeed. Today’s advances in biotechnology and genetic engineering have exciting applications in medicine — yet also alarming implications, including for military affairs. China’s national strategy of military-civil fusion (军民融合) has highlighted biology as a priority, and the People’s Liberation Army could be at the forefront of expanding and exploiting this knowledge.
The PLA’s keen interest is reflected in strategic writings and research that argue that advances in biology are contributing to changing the form or character (形态) of conflict. For example:
In 2010’s War for Biological Dominance (制生权战争), Guo Jiwei (郭继卫), a professor with the Third Military Medical University, emphasizes the impact of biology on future warfare.
In 2015, then-president of the Academy of Military Medical Sciences He Fuchu (贺福初) argued that biotechnology will become the new “strategic commanding heights” of national defense, from biomaterials to “brain control” weapons. Maj. Gen. He has since become the vice president of the Academy of Military Sciences, which leads China’s military science enterprise.
Biology is among seven “new domains of warfare” discussed in a 2017 book by Zhang Shibo (张仕波), a retired general and former president of the National Defense University, who concludes: “Modern biotechnology development is gradually showing strong signs characteristic of an offensive capability,” including the possibility that “specific ethnic genetic attacks” (特定种族基因攻击) could be employed.
The 2017 edition of Science of Military Strategy (战略学), a textbook published by the PLA’s National Defense University that is considered to be relatively authoritative, debuted a section about biology as a domain of military struggle, similarly mentioning the potential for new kinds of biological warfare to include “specific ethnic genetic attacks.”
These are just a few examples of an extensive and evolving literature by Chinese military scholars and scientists who are exploring new directions in military innovation.
Following these lines of thinking, the PLA is pursuing military applications for biology and looking into promising intersections with other disciplines, including brain science, supercomputing, and artificial intelligence. Since 2016, the Central Military Commission has funded projects on military brain science, advanced biomimetic systems, biological and biomimetic materials, human performance enhancement, and “new concept” biotechnology.
Gene Editing
Meanwhile, China has been leading the world in the number of trials of the CRISPR gene-editing technology in humans. Over a dozen clinical trials are known to have been undertaken, and some of these activities have provoked global controversy. It’s not clear whether Chinese scientist He Jiankui, may have received approval or even funding from the government for editing embryos that became the world’s first genetically modified humans. The news provoked serious concerns and backlash around the world and in China, where new legislation has been introduced to increase oversight over such research. However, there are reasons to be skeptical that China will overcome its history and track record of activities that are at best ethically questionable, or at worst cruel and unusual, in healthcare and medical sciences.
But it is striking how many of China’s CRISPR trials are taking place at the PLA General Hospital, including to fight cancer. Indeed, the PLA’s medical institutions have emerged as major centers for research in gene editing and other new frontiers of military medicine and biotechnology. The PLA’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences, or AMMS, which China touts as its “cradle of training for military medical talent,” was recently placed directly under the purview of the Academy of Military Science, which itself has been transformed to concentrate on scientific and technological innovation. This change could indicate a closer integration of medical science with military research.
In 2016, an AMMS doctoral researcher published a dissertation, “Research on the Evaluation of Human Performance Enhancement Technology,” which characterized CRISPR-Cas as one of three primary technologies that might boost troops’ combat effectiveness. The supporting research looked at the effectiveness of the drug Modafinil, which has applications in cognitive enhancement; and at transcranial magnetic stimulation, a type of brain stimulation, while also contending that the “great potential” of CRISPR-Cas as a “military deterrence technology in which China should “grasp the initiative” in development.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

Russian Lab Explosion Raises Question: Should Smallpox Virus Be Kept Or Destroyed?

The lab is one of two known places that store live samples of the virus that causes the disease. Scientists use them for research. But there is concern about accidental or intentional release.

www.npr.org

Russian Lab Explosion Raises Question: Should Smallpox Virus Be Kept Or Destroyed?
September 19, 20195:14 PM ET Fran Kritz

A computer illustration of the virus that causes smallpox. The virus was eradicated in 1980, but live samples are kept in two known labs for research.
Science Artwork/Science Photo Library/Getty Images
An explosion this week in a Russian lab, one of only two labs in the world known to store live samples of the variola virus, which causes smallpox, has raised anew questions that have been asked since the disease was eradicated in 1980.
Should humankind hold on to the live virus to conduct research on treatments, tests and vaccines in case smallpox were to reemerge?
Or is it more prudent to destroy all samples of the live virus to avoid any accidental or intentional release and instead rely on sequenced gene fragments for further research?
(Note to concerned readers: One worker was injured in the gas explosion at the Russian lab, in the Siberian city of Koltsovo, and was hospitalized after the blast. But according to news coverage and the World Health Organization, the explosion did not occur near the smallpox or other virus stockpiles; they remain intact and secure.)
Goats and Soda
Germ History: Milkmaids Inspire Vaccines, But The Germs Keep Coming
Soon after smallpox was eradicated, the World Health Organization consolidated the remaining stocks of variola virus to two labs, the Russian State Centre for Research on Virology and Biotechnology and a lab at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.
WHO decided that the stocks should be ultimately destroyed — but not right away. The reason for the delay was to give researchers time to develop countermeasures — new and improved tests, treatments and vaccines based on information gleaned from the live virus samples — in case smallpox were to reemerge through a lab accident or bioterrorism. In 1999, the WHO Advisory Committee on Variola Virus Research was formed to oversee the research; its 16 experts present a yearly report to the World Health Assembly, WHO's decision-making body, which has so far delayed a decision on when to destroy the smallpox stocks.
By subscribing, you agree to NPR's terms of use and privacy policy. NPR may share your name and email address with your NPR station. See Details. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The reason for this caution is based on the nature of the disease. Smallpox causes fever, convulsions and painful blisters all over the body. And it is quite deadly. By some estimates, smallpox has killed more people than every other infectious disease combined — 300 million since 1900, according to some sources. Even in its waning days, before intensive vaccination campaigns wiped it out in Africa, Asia and South America, where it still lingered, the fatality rate was 30% or higher.
The virus can spread when an infected person coughs or sneezes during prolonged face-to-face contact with someone. The virus is also found in the scabs that are a hallmark of smallpox; the virus can be transmitted by direct contact with the fluids within the scabs as well as by contact with body fluids of a person with smallpox or items they have touched, such as bedding.
In the past two decades, WHO has approved research using the live virus, which has resulted in new diagnostics to test for the virus, the first ever treatment for smallpox, approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2018, and work on new vaccines to prevent smallpox, including one being tested on health care workers in the Democratic Republic of Congo to prevent monkeypox, a viral cousin of smallpox. New vaccines are needed to be sure all known smallpox strains are covered and because the commonly used vaccine, though effective, caused severe side effects in some people — for example, fatigue, shivering and swollen, painful or tender lymph glands in the neck, armpits or groin.
So far there has been no clear consensus on the future of the live virus samples. The members of the Advisory Committee on Variola Virus Research are divided. During their most recent meeting, in September 2018, most said that samples of the live virus are still needed for development of another antiviral drug with a method of action different from the one approved by the FDA — in case there is resistance to the first drug.
Those on the side of destroying the stocks say new drugs and vaccines could be tested using gene fragments that have been sequenced from the live virus as well as on similar viruses like monkeypox. "There is no such thing as 100% certainty regarding the potential for inadvertent release," says Dr. Jeffrey Duchin, a member of the board of the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the health officer for public health in Seattle & King County in Washington state. He has long supported destroying the stocks.
But Dr. Inger Damon, who directs the CDC's work on smallpox and is in charge of its smallpox stocks, believes there is still more to be gained by continuing research on the live virus. "When I started [research work on the virus] in 1999, the conjecture was there were two [genome] sequences near completion and no need to sequence anymore," says Damon. Since then, researchers have found 45-plus additional strains.
"We want to make sure we have sufficient public health measures for the global community," says Damon. The explosion in Russia does not make her think that the stocks should be destroyed more quickly.
But the explosion will likely be on the agenda when the Advisory Committee on Variola Virus Research next meets at the end of October. "It would be reasonable to suppose this incident may be raised by [committee members] for further discussion in the context of global health security," said Dr. Rosamund Lewis, head of the WHO Smallpox Secretariat, in a statement to NPR. "At every meeting of the Advisory Committee ... the two [labs] provide a full update on the status of the virus stocks and any significant events and emerging issues."
So far, the Russian incident has not led to any changes in protocol. The labs are inspected every two years; the Russian lab was last visited in January. "As the smallpox lab was not directly affected, no interim inspection is presently planned, pending further clarification of the circumstances and impact of the incident," says Lewis, who expects that the heads of the Russian lab will review the accident "so as to mitigate any future risk to their installations."
Lewis says WHO will continue to closely monitor the conditions under which the variola virus is stored and handled. "The nature of the risks identified and mitigating measures will be taken into account in future inspections," Lewis said in her email to NPR.
Even before the Russian lab explosion, a timeline was already on the minds of the committee members. Sylvie Briand, director of the department of infectious hazards management at WHO, told NPR this summer that based on her assessment of the committee's discussions, the smallpox stocks could possibly be destroyed in three to five years.
And there is new pressure from the medical community to take that step. An editorial published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases in August pointed out that one institute that had stored stockpiles of an animal virus called rinderpest had destroyed its cache and that the French government was considering doing the same thing.
"And in the future," asked the editorial writers, "what might happen for polio? For mumps? For measles? Destruction of all stocks should be the ultimate goal of eradication. What is needed are clear requirements for exactly what medical countermeasures are required before that final step is taken."
Fran Kritz is a health policy reporter based in Washington, D.C. Her work has appeared in The Washington Post and Kaiser Health News. Find her on Twitter: @fkritz. Corrections Sept. 19, 2019
An earlier version of this story mistakenly listed the Twitter handle of the author as @FranKritz instead of @fkritz. In addition, the editorial in The Lancet Infectious Diseases was published in August, not June.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

Deadly Germ Research Is Shut Down at Army Lab Over Safety Concerns (Published 2019)

Problems with disposal of dangerous materials led the government to suspend research at the military’s leading biodefense center.

www.nytimes.com

This is behind a paywall if someone can help getting the article.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

History of African-Americans and Medical Research Goes Beyond Henrietta Lacks

The story is as old as the nation is, an expert tells TIME

time.com

History
movies
The Disturbing History of African-Americans and Medical Research Goes Beyond Henrietta Lacks
A scene from HBO's 'The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks' Quantrell Colbert/HBO
By Lily Rothman
Updated: April 21, 2017 6:20 PM ET
Ask a given person what they know about the history of the use of African-Americans as unwilling research subjects and they are likely to mention one infamous incident: Tuskegee. “Such a failure seems almost beyond belief, or human compassion,” TIME wrote when the study made headlines in 1972, as the world learned that for four decades the U.S. Public Health Service had been conducting an experiment in which proven remedies were kept from syphilis patients in Alabama, all of whom were black men. But there’s a lot more to that history.
“Tuskegee shouldn’t be the first thing people think of,” Harriet A. Washington, the author of Medical Apartheid, tells TIME. “It’s the example that the government has admitted to and acknowledged. It’s so famous that people think it was the worst, but it was relatively mild compared to other stuff.”
With the premiere on Saturday of the HBO film The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, based on Rebecca Skloot’s best-selling book of the same name, another piece of the puzzle may get a little closer to the first-to-mind fame of Tuskegee. Lacks was, as TIME explained in its initial review of Skloot’s book, a black woman treated unsuccessfully for cervical cancer in 1951, from whose tumor doctors kept a sample of tissue. Her cells provided a breakthrough would prove invaluable to medical research, but her family was kept in the dark even as they themselves became the subjects of scientific interest.
Washington, who has interviewed the Lacks family, says that one problem with the national narrative about Tuskegee is the risk that those unaware of the larger history that surrounds both that study and the story of Henrietta Lacks might think that African-Americans are “overreacting to a single study” if they express distrust of the medical establishment. Rather, as Skloot also notes in her book, distrust like that expressed by the Lacks family is related to what’s summed up by the subtitle of Washington’s book as The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans From Colonial Times to the Present.
“We’re talking about something that began in the 17th century,” Washington says.
Though the line between therapeutic medicine and research was blurrier at the time, she says it’s clear that doctors in the colonial American context would often try out new ideas on white patients when they hoped that the experiment would help the person in question; they would use African slaves and Native Americans as subjects when the point of the research was to benefit others. Perhaps the most infamous example of antebellum medical research being performed on slaves is that of J. Marion Sims, whose innovation of a revolutionary gynecological procedure was made possible by multiple practice runs on enslaved women. Washington also found that slaves’ bodies were used for experiments after they died, despite widespread belief that maintaining the body’s integrity after death was religiously necessary.
“Historically, one of the larger connections is that, if you’re talking about the appropriation of African-American bodies when enslavement was part of the law of the land, that represented an extension of slavery into eternity,” she explains.
Get our History Newsletter. Put today's news in context and see highlights from the archives.
You may unsubscribe from email communication at any time. See our Privacy Policy for further details.
When it comes to the 20th century, though slavery was no longer the law, Washington says that there was a widespread belief that people who did not pay for their medical care would “owe their bodies” to the medical community in return. As a result, patients from marginalized communities, like the poor and immigrants, did not receive the same ethical consideration that others did. Though that idea would have applied to poor patients of all races, segregation at the time meant that black patients were confined in many places to “black wards,” and they were disproportionately affected.

American politics is still defined by the values and priorities of baby boomers. But not for long
Washington says that one big misconception she often hears is that in 1951, when Lacks was treated, what happened to Lacks would have been just the common practice at the time. In reality, she has found that — while it is true that the laws and regulations that govern such experimentation have changed between then and now — basic ethical concepts such as informed consent were already very much in play. In fact, she says, especially in the wake of the world learning of Nazi medical experimentation, some organizations kept consent rules that were even more stringent than those in play today. “These conventions tended to be rigorously adhered to when it came to white people,” Washington notes.
And, though medical research can be complicated, she believes the basic idea — then and now — is simple: “Subjects who have normal adult intelligence are capable of understanding whether their permission has been asked.”
But, if those ethical standards have generally endured, other things have changed. Washington points to 1980 as a turning point, thanks to changes like the law that changed the medical-research economy and a Supreme Court decision that has been interpreted to mean that living things are subject to patents. The need for tissue on which to experiment continues, but now it can be a lot more financially valuable if things work out. Washington believes that economic pressures have led to an erosion in the application of informed consent in the years since.
That’s part of the reason why Washington is glad that Henrietta Lacks’ name is becoming more famous.
“People tend to underestimate the extent and breadth of this,” Washington says. “There’s no sphere of American medicine that was not touched by the use in research of African-Americans.”
Write to Lily Rothman at lily.rothman@time.com.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

U.S. apologizes for Guatemala STD experiments

U.S. government medical researchers intentionally infected hundreds of people in Guatemala, including institutionalized mental patients, with gonorrhea and syphilis without their knowledge or permission more than 60 years ago.

www.nbcnews.com

By Robert Bazell Chief science and health correspondent NBC News updated 10/1/2010 7:19:05 PM ET Print
U.S. government medical researchers intentionally infected hundreds of people in Guatemala, including institutionalized mental patients, with gonorrhea and syphilis without their knowledge or permission more than 60 years ago.

Many of those infected were encouraged to pass the infection onto others as part of the study.
About one third of those who were infected never got adequate treatment.
On Friday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius offered extensive apologies for actions taken by the U.S. Public Health Service.
"The sexually transmitted disease inoculation study conducted from 1946-1948 in Guatemala was clearly unethical," according to the joint statement from Clinton and Sebelius. "Although these events occurred more than 64 years ago, we are outraged that such reprehensible research could have occurred under the guise of public health. We deeply regret that it happened, and we apologize to all the individuals who were affected by such abhorrent research practices."
Secretary Clinton called Guatemalan president Alvara Cabellaros Thursday night to reaffirm the importance of the U.S. relationship with the Latin American country. President Barack Obama called Cabellaros Friday afternoon, according to a statement from White House press secretary Robert Gibbs.
"The people of Guatemala are our close friends and neighbors in the Americas," the government statement says. "As we move forward to better understand this appalling event, we reaffirm the importance of our relationship with Guatemala, and our respect for the Guatemalan people, as well as our commitment to the highest standards of ethics in medical research."
During a conference call Friday with National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins and Assistant Secretary of State Arturo Valenzuela, officials noted that there were no formalized regulations regarding protection of human studies during the 1940s.
Story: Horrific medical tests of past raise concerns for today
In addition to the apology, the U.S. is setting up commissions to ensure that human medical research conducted around the globe meets "rigorous ethical standards." U.S. officials are also launching investigations to uncover exactly what happened during the experiments.
The episode raises inevitable comparisons to the infamous Tuskegee experiment, the Alabama study where hundreds of African-American men were told they were being treated for syphilis, but in fact were denied treatment. That U.S. government study lasted from 1932 until press reports revealed it in 1972.
The Guatemala experiments, which were conducted between 1946 and 1948, never provided any useful information and the records were hidden.

Wellesley College
Susan Reverby, a professor of women's studies at Wellesley College in Massachusetts, discovered records documenting U.S. experiments that infected Guatemalans with gonorrhea and syphilis.
They were discovered by Susan Reverby, a professor of women's studies at Wellesley College in Massachusetts and were posted on her website.
According to Reverby’s report, the Guatemalan project was co-sponsored by the U.S. Public Health Service, the NIH, the Pan-American Health Sanitary Bureau (now the Pan American Health Organization) and the Guatemalan government. The experiments involved 696 subjects — male prisoners and female patients in the National Mental Health Hospital.
Video: Prof. discovers U.S. role in health experiments (on this page)
The researchers were trying to determine whether the antibiotic penicillin could prevent syphilis infection, not just cure it, Reverby writes. After the subjects were infected with the syphilis bacteria — through visits with prostitutes who had the disease and direct inoculations — it is unclear whether they were later cured or given proper medical care, Reverby notes. While most of the patients got treatment, experts estimate as many as a one-third, did not.
Secret testing of Guatemalans may renew minorities mistrust
The STD experiments were conducted with the cooperation of the Guatemalan government. During that time, the U.S. -- which had a long association with the Guatemalan military -- exerted a powerful influence in the Latin American country, largely in order to protect the interests of the American-based United Fruit Company. In 1954 the U.S. CIA helped overthrow Guatemala’s democratically elected president because of land reforms that opposed the multinational corporation.
U.S. apologizes for health experiments (on this page)
Reverby, who has written extensively about the Tuskegee experiments, found the evidence while conducting further research on the Alabama syphilis study.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

Agenda 21/Agenda 2030 There is No Difference

Editor’s Note: Many times in the past year, when I have continued to use the term Agenda 21, people will rush in to correct me – “It’s Agenda 2030 now!” Well, yes and no. This is what the UN does – it changes names and titles like a judo move – but the plan is the same. Remember, that’s just what I

americanpolicy.org

04 Oct Agenda 21/Agenda 2030 There is No Difference Posted at 16:05h in Sustainable Development by Tom DeWeese
Editor’s Note:
Many times in the past year, when I have continued to use the term Agenda 21, people will rush in to correct me – “It’s Agenda 2030 now!” Well, yes and no. This is what the UN does – it changes names and titles like a judo move – but the plan is the same. Remember, that’s just what ICLEI did a few years ago when they changed their name. They were originally named the International Council for Local Environmental Initiative. But when we started to reveal that they were part of a global movement to change our way of life by inserting themselves into local policy making, they quickly moved to drop the “international” from their name. Now they are simply known as “ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability.” That’s how these cock roaches seek to hide when a bright light is shown on them. The name changes, but the game is the same.
The 2030 Agenda is nothing more than a reboot of Agenda 21. The UN uses such updates of plans to keep their people excited and involved. The 2030 Agenda simply goes in to more detail as to how and what they intend to do. Remember, Agenda 21 was introduced as the “comprehensive blueprint for the reorganization of human society.” The 2030 Agenda gives more detail on how that is to be done, along with providing a more specific date for its full implementation. In reality there’s nothing new here. It’s still Agenda 21!
So, I wanted to reissue an article I wrote in 2015 about Agenda 2030, when it was first announced, to help build understanding of its threat, but to also assure you that Agenda 21 and its goal to restructure the world is still very much alive. As I say in the article, now we should better understand what we are fighting because they are clearly telling us. Please pass this on and help others to understand the threat. It’s very real.
Tom DeWeese It’s 1992 All Over Again. A New Agenda 21 Threatens Our Way of Life By Tom DeWeese

If you had a time machine and could travel back to 1992 as the UN’s Earth Summit was underway, your efforts to abort this subversive policy would be aided by all you had experienced in the Orwellian world of “Sustainable Living”. You wouldn’t have to wonder what the NGOs who created it had in mind. You wouldn’t have to trust the news media to provide the details. You would know because you would have lived it. You would know that Nancy Pelosi’s open claim that Agenda 21 is a “comprehensive blue print” for the reorganization of human society was true. And what’s more; you don’t like it!
We were told, without hesitation, that Agenda 21 was aimed at destroying free enterprise. That it is was a clarion call for humans to live on less and that the Earth could no longer sustain the consumptive appetite of United States of America. They told us, but so many weren’t listening. It took over 15 years for many to finally understand the agenda of Agenda 21. By then it was firmly entrenched in every government agency, every community plan, and every school curriculum. So much so that many now say it is impossible to combat. That it’s a done deal.
Well, guess what, Agenda 21 is not a done deal and one of the main forces to recognize that fact is the UN itself, along with a mob of enabling Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). And because it is not a done deal, they are all planning a new massive gathering to reboot Agenda 21 and force it across the finish line.
Over the weekend of September 25 – 27, 2015, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City thousands of delegates, UN diplomats, representatives of Non-governmental Organizations, heads of state and the Pope, will converge to present a new fifteen-year plan entitled “Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”
Just as in 1992, they are openly telling us what the plan includes and how they intend to put it in force. The preamble to the plan says, “All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, WILL implement this plan.” It goes on to say, “We are determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path. As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind.” When I read these words I don’t glow with anticipation, I bristle with dread.
That, my friends, is a direct challenge and a threat to anyone who dares to disagree with the plan or stand in their way. They promise us that they “WILL” do it and it will be forced on everyone. Our experience with Agenda 21 over the past 23 years tells us what to expect.
Here are the seventeen goals to be presented and what they really mean:
Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere. The only answer the plan offers for eliminating poverty is redistribution of wealth. The document calls for “equal rights to economic resources.” That means government is claiming an absolute power to take away anything that belongs to you to give to whomever it deems more deserving. That is government-sanctioned theft. These are only Band-Aids that solve nothing. Tomorrow those on the bread lines will still need more. There is not a single idea in these plans to give the poor a way to earn their own wealth so they no longer need government handouts. The final result; a never ending cycle of poverty that will consume the middle class.
Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improve nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture. UN documents go into great detail on controlling food supplies. They detail enforcing “sustainable farming tactics” which have been proven to force up the cost of food production while decreasing yield. It is basically the old Soviet practice of farm control that turned the bread basket of the world into non productive wasteland. The document details the use of government controlled seed and plant banks… “to ensure access to and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge as internationally agreed.” In other words, our future food sources will be put into the hands of politically connected bureaucrats who have never been on a farm. . Starvation on a massive scale will trim the population to more sustainable levels.
Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being of all at all ages. This means cradle to grave control over how and where we live and what we are permitted to eat. The healthy lives they promote means basically forcing us out of our cars and into walking and riding bikes as we are relocated into controlled high rise apartment buildings sanctioned by government. Meat will be out of the question as raising herds is not considered to be “sustainable. But don’t worry. Obamacare for all will deal with the predictable decline in health that is sure to follow.
Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. We have long known that lifelong learning is the means to continually apply behavior modification practices to assure we maintain the desired attitudes, values and beliefs to live in a global village
Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. The rainbow flag flies as we ignore Shariah law and its war on women.
Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation. Ask California how sustainable water control is working for them as these policies have torn down water systems and dams to “free the rivers.” The original pioneers found the land to be a desert. They built a sophisticated water control system that resulted in an emerald green paradise. Now, as Sustainable policies are being enforced, they are witnessing the return of the desert, destroying productive land. Meanwhile, across the nation, the EPA is moving to take control of all the water in the United States. Control the water, control the population.
Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. Seriously? Their solution is to ban oil and enforce wind and solar power. Every study across the nation and around the world has proven that these “modern” energy sources are unreliable and force up the cost of energy. Some report health problems related to life under the turbines. Moreover, the carnage of the birds and bats that are being chopped up and fried by these “sustainable” energy practices goes against everything environmentalists told us about protecting species.
Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all. One thing our 23 years of Agenda 21 have proven, there is no economic growth. European nations that implemented sustainable energy and water controls guidelines are now dumping those programs as fast as they can to save their economies. And who decides what is “productive” or “decent” work? Do we leave it to the bureaucrats to decide?
Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation. Oh come now. Sustainable industrialization means destroyed industry. No real industry can remain in business under a government managed economy with its shifting rules and constant increase in taxes. Government doesn’t create industry or prosperity. Our government’s real job is to provide protection of the market place so real innovators are free to create new ideas, industries and opportunities. Government itself is a job killer when it gets in the way.
Goal 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries. This is another form of redistribution of wealth that forces industries from first world to third world nations. By using oppressive sustainable policies to drive up production costs, companies are forced to take their factories to the poorer nations. The second trick is to exempt those poorer nations from the very environmental rules and regulations that caused the factories to move in the first place. Can anyone explain how this helps the environment? It doesn’t. It simply makes everyone equally poor. This is also an assault on national sovereignty.
Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. This is Smart Growth which promises a utopia of families and neighbors playing and working together, riding bikes, walking to work in stress free communities. It really means the end of private property rights, single family homes, and stack and pack high rises where residents are over taxed, over regulated, rents are high and individual thoughts and actions are viewed as a threat to the “well-ordered society.” And by the way, the American Planning Association did a study to see if their smart growth plans worked and their own report concluded that Smart Growth doesn’t work.
Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns. What more is there to say? Control from the top down.
Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts. Here it is! The root of the entire plan. Climate Change. How many scientific reports do real scientists have to present to show this is the greatest scam ever devised to create a reason for government to control every aspect of our lives? Well, here, let the Global Warming scare mongers tell you their true purpose in their own words:
“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony – climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” Christine Stewart (former Canadian Minister of the Environment). Justice built on a lie? And here is another quote to make it clear. “We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.” Timothy Wirth (President, UN Foundation). The end justifies the means! Notice that Mr. Wirth is as concerned with the economy as he is with the environment.
Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development. Control the water, control society. This one is really aimed at destroying the oil industry in order to enforce wind and solar power. This is the UN pounding its chest to become the central global government it has always sought to be. It has no more right to the seas than it does to the air we breath or the surface of the moon.
Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss. Have you been watching the news as the greatest fires in history are destroying millions of acres of forests? Why is this happening? Because of sustainable forest management that refuses to allow the removal of dead trees from the forest floor. This creates a density of combustable material to fuel massively hot and unmanageable fires. If you want to save a forest, send an environmentalist back to his high rise in New York City where he belongs.
Goal 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels. This is Social Justice which really means social engineering. Have you ever once witnessed an “effective” or “accountable” institution coming out of the United Nations? By its very nature, the UN is unaccountable. Who would be the entity to oversee that accountability? Every one of these programs outlined in the 2030 Agenda creates money, power and unaccountability at every level of government. That is why government is now running out of control and people are feeling so hopeless in trying to deal with their governments. Goal 16 should be named the “Foxes Running the Hen House” goal.
Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development. This means the re-boot of Agenda 21, because that was the original “global partnership.” This goal is a call for all of the treaties, plans and schemes devised in the massive UN meetings to be made the law of the globe. It is total global government and it is a sure highway to misery, destruction of human society, individual thought, motivation and dreams.
In 1992 they told us that Agenda 21 was just a suggestion. Today, after experiencing the “wrenching transformation” of our society that Al Gore called for, we know it was much more than that. And we have suffered the consequences as our economy has plummeted, as the middle class is disappearing, jobs are non-existent and the world is in turmoil.
Now the power elite which prey on the poor and helpless are determined to finish the job. They are fast moving toward the goal of eliminating individual nation states; controlling individual actions and wiping private property ownership from the face of the Earth. Their goal is to make us all “equal” in the same chains to assure none of us can disrupt their well ordered utopian nightmare.
Well, now our time machine has brought us back from 1992 to the present. As we disembark, one voice should be ringing in our ears. In clear and concise words we were warned of what Agenda 21 was designed to do. “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized nations collapse? Isn’t it out responsibility to bring that about?” The voice belonged to Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN Chairman of the Earth Summit as he delivered an official statement.
But here in 2015, the same forces are about to introduce the 2030 Agenda. We have the advantage of knowing what is intended. The 2030 Agenda to “Transform the World” is to be built on the ruins and desolation of a thousand such schemes for control over human life. Each time they have failed to achieve their lofty goals but have brought about a slow decline in liberty and self sufficiency. And each time they have come back with a new “plan.” The 2030 Agenda is Agenda 21 re-booted. But this time you and I don’t have an excuse to ignore it. We know what it is from the start. Now we have a new opportunity and the obligation to stop it dead in its tracks. We’ve been given a second chance. Let’s not waste it.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

How Is Agenda 21 Being Implemented Worldwide?

Agenda 21 is an action plan devised by the U.N. to depopulate 95% of the world population by 2030. How is it implemented locally worldwide?

massawakening.org

What Is Agenda 21?
Agenda 21 – and the recent ones Agenda 2030 and Agenda 2050 – is a plan to depopulate 95% of the world population by 2030, according to Disclose.tv..
It is an action plan devised by the U.N. and signed by 178 governments at the UN Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992. Its goal is the depopulation of humanity because “we are too many”. It is promoted by the elites as a way to “save the planet” and implemented by governments worldwide. Bill Gates even shared his view about how to achieve this goal by vaccinations and other means in a TedX lecture:
“The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care & reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.” (HumansAreFree.com ).
Photo: Shutterstock
They push their globalist agenda on all of us of no rights to property and other rights. People were even fined for collecting rainwater in their own homes, according to CanadaFreePress.
The Means of Depopulation
This genocidal agenda of humanity has already begun and there are many means implemented to achieve this goal, including chemtrails (or “Geoengineering”), vaccines, irradiated food, GMOs (Codex Alimentarius), smart meters, 5G deployment that Trump promotes as part of a “technology race”.
One such mean which is relatively ignored in the alternative media is mass population migration from Africa and the Middle East into the U.S. and Europe. In Israel, they helped bring about 100,000 migrants from Africa who conquered entire neighborhoods in Southern Tel Aviv and other cities where the local population literally became refugees in their own country and fled to other parts in the country. They terrorize the locals and it’s horrendous what happens in these areas. However, all these means sound great when they are termed the “sustainable development” under Agenda 21.
So how people who barely earn 300 USD per year could afford a journey from Africa to Israel that costs (according to some immigrants’ testimonies) $3000 USD. I discovered that this is being paid for and these immigrants are being protected by NGOs (Non-Government Agencies), which are funded by foreign governments and foundations. I surmise that this is an orchestrated immigration to Israel, resembling that from Syria and Africa to Europe and the U.S., is to destroy the Western countries and those aligned with them from within. Then I started thinking about what we aren’t being told about this massive population migration to Israel. At the beginning, the Israeli mainstream media called them “refugees.” However, after the U.N. representatives had checked their status, they pointed out that only 6 percent of them were real refugees. This required the mainstream media to change its terminology in regard to them as ”asylum seekers.”
How Is Agenda 21 Implemented Locally Worldwide?
Again, Agenda 21 is carried out by NGOs funded by foreign countries, like the New Israel Fund (funded by the Ford Foundation and others, including Muslim countries) as well as such groups as the Open Society Foundation (George Soros) and Oxfam with the intentions, I surmise, to destroy Israel from within like with other Western countries. Check the Periodic Report to ICLEI, the U.N.’s NGO that implements Agenda 21 locally, of 15 cities in Israel complying with its guidelines and here on YNET News.
According to the UN’s own website, this is a “comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations system, governments and major groups, in every area in which human impacts on the environment.” This plan is involved in every aspect of our lives according to Rosa Koire, an activist and a lecturer who tirelessly works to inform the unaware public about the dangers of this plan. U.N. Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is a corporate manipulation using the Green Mask of environmental concern to forward a globalist plan.” (www.openmindconference.com )
It seems that using the word “sustainability” helps them promote their depopulation plan unabated. It sounds so “green”, advanced, and progressive. Does it ring a bell? That’s the reason why most people will consider this plan as positive. So, what is wrong with it? Pay attention to the actions of those implementing it and not to “nice”, placating words such as “sustainable development”.
For a long time, I had no idea that there was any connection between all these diverse topics.
This agenda is run by the United Nations via an NGO called “International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives,” commonly known as ICLEI (pronounced Ik-lee). It is implemented locally by municipalities of major cities worldwide, including London, Berlin, Rome. From my research, fifteen cities in Israel joined this NGO in 2008. It should come as no surprise that Ron Huldai, Tel Aviv’s mayor, is the chairman of ICLEI Israel (or as it’s called the Forum 15, which is the forum of 15 cities in Israel that adopted ICLEI regulations).
This is paid for by you, and taxpayers worldwide (not only in the U.S.), without your knowledge or consent, as none of us was informed of it and obviously, and you didn’t have had a vote on its implementation. This U.N. Agenda 21 is responsible for the development programs in your city that you are not aware of, behind the mass engineered immigration in the West and heavy population surveillance everywhere (as with “smart meters” and 5G). You can check the Agenda 21 programs implemented in your city or town by searching Agenda 21 and the name of your city in Google. You’ll find them this way. I found these programs implemented in Haifa, the city where I live.
According to ICLEI’s official website, this NGO comprises “12 mega-cities, 100 super-cities and urban regions, 450 large cities as well as 450 medium-sized cities and towns in 84 countries.” This NGOs stated goal is that “By 2050, a third of all humans will be living in cities.”

MEMBERS & PARTICIPATING CITIES | ICLEI Kaohsiung Capacity Center

kcc.iclei.org

They also condition children to use sustainable transport which is closely tied to Agenda 21’s population management program, in attempt to bring most people into megacities and away from rural areas which will be deemed “open spaces” for wildlife and be more easily controlled by using public transport.
Photo: Taken from the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.
And below you can see the explanation:
Recently we became familiar with a Swedish teenage girl called Greta Thunberg who according to mainstream media – that promotes agenda 21 and global warming/climate change – helps raise the awareness to climate issues (BBC).
Again, we can see here how children and teenagers and even children are being conditioned to such beliefs without perhaps realizing that they are being used to promote this agenda. If the cabal doesn’t succeed one way (as with Al Gore), they will push their agenda in another way.
Photo: cfact.org
My primary concern here was that a hidden agenda is being masked as a beneficial plan for humanity, while being exactly the opposite. In reality, it’s a well-crafted lie to slip past our scrutiny. The upshot of all this is removing national sovereignty and empowering the U.N. to gradually take control over what was once national policies. “It will remove and destroy all constitutions, restrict free speech and disarm the people. When Agenda 21 is fully realized, the United Nations will be in possession of all guns and subsequently, there will be no opposition to their control.” (The Coveners League).
Paul McGuire, an internationally recognized prophecy expert, speaker, minister, and author writes in his book The Babylon Code that,
“The true agenda of Agenda 21[/2030] is to establish a global government, global economic system, and global religion. When U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon spoke of ‘a dream of a world of peace and dignity for all’ this is no different than when the Communists promised the people a ‘worker’s paradise.’”
Is It Legal?
As this plan is covertly implemented in the name of U.N. Agenda 21 by an NGO called ICLEI, none of us had been informed about it or have voted for it in any way; it basically leads to the loss of personal freedom and sovereignty worldwide. This is a deceit of humanity rooted in darkness and our complicit ignorance, which allows the U.N. to implement this treacherous plan. This is totally undemocratic “and it relies on our passive, ill-informed acceptance of ‘authorities’.”
What Is Codex Alimentarius?
This is a term used for the food regulations that were written and ratified in 2009. In my research, I found a connection between IG Farben (former BAYER, BASF, HOECHST) and the food laws ratified by the UN. It raises many important questions such as: How are these regulations connected to the depopulation agenda? And why is our food filled with toxins and elements that risk our health? Are there really too many people on earth? Is the World Health Organization interested in our general wellbeing?
I found out that Nazis like Fritz ter Meer, a former executive member of IG Farben (which produced and supplied the Zyklon B to the death camps during the Second World War), who was incarcerated for fifteen years in prison after being convicted in the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, was employed by the U.N. after being released. He was part of the committee designed to plan the food resources for humanity that devised the Codex Alimentarius. (This is an UN-sponsored global food standards body, which criminalizes the production of healthy nutrition both commercially and at your home, whether it’s organic food, your dietary supplements, or even your organic garden). Dr. Rima Laibow talks about these regulations, which has determined that vitamins are toxins and therefore to be limited in consumption to ineffective dosages, and which includes irradiating the food supply to destroy all nutrients in our food, and to switch to the GMO foods to be consumed by the masses. This alone will lead to the death of three billion people worldwide in the next few decades according to Dr. Rima Laibow, according to Awaken to the Truth.
The World Health Organization confirms these estimates, according to AskMarion Blog.
Here is more explanation on those behind the outlining of this plan:
“Just fifteen years after they were convicted in the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, Bayer, BASF and Hoechst were again the architects of the next major human rights offences. In 1962, they established the Codex Alimentarius Commission.” (Remark made by the Dr. Rath Health Foundation)”.
Why Don’t People Hear About This Plan?
Most people use mainstream media, including TV, newspapers, radios and other means to keep informed, which suppresses this information; those in power control mainstream media and don’t want you to be aware of this plan. This media has denied the existence of such a plan for years, despite the existence of a book entitled “Agenda 21” (350 pages) published by the UN.
Photo: The U.N.
So if you don’t rely on alternative media coverage, it’s improbable that you’ll find information about this vast global plan and all of its goals.9 If the public worldwide had become aware of such a plan, they would immediately rise up against it and stop its implementation, which is definitely something “the powers that be” don’t want. So they have introduced this plan incrementally by using appealing wording like “sustainable development” or some other “green”-sounding term so people would gladly accept it (as fascist regimes have always done). However, it is not about environmental sustainability at all. Its true goals are implemented by deception, concealing its real aim to take over the entire planet and all its assets by a handful of people.
Those promoting this agenda include royalty (such as Prince Charles who is an avid advocate of this plan, as can be seen in his speech ‘The New Environmental Agenda’), top politicians like Obama, who addressed the U.N. General Assembly on September 27, 2015 and stated that the U.N. blueprint “is one of the smartest investments we can make in our own future.” Bureaucrats, CEOs and the top of international banks and corporations like Hugh Grant, the CEO of Monsanto, said, “This place is getting busier and more crowded. As long as you’ve got money in your back pocket and you drive your station wagon to the supermarket on weekends, then it’s out of sight, out of mind, so far.” The lifestyle of the “global elite” with their private trains and jets, fleets of cars, and palaces and their businesses are excluded from this plan and continue to be considered sustainable.
Chemtrails
In 2013, after finding out that “chemtrails” do exist, I started writing to well-known activists on this topic like Dane Winington (geoengineeringwatch.org site); especially, after feeling distraught and helpless about it. I was sick, my throat hurt, and there was no one I could turn to except for those activists reporting and sharing health tips on how to maintain our health and sanity when all this insane information comes out.
First, after realizing this phenomenon, I took a lot of pictures and then one day I noticed two airplanes spraying and leaving these white trails behind them that other planes didn’t leave. This occurred so many times that a friend and I just watched these planes. She also took some usable photos and videos and posted them on Facebook. I started feeling helpless and hopeless seeing these unmarked airplanes spraying and being unable to do anything except to watch them spraying their poison.
Later on, I also found out that not only do they spray from airplanes, but they also use underwater jet streams in the oceans aimed at our beaches where it’s relevant.
The founder of this site Geoengineering Watch, Dane Winington, together with others filed a lawsuit against the authorities (the regime), who are supposedly behind this crime against humanity stating that HAARP is being used as a weapon that induces climate change.
I found out about a patent for H.A.A.R.P (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) that it has installations worldwide, which together with chemtrails they can actually create earthquakes, tsunamis, and other “natural” disasters. Cobra (the resistance movement) also calls it ionosphere heaters (the most famous one is located in Alaska, but such facilities can be found worldwide). The map was published on ClimateViewer News.
Photo: GeoengineeringWatch.org
I watched videos that people worldwide uploaded on YouTube showing strange colorful “clouds” half an hour before a “natural” disaster occurred.
U.S Black Budget to Spray the Populace like Roaches
I found out that a secret “black” budget of former President Obama sponsoring our own demise; shockingly, I discovered that we unknowingly finance our own genocide (Secret Presidential Chemtrail Budget Uncovered—Congress Exceeds Billions To Spray Populace Like Roaches, according to the IntelHub.com and that it goes on for decades. Here’s the words of Dane Winington on the ongoing chemtrails / Geoengineering: “Historical records prove beyond doubt that climate engineering has been fully deployed on a substantial scale for over 65 years (hurricane suppression for over 53 years), so why do major publications continue to lie about this blatant reality? Because that is what they are paid to do. Once global populations fully grasp the gravity of the biosphere collapse that is rapidly unfolding around them (further exacerbated by Geoengineering), our paradigm will overturn. The power structure is trying desperately to hide this reality for as long as possible. Unfortunately, most environmental groups and organizations are major participants in Geoengineering denial. I and several other activists just attended a global warming presentation with standing room only, we made sure that the Geoengineering subject was not omitted from this event.” (GeoengineeringWatch.org)
According to this agenda (Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030), humans are on the same level as animals. We are to be managed like flora and fauna. Behind it all is a materialistic and secularized view of humanity, which rejects the idea humans are sacred and part of the divine!
Needless to say, this is just the tip of the iceberg in regards to this hideous agenda, which I detail in my book, Mass Awakening. As the title indicates this covers the real intent to control humanity by cutting us off from our higher sources, but I believe we will win this battle and show the methods I and others employ to keep our connection and fight back.
How Do We Know that We Are on a Positive Timeline and that We’re Being Saved?
David Wilcock argues that if what Alex Jones, who discussed this depopulation agenda by the cabal for years, including the FEMA camps in the U.S., succeeded, we wouldn’t be here.
I feel that it needs to be emphasized: If what the cabal/the elites planned for us all would have worked as they wished and implemented, and there were no white hats, you wouldn’t have been here reading this article. They have done everything to curb fertility and depopulate the planet but we are still here and they, the cabal, is losing. Remember this.
WWG1WGA
I used some photos in this article that I couldn’t find their creators. I tried to find them. If you know them please contact me and give me their names and links to their sites to give them credit.

 

[dero50]

Any society that will kill babies will kill anyone else for whatever reason they deem necessary. I've always said as they kill babies watch what they do with the elderly and infirm.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

Biological Weapons, Bioterrorism, and Vaccines

A biological attack may seem more like a plot element in an action film than a realistic threat. Biological attacks, however, have occurred in the past.

www.historyofvaccines.org

Biological Weapons, Bioterrorism, and Vaccines Military smallpox vaccination Department of Defense

A biological attack by terrorists or a national power may seem more like a plot element in an action film than a realistic threat. And indeed, the possibility of such an attack may be very remote. Biological attacks, however, have occurred in the past, one as recently at 2001. Accordingly, a collection of U.S. government agencies are involved in planning responses to potential biological attacks.
Bioweapon threats could include the deliberate release by attackers of an agent that causes one or more of a variety of different diseases. Public health authorities have developed a system to prioritize biological agents according to their risk to national security. Category A agents are the highest priority, and these are disease agents that pose a risk to national security because they can be transmitted from person to person and/or result in high mortality, and/or have high potential to cause social disruption. These are anthrax, botulism (via botulinum toxin, which is not passable from person to person), plague, smallpox, tularemia, and a collection of viruses that cause hemorrhagic fevers, such as Ebola, Marburg, Lassa, and Machupo. These disease agents exist in nature (with the exception of smallpox, which has been eradicated in the wild), but they could be manipulated to make them more dangerous.
Category B agents are moderately easy to disseminate and result in low mortality. These include brucellosis, glanders, Q fever, ricin toxin, typhus fever, and other agents. Category C agents include emerging disease agents that could be engineered for mass dissemination in the future, such as Nipah virus. (This index of possible threats from the CDC lists all Category A, B, and C agents. Note that chemical weapons, such as those involving nonbiological substances such as chlorine gas, are not included.)
The use of effective vaccines would likely protect lives and limit disease spread in a biological weapons emergency. Licensed vaccines are currently available for a few threats, such as anthrax and smallpox, and research is underway to develop and produce vaccines for other threats, such as tularemia, Ebola virus, and Marburg virus. Many bioweapon disease threats, however, lack a corresponding vaccine, and for those that do, significant challenges exist to their successful use in an emergency situation.
What Is a Bioterror Threat?
The draft Model State Emergency Health Powers Act of 2001, which is a document designed to guide legislative bodies as they draft laws regarding public health emergencies, has defined bioterrorism as “the intentional use of any microorganism, virus, infectious substance, or biological product that may be engineered as a result of biotechnology, or any naturally occurring or bioengineered component of any such microorganism, virus, infectious substance, or biological product, to cause death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism in order to influence the conduct of government or to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.” Biological warfare and bioterrorism are often used interchangeably, but bioterrorism usually refers to acts committed by a sub-national entity, rather than a country.
How Likely Is a Biological Attack to Happen?
Expert opinions differ on the plausibility of a biological attack. The U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Intelligence Council stated in 2008 that bioterrorism is a more likely threat than nuclear terrorism. That same year, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell revealed that of all weapons of mass destruction, biological weapons were his personal greatest worry (McConnell, 2008). Other defense experts and scientists insist that the possibility of any attack, especially a large-scale one, is small, given the immense challenges to cultivating, weaponizing, and deploying biological agents. For example, the technical difficulties in aerosolizing a disease agent and dispersing it accurately and widely while maintaining its virulence are immense. Regardless, most biosecurity experts acknowledge that the potential of an attack should not be ignored. Moreover, preparations for a biological attack will likely benefit the response to other kinds of public health emergencies.
History Biological Weapons Biological weapons are not just a 21st century concern: humans have used infectious agents in conflicts for hundreds of years. Below are a few examples.
In a 1336 attempt to infect besieged city dwellers, Mongol attackers in what is now the Ukraine used catapults to hurl the bodies of bubonic plague victims over the city walls of Caffa.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

Cont...

Tunisian forces used plague-tainted clothing as a weapon in the 1785 siege of La Calle.
British officers discussed plans to intentionally transmit smallpox to Native Americans during Pontiac’s Rebellion near Fort Pitt (present-day Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) in 1763. It is not clear whether they actually carried out these plans. But, whatever its source, smallpox did spread among Natives Americans in the area during and after that rebellion.
The Japanese used plague as a biological weapon during the Sino-Japanese War in the late 1930s and 1940s. They filled bombs with plague-infected fleas and dropped them from airplanes onto two Chinese cities; they also used cholera and shigella as weapons in other attacks. An estimated 580,000 Chinese people died as a result of the Japanese bioweapons program (Martin et al., 2007).
The U.S. military developed biological weapons and investigated their effects in the 20th century. The U.S. Army’s Biological Warfare Laboratories was based at Camp (later Fort) Detrick, Maryland, from 1949 to 1969. The program produced and weaponized several biological agents, including anthrax and botulinum toxin, though the biological weapons were never used in conflicts. President Richard Nixon ended the biological weapons program 1969, and U.S. biological weapons were destroyed. U.S. research into biological weapons since that time has focused on defensive measures, such as immunization and response.
In 1975, the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) came into force. More than 100 nations, including the United States, have ratified this international treaty, which aims to end the development and production of bioweapons. In spite of the agreement, bioweapon threats from fringe groups, terrorists, and nations not committed to or observing the convention continue to worry public health authorities.
The former Soviet Union is known to have produced large quantities of smallpox virus and many other disease agents in its bioweapons program long after it signed the BTWC. In the 1970s, it stockpiled tons of smallpox virus and maintained production capability at least until 1990. The Soviet Union also sponsored an anthrax weapon program; an accidental release of a small amount of weaponized anthrax from a military research facility in 1979 led to at least 70 deaths. The U.S.S.R. claimed that it destroyed its bioweapons stock and dismantled the bioweapons program in the late 1980s, but most experts are skeptical that all stocks, equipment, and records were destroyed. They regard it as possible that illicit transfer of biological materials or knowledge has occurred. So, while only two known sources of smallpox virus exist, both in World Health Organization reference laboratories, many suspect that other groups—whether national or subnational—may have unknown quantities of smallpox virus as well as other remnants of the Soviet biological weapons program.
On a similar note, in the 1990s Iraq admitted to United Nations inspectors that it had produced thousands of tons of concentrated botulinum toxin and had developed bombs to deploy large quantities of botulinum toxin and anthrax. Though the Iraqi government abandoned its bioweapons program after the first Iraq war, the status and whereabouts of the large quantities of infectious material they developed are not known.
Other groups of current concern to biosecurity experts include Al Qaeda, which had a large-scale bioweapons effort in Afghanistan. This was destroyed when the U.S. bombed its facilities and training camps in 2001. Al Qaeda’s program today is likely to be much smaller in scale because so much of its material and intellectual capital was destroyed. Most experts think that Al Qaeda’s current attempts to reconstitute the weapons are focused on chemical weapons rather than on biological ones. At a national level, a 2007 U.S. military assessment of biological threats included the following overview of bioweapons programs, “According to an unclassified U.S. Department of State report in 2005, nations suspected of continued offensive biological warfare programs in violation of the BWC [Biological Weapons Convention] include China, Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria, and possibly Cuba” (Martin et al., 2007).
Contemporary U.S. Attacks Oregon followers of Indian guru Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh mounted an attack that sickened nearly 800 people with typhoid fever in 1984. Cult members introduced bacteria into salad bars and other restaurant food receptacles after their attempts to contaminate the local water supply failed. They hoped to influence local election results by preventing residents from voting. Though 43 people were hospitalized, no one was killed, and the wrongdoers were prosecuted.
A more recent U.S. biological attack occurred just after the Al Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. An unknown actor mailed a powder containing infectious anthrax spores to two U.S. senators and several media outlets. Five people died from anthrax after exposure to the material in the letters, and 17 became ill. Medical personnel offered the anthrax vaccine as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to 1,727 potentially exposed people who were also taking antibiotics to counter anthrax. Of those people, 199 agreed to take the vaccine and received all doses of it.
Law enforcement investigators reached the conclusion that a U.S. biodefense researcher who worked for a military laboratory at Fort Detrick conducted the attacks. The researcher, Bruce Ivins, killed himself in 2008 during the investigation. Ivins, however, was never formally charged with a crime, and no direct evidence links him to the attacks. Speculation about his motives centers on Ivins’s investment in maintaining national interest in an anthrax vaccine he worked on and also on his apparent mental instability. In fact, one might argue that these attacks should be considered a biocrime rather than bioterror incident if the motive was not an attempt to influence the conduct of government or to intimidate a civilian population.
Preparation for Biological Attacks
In 2001, before the 9/11 attacks, several U.S. agencies and academic groups conducted a simulated biological attack, codenamed Dark Winter, in which smallpox virus was the weapon. The exercise, which operated on an assumption of about 12 million available doses of smallpox vaccine, based on the then-available stores of smallpox vaccine, “demonstrated serious weaknesses in the public health system that could prevent an effective response to bioterrorism or severe naturally occurring infectious diseases” (“Overview of Potential Agents of Biological Terrorism,” Southern Illinois University School of Medicine).
One key weakness exposed in the exercise was a shortage of vaccine; this has since been addressed, at least in the case of smallpox, with the addition of hundreds of millions of doses of smallpox vaccine to U.S. vaccine reserves. Other difficulties exposed were the conflicts between federal and state priorities in managing resources, a shortage of medical infrastructure to deal with mass casualties, and the crucial need for U.S. citizens to trust and cooperate with leaders. The reaction of those exposed to anthrax in the post-9/11 attacks illustrates the challenges embedded in the latter issue: a study published in 2008 suggested that the reticence of many exposed individuals to take the anthrax vaccine reflected their fear of the vaccine’s side effects and distrust of medical personnel (Quinn, 2008). In any large-scale bioterror incident, this distrust may be a major hurdle to effective containment of an infectious agent.
Authorities hope that disaster planning and the devising of effective medical countermeasures for biological attacks will both minimize the impact of any such attack and also act as deterrent to those who might consider such an attack. If the attack could be easily contained and addressed, then a terrorist or unfriendly nation might have less incentive to initiate one.
Agencies Involved in Bioweapon Response
A variety of U.S. federal, state, and local agencies are involved in public health emergency preparedness and response. The U.S. Congress funds the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response (PHPR) to build and strengthen national preparedness for public health emergencies caused by natural, accidental, or intentional events. Part of the funding supports the Strategic National Stockpile, which manages stores of vaccines, drugs, and medical supplies that may be deployed in national emergencies. (See below for more on the SNS.)
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) houses several offices involved in public health emergency response. The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) was created after Hurricane Katrina and is responsible for leadership in prevention, preparation, and response to the adverse health effects of public health emergencies and disasters. ASPR conducts research and builds federal emergency medical operational capabilities. Within ASPR, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) is responsible for the development and purchase of the necessary vaccines, drugs, therapies, and diagnostic tools for public health medical emergencies.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security includes several groups that address bioweapon threats. The National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center (NBACC) examines the scientific basis of the risks posed by biological threats. NBACC's National Biological Threat Characterization Center (NBTCC) conducts studies and experiments on current and future biological threats, assesses vulnerabilities and conducts risk assessments, and determines potential impacts to guide the development of countermeasures such as detectors, drugs, vaccines, and decontamination technologies. Other offices are responsible for responding to and analyzing bioweapon attacks after they occur to help investigators identify perpetrators and determine the origin and method of attack.
State and local health departments, as well as public and private hospitals and local law enforcement agencies, would also be involved in responding to a bioweapon public health emergency. Their roles are outlined in national response plans and are addressed in detail by organization-specific plans.
Role of the Food and Drug Administration
The U.S. FDA controls the pathway to licensure for vaccines, treatments, diagnostic tests, and other tools for responding to biological threats. The regulatory requirements for licensure of a vaccine are complex and apply to a multi-step process of safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy testing, and post-licensure surveillance. (See the article Vaccine Development, Testing, and Regulation to read about this non-emergency approval process.) A typical vaccine might be in development and clinical trials for 10 to 20 years before licensure.
In situations when a new vaccine is needed quickly, the FDA has developed rapid alternative pathways to licensure. One option is an accelerated approval path that might apply in the case of a life-threatening disease with an unlicensed vaccine that has meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing options. Second, in other, more drastic threats, the so-called animal rule may be invoked—if research toward a vaccine or treatment would necessitate exposing humans to a toxic threat, then animal studies, rather than previously conducted studies in humans, may be sufficient for approval. To date, these two rapid pathways have not been invoked for vaccines. More information is available at the FDA’s Critical Path Initiative.
U.S. Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is an option in pandemic and bioweapon response for both civilian and military populations. After a declaration of emergency by the Department of Health and Human Services secretary, this program allows for use of an unapproved medical product (or a product that has been approved but not for the specific use applicable to the situation at hand) that is the best available treatment or prevention for the threat in question. EUAs were issued for antiviral treatments, a respirator, and a PCR diagnostic test during the 2009 A/H1N1 pandemic.
One challenge to licensing vaccines for response to bioweapon threats is the absence of some of these disease agents in the natural world. Vaccine efficacy is more difficult to establish when natural exposure to a pathogen is impossible (as with smallpox and other threats) and when human challenge studies are not feasible. The FDA accepts animal testing for proof of efficacy in these cases.
In the fall of 2011, national debate focused on the issue of emergency use of bioweapon vaccines. A simulated anthrax attack code named Dark Zephyr was conducted in February 2011 and raised the questions about the use of anthrax vaccine for post-exposure prophylaxis in children. Researchers have never tested the anthrax vaccine for safety and efficacy in children, though it has been extensively studied in adults and has been given to millions of U.S. servicepeople. After considering the issue in the wake of Dark Zephyr, the National Biodefense Science Board, a federal advisory panel to HHS, decided that testing the vaccine in children is ethically justifiable, given that it would provide information important to the health and well-being of any child victims of an attack. Critics have disputed that thinking, stating that the possibility of an anthrax attack is too remote to justify exposing children to any risk at all. HHS has not established a timeline for further action on studying anthrax vaccine in children.
In the meantime, if a bioweapon incident involving anthrax were to occur, adults would be given three doses of the vaccine, along with oral antibiotics, as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) under Emergency Use Authorization, as the vaccine is not currently licensed for PEP nor for use in a three-dose regimen. Children might receive the vaccine under FDA approval of an investigation new drug protocol (IND). Use of anthrax vaccine in children under an IND protocol is not ideal, as the protocol is more suited to clinical trials or to an emergency situation for a single patient.
Vaccine Response to Bioweapon Threats
In a wide-scale emergency in which a vaccine is available or potentially available, a large supply of vaccine would be necessary and would be needed quickly. Currently, the U.S. Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) has enough smallpox vaccine to vaccinate every person in the country in the event of a bioweapon attack. The stockpile also holds millions of doses of anthrax vaccine, other vaccines, antiviral medications, and other medical supplies. Quick deployment of a vaccine is essential to its success in preventing disease: for some diseases, vaccinating after exposure may have no effect on preventing disease, and for others, vaccination must occur very quickly after exposure for prophylaxis to work. In the case of smallpox, PEP is most likely to be effective when given within four days of exposure to the virus. Plans provide for smallpox vaccine to be shipped starting on the first day of an attack, and it would continue to be shipped from the stockpile to the rest of the country as needed in the five to six days following the attack.
Biosecurity experts have suggested that the use of agents for passive immunization could play a role in response to certain bioweapon attacks. (Passive immunization is the introduction of antibodies taken from immune donors into nonimmune individuals. The “borrowed” antibodies offer short-lived protection from certain diseases. See our article on Passive Immunization for more information.) The advantage of using antibodies rather than vaccines to respond to a bioterror event is that antibodies provide immediate protection, whereas a protective response generated by a vaccine is not immediate and in some cases may depend on a booster dose given at a later date.
Candidates for this potential application of passive immunization include botulinum toxin, tularemia, anthrax, and plague. For most of these targets, only animal studies have been conducted, and so the use of passive immunization in potential bioweapon events is still in experimental stages.
Conclusion
A biological attack by terrorists or an unfriendly nation is a remote possibility that nevertheless demands public health emergency response planning. Several multi-agency simulations have exposed weaknesses in systems designed to respond to biological emergencies. These exercises have helped to focus planning efforts on the need for emergency plans to address the potential for a large bioweapons event to overwhelm medical capabilities, cause widespread illness and death, and lead to economic and social disruption. The successful deployment of vaccines, antibodies, and other medications in a bioweapon event will depend on a number factors, such as how many people the attack has the potential to harm, the stability of the transportation system in an emergency, the availability of viable vaccine and drugs, and the ability of the public health system to communicate with the public and get the vaccines and medications into the people who need them.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

12/4/17: GENOMIC WARHEAD - GENETIC EXTINCTION TECHNOLOGY

We are all literally living through and witnessing an active genocidal Holocaust taking place right now, and it’s all being carried out in the name of “science” while touting vaccines…

www.groundzeromedia.org

Ground Zero, Recent Shows 12/4: GENOMIC WARHEAD – GENETIC EXTINCTION TECHNOLOGY GENOMIC WARHEAD GENETIC EXTINCTION TECHNOLOGY
The history of biological warfare is nearly as old as the history of warfare itself. In ancient times, warring parties poisoned wells or used arrowheads with natural toxins. Mongol invaders catapulted plague victims into besieged cities, probably causing the first great plague epidemic in Europe, and British settlers distributed smallpox-infected blankets to Native Americans.
However, more and more we are learning that secretly, there are genetic engineers developing weapons that are far more sophisticated. Biologiocal weapons that target certain groups of people are becoming more advanced.
The genetically engineered ‘superbug’— highly lethal and resistant to environmental influence or any medical treatment, is only a small part of this story. Much more alarming, from an arms-control perspective, are the possibilities of developing completely novel weapons on the basis of knowledge provided by biomedical research — developments that are already taking place.
Such weapons, designed for new types of conflicts and warfare scenarios, secret operations or sabotage activities, are not mere science fiction, but are increasingly becoming a reality that we have to face.
In debates about genetic engineering and biological weapons, it is often stated that natural pathogens are sufficiently dangerous and deadly, and that genetic engineering is not necessary to turn them into more effective biological weapons.
The same can be said for conventional weapons being deadly and dangerous and yet we have nuclear capabilities, and advanced artificial intelligence capable of launching nuclear warheads at a predetermined target.
Today, access to highly virulent agents and strains are increasingly regulated and restricted. One In particular is smallpox, which was eradicated more than 20 years ago.
Officially it is only stored at two high-security laboratories in the USA and Russia, and it is at present virtually impossible to gain access to these virus stocks. But considering the rapid development of molecular biology, it is only a question of time before the artificial synthesis of agents or new combinations of agents becomes possible.
A research team at the State University of New York at Stony Brook chemically synthesized an artificial polio virus from scratch. They started with the genetic sequence of the agent, which is available online, ordered small, tailor-made DNA sequences and combined them to reconstruct the complete viral genome.
In a final step, the synthesized DNA was brought to life by adding a chemical cocktail that initiated the production of a living, pathogenic virus.
In principle, this method could be used to synthesize other viruses with similarly short DNA sequences. This includes Ebola virus, Marburg virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus and the pneumonic plague.
The reason they it synthesized these pathogens is just to see if they could do it.
If this was done elsewhere in the world, it would be seen as an act of war.
The global norm against biological weapons, laid down in the 1925 Geneva Convention and the 1972 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, clearly contributed to the fact that few countries have been engaged in research into offensive bio-warfare during recent decades.
Science is capable of genetically modifying our foods and now genetically modifying a pathogen — force multiplying its viral capabilities can now be seen as genetic extinction technology.
It is the mother of all genomic discoveries that rivals the nuclear warfare programs developed in the 1940’s.
New technological possibilities met new military concepts in the USA and led to a renewed interest in weapons that, until recently, had been banned and rejected.
Emails recently made available through the Freedom of Information Act now reveal that A US military agency is investing $100m in genetic extinction technologies that could wipe out malarial mosquitoes, invasive rodents or other species.
The documents suggest that the US’s secretive Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has become the world’s largest funder of “gene drive” research.
The UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is debating whether to impose a moratorium on the gene research next year and several southern countries fear a possible military application.
UN diplomats confirmed that the new email release would worsen the “bad name” of gene drives in some circles.
The use of genetic extinction technologies in bio-weapons is the stuff of nightmares—so far the documents that are declassified tell us that the science is being developed to render extinct – many pests and vermin.
Cutting-edge gene editing tools such as Crispr-Cas9 work by using a synthetic RNA to cut into DNA strands and then insert, alter or remove targeted traits. These might, for example, distort the sex-ratio of mosquitoes to effectively wipe out malarial populations.
However what will that do to the ecosystem and to species that depend on these mosquitoes for food sources.
I am sure that many of the classified documents and data have information on how humans can also be targeted with genetic extinction technology.
Between 2008 and 2014, the US government spent about $820m on synthetic biology. Since 2012, most of this has come from DARPA and other military agencies.
Chemical and biological weapons conjure in the mind terror and have been repeatedly cited as a pretext for both acts of military aggression and even entire wars. Scenes of soldiers and civilians choking on toxic chemicals or covered in boils after exposure are horrific images both geopolitically and in fiction.
A US policy think tank as early as 2000 in a publication titled, “Rebuilding America’s Defense” Project for the New American Century” is a virtual blueprint of the plans and means the US sought to utilize toward achieving global hegemony, would make particular note of bio-weapons and the use of genotype-specific weapons, stating:
“Although it may take several decades for the process of transformation to unfold, in time, the art of warfare on air, land, and sea will be vastly different than it is today, and “combat” likely will take place in new dimensions: in space, “cyber-space,” and perhaps the world of microbes.”
Remember that this was the same publication that prior to the 911 attacks indicated that an increase of defense spending would have America’s blessing if there was a “new Pearl Harbor” to galvanize the citizens into demanding a new war foothold.
In 2004, The Guardian newspaper printed and article with the headline, “Could you make a genetically targeted weapon?” and it said:
“The prospect that rogue scientists could develop bioweapons designed to target certain ethnic groups based on their genetic differences was raised this week in a report by the British Medical Association (BMA).
The report, Biotechnology, Weapons and Humanity II, warns that construction of genetic weapons “is now approaching reality”. Such “genetic bombs” could contain anthrax or bubonic plague tailored to activate only when genes indicated the infected person was from a particular group.”
The Apartheid regime in South Africa attempted to produce biological weapons to induce infertility among the nation’s black population.
PBS Frontline’s article, “What Happened in South Africa?” would recount:
In 1998 South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission held hearings investigating activities of the apartheid-era government. Toward the end of the hearings, the Commission looked into the apartheid regime’s Chemical and Biological Warfare (CBW) program and allegations that it developed a sterility vaccine to use on black South Africans, employed toxic and chemical poison weapons for political assassination, and in the late 1970s provided anthrax and cholera to Rhodesian troops for use against guerrilla rebels in their war to overthrow Rhodesia’s white minority rule.
While South Africa’s entire Chemical and Biological Warfare program was abhorrent, what is particularly frightening is the use of South Africa’s national vaccination program as a vector for infecting black women with viruses meant to sterilize them. Now that vaccination programs are being pushed globally, there lies the danger that such weapons could be used against entire regions of the planet.
Weeks ago, Prince William called for “urgent depopulation efforts” in Africa. All the while the Plague was ravaging Africa. This form of the plague has been described as rare and is now showing resistance to antibiotic treatments.

Officials from the World Health Organization (WHO) have warned there is a risk the disease could spread to other continents. Scientists also believe the disease – which can kill in 24 hours – could become untreatable in the future if the virus mutates.
At this time evidence is mounting that the plague is a force multiplied genetically modified bio-weapon being used to kill off African populations.
What’s the quickest and easiest way for globalists to eliminate targeted human populations? Release a weaponized infectious disease and let it spread from city to city while using the outbreak to strengthen government funding of the vaccine and pharmaceutical industries. This, of course, is a form of medical genocide.
Vaccines and pharmaceuticals are now confirmed to be routinely used to reduce targeted populations rather than save lives. For example, a bombshell science paper was released that documents the covert infertility chemical being spiked into W.H.O. vaccines administered in African nations.
There is evidence to suggest that there is a covert depopulation program being carried out by the World Health Organization targeting Africans for extermination via infertility chemicals administered under the guise of vaccines.
It was reported that Local governments, told young African women they needed these vaccine injections for their own health and safety. But the real agenda was to cause their bodies to kill their own unborn babies as part of a globalist depopulation agenda. Africa is repeatedly chosen as a testing ground for weaponized depopulation viral and bacterial strains, by the way, which is one reason why so many deadly, hyper-aggressive diseases are found spreading in Africa.
These genocidal tactics are carried out in the name of science and medicine by other following vectors:
• Food supply (laced with infertility chemicals, confirmed by a U.S. science advisor to the President.
• Water supply (heavy metals poisoning, as we recently witnessed in Flint, Michigan)
• Medical experimentation similar to the Tuskegee, Guatemalan prisoner experiments funded by the U.S. government.
• Immunization campaign
• Cancer (disproportionately affects people of darker skin color due to vitamin D deficiency)
• Abortion activities that target blacks in order to harvest baby organ tissue for use in vaccines, which is technically medical cannibalism.
As I have said many times. Timing is everything and as we look at the stories of genetic tinkering on a grand scale and the calls for depopulation we have to address the issue of the possibility of a major cull that has begun around the world.
There are a number of other points to ponder as the United Nations has become more aggressive on their stance for global sustainability, issuing reports on human effects on wildlife habitat, which was the basis for Prince William’s comment on over-population.
I cannot stress enough that there has a been an ongoing push for depopulation using the “climate change ” narrative which claims human populations must be reduced to save the planet.
Africa’s current population explosion makes it the highest priority target for government-run depopulation efforts. We can also speculate that some of these depopulation exercises have taken place in Brazil where mosquitoes were used as a vector to spread the Zika virus which created severe birth defects in children.
We are all literally living through and witnessing an active genocidal Holocaust taking place right now, and it’s all being carried out in the name of “science” while touting vaccines, GMOs and Planned Parenthood. The “final solution” goal is the complete extermination of people in an effort to free up resources for the elite.
Thanks to RNA interference experiments, a genetic extinction technology can be administered to a large population thus reducing it and it can be done with plausible deniability.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

“Mystery virus” spreading like wildfire across U.S. population, putting people in bed for a MONTH… is this a depopulation experiment? - DC Dirty Laundry

What is the source of this virus?

dcdirtylaundry.com

“Mystery virus” spreading like wildfire across U.S. population, putting people in bed for a MONTH… is this a depopulation experiment?
Isabelle Z. January 13, 2019
(Natural News) A cough can be rather annoying, especially when it keeps you up at night, but you can usually take comfort from knowing that it tends to run its course rather quickly and you’ll be back to normal in no time. Unfortunately, a new virus is going around that is turning what is normally a week-long nuisance into a month-long nightmare – and speculation abounds regarding its origin.
Physicians around the nation are reporting a spike in cases of people suffering from a very unusual cough. It’s caused by a virus and it’s lasting anywhere from four to six weeks – and in some cases, even longer.
One doctor, Texas Health Dallas’s Dr. Gary Gross, says he has been seeing at least a patient a day suffering from the virus, and he lamented the fact that it lasts so long without seeming to get better.
Dr. Gross told CBS DFW that the virus has no quick fix. Patients have no choice but to let it run its course, although some medications can help soothe the cough somewhat. Patients are advised to get plenty of sleep as well as lots of fluids.

Emergency medicine specialists in Cincinnati have warned the public about the virus, which they say has caused a surge in patients presenting with upper respiratory symptoms such as a cough, congestion, and shortness of breath.
Bethesda North Hospital’s Dr. Kenneth Patton describes the difficulties patients with the virus experience in breathing, saying: “They are retracting, their ribs are doing a lot of work. You can see their neck muscles, you can really see that they are having a hard time breathing.”
Patients’ biggest complaint, however, is the duration, with many people stuck in bed for weeks. Avoiding the virus is a matter of washing your hands frequently and keeping your distance from people who are sick. Once you get it, however, you’ll simply have to wait it out.
What is the source of this virus? Naturally, any time a new virus like this emerges seemingly out of nowhere, it’s hard not to wonder if it could be part of a depopulation bioweapon experiment.
Plant Pathology Professor Dr. Cyril Broderick has stated his belief that the Ebola virus was manufactured and then released intentionally in Africa as a weaponized virus. Other experts agreed with his theory. Meanwhile, in the wake of the Zika outbreak, governments in Latin America urged women to avoid pregnancy because of the potential for birth defects.
The idea that depopulation efforts are underway is bolstered by the ongoing push toward reducing human populations in the name of somehow saving the planet from “global warming” and the testing of vaccines and experimental drugs in African nations. Influential names like Bill Gates have openly declared that reducing the human population could help “save” the planet, and The New York Times recently printed an editorial arguing that the end of humanity would actually be a good thing for the planet.
There’s also the fact that pharmaceutical companies have a lot to gain in the wake of such outbreaks by developing new vaccines and drugs. In fact, a team of researchers at California’s Scripps Research Institute have engineered a deadly new bird flu strain that can infect humans on the pretense of learning what such a virus could do in order to prepare for it. The mutations they’ve created allow the virus to make its way into human lung cells. What could possibly go wrong?
When you pay attention to everything that is going on in the world today, it’s not a stretch to question whether depopulation efforts are behind viruses that emerge mysteriously and suddenly affect a significant number of people.
Sources for this article include: DFW.CBSLocal.com

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

waronwethepeople.com

www.waronwethepeople.com

HPV Vaccine Risks Include Genocide: Politicians endorse cancer and Depopulation by Dr. Leonard Horowitz and Sherri Kane
CDC CONCEALS HPV VACCINE RISKS: GENOCIDE & MORE EXPOSED by Dr. Leonard Horowitz and Sherri Kane
(1/17/2014)
According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)HPV is a “sexually transmitted” disease for which two “reliable” vaccines are available for “prevention.”

The human papillomavirus (HPV) types that cause most cervical cancers, they claim, are whacked by Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline) and Gardasil (Merck). They also credit Gardasil for preventing genital warts as well as anal, vulvar and vaginal cancers.

“Both vaccines are given in 3 shots over 6 months,” they promote.

CDC Official Malfeasance
The CDC’s commitment to “prevention” would be laughable if not for the fact it is genocidal.
Genocide was originally defined as “the mass killing of people for profit, politics, and/or ideology.” Bingo, the CDC is implicated thrice.

Money makes the world of “disease control” go round. The CDC spends less than 3 percent of its budget on prevention, which helps to explain why its original name–”Centers for Disease Control & Prevention”–has been dropped, more accurately identifying an agency controlling the spread of diseases largely through vaccinations, including the HPV vaccines.

The vaccine industry is notorious for conducting “sexually transmitted disease” frauds implicating the CDC in a conspiracy to commit depopulation.

Remember where HIV/AIDS came from? Not “African green monkeys” as Dr. Robert Gallo claimed, nor even a gay flight attendant traveling between New York and San Francisco as “PHARMAWHORES” in the media and medicine claimed. HIV/AIDS came from chimpanzees used to develop the hepatitis B vaccine, according to massive scientific evidence suppressed by the “medical dieties” at the CDC and elsewhere.
Hepatitis was also said to be a sexually-transmitted disease, primarily. But seeking the science that explains where it first emerged and you find it was originally called the “Australian Antigen (AuAg)“ according to early cancer industry (NCI) records.

Read Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola–Nature, Accident or Intentional? It tells the story, referencing solid science, showing that AuAg was first taken by Dr. Saul Krugman at the New York University Medical Center under U.S. Army contract. Krugman’s “vaccine research” required human guinea pigs on behalf of the Merck drug company’s collaboration with the U.S. military. Gay men in NYC were selected, as well as Willowbrook State School mentally retarded children on Staten Island. Blacks in central Africa also “volunteered” to receive the AuAg test viruses and vaccines that were prepared in CHIMPANZEES.

The rest is recorded history. The gay men who received the AuAg (hepatitis B) vaccines between 1972 and 1974 developed a never-before-seen leukemia-lymphoma-sarcoma immune suppressive disorder beginning in 1976 in New York City. At this same time, the children at Willowbrook who received the vaccine began to die. Geraldo Rivera spun the story claiming the children were simply being “abused.” Willowbrook closed soon thereafter, all except its biological laboratory that continued its covert operations.

To cover Krugman’s trail, and military contract, credit for the “discovery of hepatitis B” and the advancement of an “effective vaccine” was given to decoy doctor Wolf Szmuness (pronounced Shmoo-ness). Great grist for conspiracy theorists, Szmuness worked for the Rockefeller-family-directed New York Blood Center, co-founder of the American Red Cross and what is known today as “blood banking.” Szmuness was also from Poland, and his rise to great prominence in medical history occurred suspiciously, especially because Szmuness vacationed with Catholic priest, Karol Wojtyła, who later became Pope John Paul II.

So “tainted vaccines” best explains how we got the “sexually-transmitted” HIVs and Hep B, C, D . . . etc., etc. , (Aside from the polio vaccines that delivered both polio and pandemic cancers.) Many common cancers have been scientifically linked to co-infections and immune-suppressions from the DNA-viruses, herpes-type mainly, including Epstein Barr and Simian Cytomegalo. These are common viral contaminations of vaccines produced in monkey kidney tissues used by Baxter and Merck companies most notably.
Likeise, HPV is a DNA virus that appears to have a collaborative relationship with herpes viruses in producing cancers. In addition, I suspect that HPV “evolved” from the same labs that infected vaccines, and then humans, with herpes.

But rather than tell the truth and protect We The People, the CDC publishes lies, misrepresentations, and omissions that make the agency criminal, and accountable for the deaths of millions of people, globally.

What’s In the HPV Vaccine?
According to published studies, we are not receiving a “normal or natural virus” at all with the vaccine, if it is, indeed, a vaccine.
According to Lancet’s published study on the “Efficacy of a bivalent L1 virus-like particle vaccine in prevention of infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: a randomised controlled trial,” a lab mutant virus is injected; not what generally causes cervical cancer or even warts.
The mutant virus-like particles carry potential, long-term, serious risks, although in the short term, the drug-industry sponsored publication touted, the vaccine was “safe and highly effective.”

INGREDIENTS (per injection)
Aluminum Salt with possible adjuvant of fat (monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL) 225mcg
Animal and human studies have shown aluminum can cause nerve cell death and that vaccine aluminum adjuvants can allow aluminum to enter the brain, as well as cause inflammation at the injection site leading to chronic joint and muscle pain as well as fatigue.
Sodium Borate 35mcg
This is the main ingredient in Boric Acid. Powdered Boric Acid is often used to kill cockroaches. Sodium Borate is now listed as a dangerous poison. Symptons of Sodium Borate poisoning are very similar to many of the side effects being reported with the Gardasil vaccine.
Polysorbate 80 50mcg
Although Polysorbate 80 is a food additive that enables solubility of flavouring oils with water, injection is quite different. Polysorbate 80 injected into prepubescent rats caused a rapid growth of reproductive organs, but growth was abnormal and the rats were sterile, unable to have children. When used intravenously with vitamins it has been known to cause anaphylactic shock. According to the Polysorbate 80 MSDS, it may be a carcinogenic, (cause cancer), as well as a mutagenic, (birth defects).
L-histidine 0.78mcg
L-histidine is an essential amino acid which is a precursor to allergic reactions. It stimulates the inflammatory response of skin and mucous membranes (one possible cause of the allergic reactions reported). It is also responsible for forming metal bearing enzymes (such as the toxic metal storage protein metallothionein). Metals such as zinc, copper, and nickel are transported by binding to L-histidine and the binding is essential for excretion of excess heavy metals. Many parents of autistic children are quite familiar with Metallothionein and MT deficiency.

Sodium Chloride 9.56mcg
Common neurologically poisonous table salt

Yeast Protein 7mcg
This is a hidden form of MSG, as it creates synthetic free glutamic acid in the processing, which in simpler terms is MSG. Most vaccines contain some hidden form of MSG (eg hydrolysed gelatin) as this feeds the live virus.

Known Side Effects
According to Norma Ericson of SaneVax, Inc., following HPV vaccination, the following occurred (as of Feb. 2011):

• 21,292 reports of adverse events,
• 2092 hospitalizations,
• 8617 emergency room visits,
• 4346 people did not recover from adverse events;
• 689 persons became permanently disabled and
• 93 people died.

“So much for proven safe,” Ericson wrote.

According to the Merck drug company, the Human Papillomavirus Quadrivalent (Types 6, 11, 16, and 18) Vaccine, Recombinant, alerts users to expect the following vaccine reactions:

• swollen glands (neck, armpit, or groin)
• joint pain
• unusual tiredness, weakness, or confusion
• chills
• generally feeling unwell
• leg pain
• shortness of breath
• chest pain
• aching muscles
• muscle weakness
• seizure
• bad stomach ache
• bleeding or bruising more easily than normal
• skin infection

Safety and Efficacy Propaganda

Even the CDC admits that most sexually active people will get HPV at some time in their lives, though most will never even know it. “There are about 40 types of HPV that can infect the genital areas of men and women. Most HPV types cause no symptoms and go away on their own,” says the CDC.

That tells you something important. The few “virus-like particles” used in vaccines only represent ten percent of the infectious strains circulating, and most “cause no symptoms and go away on their own.”

In fact, the infections are meaningless unless the person becomes susceptible to genital warts or cancers from other lifestyle risks, having nothing to do with vaccines.

The CDC loves to use FEAR (False Evidence Appearing Real) to frighten everyone into complying with their genocidal agendas. ”Every year, about 12,000 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer and 4,000 women die from this disease in the U.S.” Censored is the fact that most of the cervical cancer deaths are caused by medical “treatments.” Radiation and chemotherapies are barbaric, compared to the advances in natural healing that have been grossly and criminally negLected by CDC PHARMAWHORES.

The CDC claims that HPV vaccines target “the HPV types that most commonly cause cervical cancer.’

That statement is a downright fraud. These is no evidence what-so-ever that proves that all cervical cancers are CAUSED by the single or multiple stains of HPV misrepresented in the vaccines. Don’t forget, what you get injected, is: a) not what causes HPV infections sexually, and b) doesn’t help you boost general immunity. In fact, the HPV vaccine ingredients tax your body chemistry and general immunity; and predispose you to immune suppression and higher cancer risks.

The CDC states that, “Both vaccines are highly effective in preventing specific HPV types and the most common health problems from HPV,” but this statement is extremely misleading. It gives you the false impression the vaccines are effective against cancers that, as mentioned above, are multi-factorial ailments, resulting not from HPV infection, per se, but from an accumulation of lifestyle risks that people can op to avoid. It is sick and sad that the CDC omits this truth.

The CDC does admit, however, that “the vaccines can only prevent HPV before a person is exposed to it. HPV vaccines do not treat existing HPV infections or HPV-associated diseases.” And they also state that nearly everyone is exposed to HPV by their sexually active years.
So that means that even IF the vaccines were safe and effective, they would be largely useless.

“Research suggests that vaccine protection is long-lasting,” boasts the CDC. But the critical word is “suggests,” which is the weakest term you can use in science to report potential relationships, such as cause and effect. “Current studies (with up to about six years of follow-up data) ,” CDC continued, “indicate that the vaccines are effective, with no evidence of decreasing immunity.”

Six years of observing injected persons tells you nothing about most cancers that grow slowly, expressing eventually decades following viral vaccination injections. And this assessment gives the CDC, FDA, and BigPharma (that did the studies) the benefit of doubt that they did not fudge the data, or eject cancer patients fraudulently from the study to proclaim the vaccines’ safety.
What About Boys?
The quadrivalent vaccine is also toxic and risky for males, ages 9 through 26 years, who have been targeted to receive this vaccine, licensed by the FDA based on the poorly researched speculation that the injections will help prevent anal cancer and genital warts.

Since October 2009, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice’s (a BigPharma front) has authorized that the 3-dose series of quadrivalent HPV vaccine may be given to young boys, but the vaccine is not routinely recommended for males, yet.

Other Ways to Prevent HPV
According to the CDC’s propaganda, “the only sure way to prevent HPV is to avoid all sexual activity.”

If that isn’t a plug for population control, I don’t know what is.

Considering the wisdom of the world’s greatest pioneering microbiologists, “the germ is nothing, the terrain is everything.” In other words, you body’s resistance against infectious diseases depends on its chemistry, more than specific immunity.
The fraudulent CDC, allegedly endorsing prevention, and safe and cost-effective disease solutions, grossly and criminally neglects the following tried and true strategies for whacking all infectious diseases:
• Alkalizing diets and water
• Oxygenation therapies
• Bioenergetic therapies (including OxySilver resonating silver hydrosol)
•Detoxification and immune enhancing strategies for greater resistance against viral expressions.

For low cost, highly effective, natural products that perform the aforementioned functions, shop at HealthyWorldStore.com, or buy from yourself through HealthyWorldAffiliates.com.

Serious Political Considerations
You may have heard that Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill that allegedly enables 12-year-old girls to reject parental authority in deciding to get vaccinated under the pressure of an alleged “mandate.” Yet, this same governor, who ran for U.S. president many years ago, also signed a bill outlawing 18-year-olds from visiting tanning salons without parental consent.

Apparently, Brown is under the influence of either BigPharma or psychotropics.

Even medical doctors rarely acquire enough information about vaccine ingredients, contaminants, and their toxic, possibly deadly, side effects, for their families and patients, because BigPharma and the CDC suppresses truths and promotes lies.

Governor Rick Perry of Texas also attempted similar legislation, and was rebuked by presidential candidate Michele Bachmann.
Mrs. Bachmann accused Perry of practicing “crony capitalism.” She criticized Perry for seeking to force “innocent little 12-year-old girls or 11-year-old girls” to take a “potentially dangerous” vaccine injection.
Bachmann noted that Perry’s former chief of staff had been a lobbyist for Merck when Perry tried to mandate Merck’s HPV vaccine. She alleged that Mike Toomey, might have played in pushing the executive order as a lobbyist for the drug company.

She correctly noted that Merck had generated thousands of dollars in donations to Mr. Perry.

“It was a $5,000 contribution that I had received from them,” said Mr. Perry, who actually lied six-fold, having received $30,000 in donations, records showed. “I raised about $30 million—if you’re saying that I can be bought for $5,000, I’m offended.”

Perry was also a staunch supporter of a 2007 ballot proposition that created a $3 billion Cancer Research Institute in Texas. So his cancer industry allegiance solidly explains his actions.

Perry defended his intended order as sound policy to prevent cancer, saying: “Texas is a place that, day in and day out, protects life.”

But Perry’s enthusiasm for protecting life didn’t extend to death row in Texas’s prisons, where he approved the execution of 234 people.

“The governors’ bills that allegedly make HPV vaccines mandatory for children prove that they are willing to do anything for the globalists’ profitable depopulation agenda,” wrote investigative journalist Sherri Kane, featured in the movie PHARMAWHORES: The SHOWTIME Sting of Penn & Teller.

“Politicians like Brown and Perry know the people who decide who becomes the next president, and know they financially control BigPharma. It’s the bankers and their mainstream media who make or break presidents of the United States. It’s the people with money and power who decide who is going to be the next puppet,” Kane concluded. “This HPV vaccine controversy with Brown and Perry proves the Democrats and Republicans are all in bed together.”

PsychoSocial and Spiritual Considerations

The audacity of presidential candidates to impose violations of parental rights in order to advance murder by injection targeting children equates to demonic possession.

Journalist Kane has linked BigPharma’s most powerful leaders in the Partnership for New York City to directors of the CIA, FBI, and NSA who control propaganda, the mainstream media, and the mass mind.

Kane’s revelations implicate COINTELPRO operatives who served former FBI Los Angeles bureau chief, Ted Gunderson, and the NSA’s leading propagandist, Michael Aquino, with the Church of Satan/Temple of Set, and ongoing child trafficking operations, including sex-slavery and “kiddy-porn.”

Kane and her colleagues, including ex-CIA psyops expert, Barbara Hartwell, conclude the abuse of children, an enterprise of demonic cabals operating within government, best explains the vaccination genocide that especially targets children.

This HPV vaccine, and is social and political impositions, challenges our fundamental human rights and values, including:

a)the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness;
b)parental vs. state rights to child welfare
c)traditional focus on family and community vs. individual alienation through state imposition;
d)natural health care vs. allopathic medicine;
e)faith in God and natural selection vs. pharmaceutical intoxication and genetic mutation

Conclusion

These facts about the HPV vaccine, and the political imposition of injecting this toxic “virus-like particle” into children and young adults, strongly evidence a demonic agenda and organized crime.

This genocide is being carried out under the guise of “public health” and “cancer prevention.” Make no mistake, the readily available scientific evidence supports the conclusion this vaccine is for population control through blood intoxication and experimental “virus” infection.

About the authors:

Dr. Leonard Horowitz is the author of seventeen books including three American best-sellers, Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola–Nature, Accident or Intentional?, Healing Codes for the Biological Apocalypse, and Healing Celebrations: Miraculous Recoveries Through Ancient Scripture, Natural Medicine and Modern Science. Dr. Horowitz is currently advancing as an alternative to the duplicitous World Health Organization (WHO), called, Healthy World Organization (HWO).

Sherri Kane is an investigative journalist who defected from FOX News, Los Angeles, for ethical reasons. She has written extensively on Barack Obama’s history, and has most recently exposed the “PharmaMedia,” detailing links between the wealthiest Wall Street investors in mass media and the pharmaceutical cartel. She has defined her life mission “to save the children” from the spoils of pedophilia, child trafficking, and sex slavery.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

I think that is all the articles. I tried to make things a little more reader friendly and stripped out the adverts.

 

[Dozdoats]

Do you really think we will ever know?

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

Do you really think we will ever know?

It will be inferred at some point by leading virus researchers. That has happened with SARS, AIDS/HIV, Ebola and countless others. And Anonymous is good at disclosures on such matters from time to time. We will see a blip and that is what we need to look for. Given the fact every one is going crazy town banana pants on global warming, pollution, and over-population and not seeing that it is part of agenda 21 and they are quickly approaching 2030, the timing, is, too, odd,,, to not be coincidental in some regards.

 

[summerthyme]

Do you really think we will ever know?

Probably not. And, as has been said before, a small farm which has hogs and poultry running around together is a very efficient virus and bacteria mutation factory...

That said, I think the origins of this virus are VERY suspicious, and I think the Chinese government's reactions (which reek of a cover-up, even now) hints that they have something more to hide than their citizens questionable dietary choices. I think it was released by accident (the almost-certainly low paid workers selling dead lab animals rings all too true), and they may well have been developing it as a possible bioweapon... but it got released before they developed the vaccine which would have protected the "important" people.

I'd imagine a whole bunch of Chinese are soiling their britches about now. Not only is no one safe from the virus, if even hints of it being engineered get out, history shows they'll find scapegoats to blame... and they have no problem using the death penalty.

Summerthyme

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

Probably not. And, as has been said before, a small farm which has hogs and pouktry running around together is a very efficient virus and bacteria mutation factory...

That said, I think the origins of this virus are VERY suspicious, and I think the Chinese government's reactions (which reek of a cover-up, even now) hints that they have sonething more to hide than their citizens questionable dietary choices. I think it was released by accident (the almost-certainly low paid workers selling dead lab animals rings all too true), and they may well have been developing it as a possible bioweapon... but it got released before they developed the vaccibevwhich would have protected the "important" people.

I'd imagine a whole bunch of Chinese are soiling their britches about now. Not only is no one safe from the virus, if even hints of it being engineered get out, history shows they'll find scapegoats to blame... and they have no problem using the death penalty.

Summerthyme

I would say it might be something they wanted to use in hong kong...

 

[Meadowlark]

I have been hearing a lot of buzz about this. The fact that its RO is approaching 4 is quite astounding and highly unusual. If you want to cause a society to break down and grind to a stop this is your virus of choice. It may not be as lethal as SARs or the Spanish flu, but it spreads very fast, takes a long time to show symptoms and really lays people low overwhelming medical facilities.

If I want to design a nasty virus, that's what I would be looking for. I have heard rumors that it was a engineered bioweapon strain that somehow accidently got released. I suspect it was intended for Taiwan, not Hong Kong.

The fact that the Chinese authorities have the DNA for this virus already down, is very suspicious. They overwhelming reaction is further potential proof. They seem to know what this strain is capable of and are really really scared!!!

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

I have been hearing a lot of buzz about this. The fact that its RO is approaching 4 is quite astounding and highly unusual. If you want to cause a society to break down and grind to a stop this is your virus of choice. It may not be as lethal as SARs or the Spanish flu, but it spreads very fast, takes a long time to show symptoms and really lays people low overwhelming medical facilities.

If I want to design a nasty virus, that's what I would be looking for. I have heard rumors that it was a engineered bioweapon strain that somehow accidently got released. I suspect it was intended for Taiwan, not Hong Kong.

The fact that the Chinese authorities have the DNA for this virus already down, is very suspicious. They overwhelming reaction is further potential proof. They seem to know what this strain is capable of and are really really scared!!!

That's partly why I laid out the suspicion with a plethora of articles that touch upon each aspect. Things are too odd and bereft of details...

 

[Meadowlark]

Shall we say too convenient

 

[Ractivist]

Unfortunately, the Georgia Guidestones hold more truth than one would like....
China, the only nation in the world who has huge empty cities waiting to be populated....
World government, is world government, and China has signed on to the plan....
The next week is going to be more than interesting.

 

[raven]

No government will ever allow information about this to be released.
Unless they are absolutely certain they will be the one writing history.
And then it will always be the other guy.

 

[changed]

I have been hearing a lot of buzz about this. The fact that its RO is approaching 4 is quite astounding and highly unusual. If you want to cause a society to break down and grind to a stop this is your virus of choice. It may not be as lethal as SARs or the Spanish flu, but it spreads very fast, takes a long time to show symptoms and really lays people low overwhelming medical facilities.

If I want to design a nasty virus, that's what I would be looking for. I have heard rumors that it was a engineered bioweapon strain that somehow accidently got released. I suspect it was intended for Taiwan, not Hong Kong.

The fact that the Chinese authorities have the DNA for this virus already down, is very suspicious. They overwhelming reaction is further potential proof. They seem to know what this strain is capable of and are really really scared!!!

Or maybe Taiwan or Hong Kong released it in Huwan?

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

Or maybe Taiwan or Hong Kong released it in Huwan?

If so this would especially scare xi.

 

[Yogizorch]

I've seen YouTube videos showing that the CDC already has a patent for the cure.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

I've seen YouTube videos showing that the CDC already has a patent for the cure.

Got a link or video on that? searches are coming up empty. I am not doubting you by any means, the darned videos stay so hidden...

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

VERIFY: ‘Coronavirus patents’ are from older viruses, not current strain

A bit of confusion around the names of certain coronaviruses has led to larger claims that governments have known about this virus for years. Author: VERIFY, Ja...

fox61.com

A bit of confusion around the names of certain coronaviruses has led to larger claims that governments have known about this virus for years.
Author: VERIFY, Jason Puckett (TEGNA), David Tregde, TJ Spry Jr. Published: 8:25 PM EST January 24, 2020 Updated: 8:56 PM EST January 24, 2020
Have governments and researchers known about this new strain of coronavirus for years? Claims online point to patents as proof that they have.

A similar claim was sent to our VERIFY team by viewer Bruce C.
“The coronavirus is man-made and patented,” he wrote. “CORONAVIRUS PROTEINS AND ANTIGENS Publication number: 20160339097.”
It's a real patent titled “Coronavirus proteins and antigens,” and was requested in 2014.
There’s also this patent, from Justia patents, filed in 2015. It also talks about coronavirus.
But there’s a key misunderstanding to these claims and social media posts.
THE QUESTION:
Are there patents showing that the coronavirus was known about and being studied by governments for years?
THE ANSWER:
The term “coronavirus” is actually a classification for a bunch of viruses in the same family. It’s not the name for one specific virus. SARS, MERS and the new virus “2019-nCoV” are all strains of a coronavirus.
The patents above and others like them were submitted by multiple governments and research groups to study vaccines and detection methods of past coronavirus strains.
Put simply, the patents are real, but they are about other coronaviruses, not the one that’s currently spreading.
WHAT WE FOUND: Corona means crown in Latin.
According to the CDC, this family of viruses is named because of the spikes that form a crown-like ring around the body of the virus.
Any virus in that family is called a coronavirus. The virus spreading from China is a coronavirus -- but it’s not the only one that exists.
Think of it like a company name compared to a product name. Any car built by Ford is a “Ford,” but the individual models, like F-150, Escape, etc., are different.
It’s the same with viruses. “Coronavirus” is the name for all types of similar viruses, but each individual virus has its own name and distinct properties.
The CDC identifies seven that can infect humans. The list includes SARS in 2003, MERS in 2012 and the current strain that’s infecting people: 2019-nCov. That stands for 2019 Novel Coronavirus. It’s a more medical sounding name because no one has given it an official one like SARS or MERS yet.
That brings us to the patents.
Hospitals, researchers and governments have patented strains of viruses in the past so they can work on developing vaccines and ways to detect specific strains. And that’s the key part. They’re different strains. None of the patents that are being shared online are for the current 2019-nCoV strain. That was only discovered a few weeks ago.
We can VERIFY: Patents for previous coronavirus strains exist. But they’re for vaccines and detection.
And they’re not for the current, new strain that doesn’t have an official name yet.

 

[Yogizorch]

Got a link or video on that? searches are coming up empty. I am not doubting you by any means, the darned videos stay so hidden...

I'm searching my YouTube history. I found this vid which just talks about a Bill Gates funded company funding the search for a vaccine, but I haven't found the one about the CDC actually owning the patent for a cure yet. I'll keep searching.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD8sI1ydH9Q&t=373s

 

[Yogizorch]

Got a link or video on that? searches are coming up empty. I am not doubting you by any means, the darned videos stay so hidden...

Here's another video I found which gets good around the 14:00 minute mark talking about a company funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation running simulations on a Coronavirus pandemic in Nov. of 2019. A little after the 17 minute mark it talks about China having a maximum security biolab studying the world's most dangerous pathogens which just happens to be in Wuhan.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0hIcbIBwJM&t=894s

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

I'm searching my YouTube history. I found this vid which just talks about a Bill Gates funded company funding the search for a vaccine, but I haven't found the one about the CDC actually owning the patent for a cure yet. I'll keep searching.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD8sI1ydH9Q&t=373s

Thanks dude! I was having a heck of a time finding anything. Google and YouTube are filtering and ranking things differently for everyone and my research creates issues with getting normalized results. I research how to build and make science fiction costumes and props and make them real life functional.

 

[Reasonable Rascal]

Quick and simple answer to the question is yes, it was. It was developed in the BAT cave.

RR

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

BTT

 

[Ragnarok]

Do you really think we will ever know?

Yes

 

[Ragnarok]

BTT

BTW...

Right or wrong, that was a righteous amount of investigation you did.

Kudos!

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

BTW...

Right or wrong, that was a righteous amount of investigation you did.

Kudos!

I have one of those photographic memories. When I get into heated discussions on something that sounds ridiculous on its face, I will go digging and start quoting article after article to backup my view point. Usually I end up leaving the indoctrinated speechless as they can't think through their missed learning to see where to attack the facts adequately. I will always try to approach issues from an intellectual and fact based approach. Rather than rely on conspiracy theory, I rely upon conspiracy fact. And if you can can come up with a fact based argument to your viewpoint I might even come over the aisle and agree to an extent.

The sad part was this was all stuff I knew off the top of my head. Getting it all put together in a coherent discussion with all the facts laid clearly out, was the pain.

As no one had made the point, I though it needed to be made so that further discourse could occur to bring up more facts and points of contention...