Exposes World’s Most Dangerous Lie In Gates from Hell A True Corbett Report

Exposes World’s Most Dangerous Lie In All Vaccine Research Eventually Leads To Bill Gates And Nazi Eugenics Vaccines Used As Vector For World Wide Depopulation Experiments. After defending his decision to screen the controversial documentary “VAXXED” at the Tribeca Film Festival, Robert De Niro succumbed to public pressure and removed the film from the movie lineup. But it wasn’t just public criticism that influenced De Niro’s decision. It has been recently discovered that De Niro was pressured by the Nazi-linked Sloan Foundation in New York to blackball the documentary.

Show more

The Sloan Foundation is named after Alfred P. Sloan, a Nazi collaborator who hated both Jews and blacks. Like Bill Gates, Sloan had a vested interest in the eugenics movement, which eventually went on to become the Human Genome Project.

Sloan Foundation partners with Tribeca Film Festival
The reason that the Sloan Foundation was able to pressure De Niro into pulling the documentary is because the organization has a partnership with the Tribeca Film Festival. As the festival’s webpage states:

The New York based Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, founded in 1934, makes grants in science, technology and economic performance… The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, in partnership with the Tribeca Film Institute, provides funding for narrative features or series that are scientifically relevant, accurate, and exciting through the TFI Sloan Filmmaker Fund.

All the while, sources at zengardner revealed Alfred P. Sloan’s true colors as a Nazi-collaborator and pro-eugenics elitist:

Industrialist Alfred P. Sloan, as head of General Motors, was a Nazi collaborator, and ardent admirer of Hitler. Sloan’s hatred of blacks was almost as intense as his hatred of Jews. He had a close connection with the eugenics movement which eventually became the Human Genome Project. The Sloan Foundation, together with the Rockefeller nexus, held a long standing interest in population reduction, including their involvement with the introduction of mysterious new vaccines together with the World Health Organization, which has a stated policy of population reduction, as clearly set forth in Agenda 21. (truthaboutagenda21.com).

This dubious enterprise led to a massive vaccine initiative to vaccinate against relatively rare tetanus in The Philippines, Nicaragua, and Mexico. These vaccine vials, distributed by the WHO, were found to contain hCG, which when combined with tetanus toxoid carrier, stimulated formation of antibodies against human chorionic gonadotropin, rendering women incapable of maintaining a pregnancy and potentially inducing a covert, involuntary abortion. Population control under the cover of health care. (ethiofreedom.com).

This seemingly altruistic Sloan Foundation also funded the Community Blood Council of Greater New York, Inc., which allowed more than 10,000 hemophiliacs and countless others to become fatally infected with HIV/Aids. Moreover, The Sloan Foundation held 24,000-53,000 shares issued by Merck and Co., whose president George W. Merck was director of America’s biological weapons industry and whose Hepatitis C and polio vaccines have been suspected of transmitting AIDs; and who knows what else. (Population Control: Aids/Ebola and other man-made diseases, S.R. Shearer, July 29, 2014). Dr. Leonard Horowitz’s seminal work, Aids and Ebola: Nature, Accident or Intentional, contends that both Ebola and Aids were bio-engineered by scientists working for the CIA.

A Bill Gates way drug
Paul Joskow currently serves as President of the Sloan Foundation. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), which has financial connections to the Gates Foundation. The Gates Foundation has developed a reputation of insularity in terms of its grants, only funding organizations that agree to peddle their pro-vaccine agenda. Almost all pro-vaccines websites are funded and owned by Big Pharma or the Gates Foundation.

In other words, both the Gates Foundation and the Sloan Foundation are investing and promoting vaccines in an effort to reduce the world population. In fact, according to Bill Gates, “if we do a really great job on new vaccines… we could lower [world population] by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

The Gates Foundation’s interest in reducing the world population isn’t limited to vaccines either. The organization has a history of funding depopulation efforts, including research into deliberately destroying sperm with ultrasound technology.

The lesson to be learned? Once the surface is scratched and the layers are peeled, all vaccine research ends up being a Bill Gates way drug.

What Do Bill Gates and Joseph Goebbels Have in Common? Bill Gates and Joseph Goebbels are/were ordinary human beings, just like you and I. Both of them visionaries in their own way; which is how I like to see myself - and possibly you do too? Vision is invariably related to a better world, an ideal in which the greater good exists for all – well-being, health, prosperity, etc. The huge difference between Gates and Goebbels, however, is how they would define the ‘all’. For Joseph, like his infamous associate Adolf Hitler, the ‘all’ did not include Jews, and even those it did include would never be seen as equals. Aryans were superior - no doubt about it. For Bill the story is very different. The Gates Foundation statement that ‘we see equal value in all lives’ leaves us in no doubt where he stands. Along with all other races, his vision would definitely include Jews!

What a person says and what he does can sometimes be quite different. A man must inevitably ‘put his money where his mouth is’, so to speak. Joseph Goebbels certainly did this. He passionately believed in the Nazi ideal with its blatant Antisemitism, and went on to become a major force in dissemination of party propaganda, as well as perpetrating major crimes against humanity. Bill Gates likewise has literally been putting his money where his mouth is - distributing substantial funding toward his superlative vision over the past decade. For this I both admire and respect his philanthropy and humanitarianism. Each of these men display an inordinate zeal and fervour for what they believe in. However, Gates has an all-inclusive vision; whereas Goebbels’ vision was exclusive. Personally, I love it when I'm included - and tend to suffer feeling excluded. So, if I had to choose between the two, I would definitely prefer Bill’s vision to Joseph’s! I know what exclusion feels like. After forty years in an exclusive religious faith, at the age of 43 I felt moved to leave. I was subsequently ex-communicated and have been shunned by that community ever since. I could easily have ended my life in the early months, so the question of inclusion is naturally close to my heart.

But even closer to my heart is the core value of freedom - the freedom to choose for oneself. Throughout my religious life, as a child from a tender age, through my teens and the following two decades as I raised a family, ‘choice’ was never on the menu. In its place was ‘requirement’. And it wasn't my parents or any other human authority figure, it was God himself who exacted so much from me. Or so I was led to believe. And if I didn't do what was required, then I would likely be out of favour when he called all his children to account, during the forthcoming fear-inspiring day of reckoning at Armageddon. This was far too scary for me to contemplate, so I always towed the line, willingly complying with everything a ‘good’ Jehovah's Witness should think, say and do. There was no room for feelings at all.

It actually felt as if I had made my choice, whereas in fact I had never been informed of any other option. I’m not complaining; in many ways it has served me, and shaped me into the human being I have become. But while it lasted, I totally identified myself with the movement. Had I lived in Germany during the holocaust, I would have been incarcerated in a concentration camp along with Jews, Gypsies and many who questioned the ethics of Nazism. I may even have been shot or beheaded for not voting; some Witnesses during the 30s were. Regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses, Hitler had vowed: “this brood will be exterminated!” Why? Simply because their allegiance belonged elsewhere and he didn't like it. In other words, they were exercising their freedom of choice. Any timorous stand against a perverted ideology has to be an evolutionary plus for humanity.

There have always been perversions of ‘good intention’, and perhaps there always will be. It’s only when those concerned hold positions of power over others that serious problems arise. For millennia, power was derived through birthright - royalty and nobility. During the last century or so, power shifted more and more toward the common people, those whose vision could be expressed through the zealously passionate word. (Like his mentor Adolf Hitler, Goebbels would spend hours in front of the mirror, perfecting his oration skills.) But in recent decades an even subtler shift is taking place, one that has nothing to do with birthright and little to do with rhetoric. Loudly and clearly in today's world - money talks. Therefore, power currently lies primarily in the hands of the super-rich.

As we mature as human beings, the desire eventually arises to contribute to the world in a more meaningful way. It's a natural development of personal consciousness, as we grow toward our soul-purpose. We will tend to contribute the kind of things we believe in strongly. And with contribution comes a sense of fulfilment. Each one’s contribution goes toward making up the whole. All are invited to the world stage. The human race has thankfully evolved out of the strongly egocentric world of yesteryear – of Stalin, Hitler, Goebbels, et al. We have apparently left despotism way behind in the last century, and are quick to move against it, should it ever raise its ugly head. But are we still blinkered where the cataracts of fear obscure clarity?

Humanity has been drawing ever closer toward the One World ideal. We no longer live in fear of other nations and how they might oppress us, taking away our national, therefore personal freedom. The current coronavirus pandemic is demonstrating without doubt how far human beings can go in cooperation with each other, irrespective of national grouping. For the very first time in planetary history we have been facing a common enemy: the COVID-19 virus. Pooling resources, donating equipment and money, heartfelt appreciation, self-sacrificing spirit, etc. - all have suddenly become the order of the day. It seems we will never return to that smug complacency of the passing era. Everyone is saying that ‘life will never be the same again’. So, we are moving rapidly toward uncertain but exciting times, a new world order, the age of Aquarius, as we begin to feel the cleansing waters of change.

But what does the vision entail for you, for me, for the world? Does it breathe with expected human rights and freedom of choice in all the important areas affecting our individual lives? Are you aware for example, that had the US presidency gone to Hillary Clinton in the last election, it is likely there would soon follow mandatory laws regarding disease control affecting all citizens? Laws supposedly for the good of all, yet at the same time riding roughshod over the basic human right to choose? And are you further aware of the ongoing and future implications regarding disease control? According to Science Alert 18th April 2020: “The wealthy Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation called Wednesday for global cooperation to ready COVID-19 vaccines for 7 billion people, while offering an additional US$150 million toward developing therapeutics and treatments for the virus.” Those of us alive during the 1960s will remember the space race – the huge national programs to dominate outer space, to gain ascendancy, for fear of being overpowered. Now we have the race to dominate inner space – to find a ‘cure’ for the new common enemy. This time there seems to be more cooperation than competition, which is a marked improvement. But one thing remains obvious – the assumption that such measures are ‘required’ for humanity to survive and thrive is at best only an assumption.

There are many sincere, well-meaning philanthropists who believe wholeheartedly in the efficacy of certain procedures for the common good. There are also opportunists for whom money talks loud and clear. And there is a fine line between the two, which line can easily become diffused and blurred. And finally, there are others, like myself, who have an overarching belief in the efficacy of the human organism itself, to be supplemented only as a last resort by man’s interventions. (Read my poem No Stranger)

So, what do Joseph Goebbels and his partners in obvious crime have in common with Bill Gates and his partners in well-intentioned coercive enthusiasm? Read for yourself the ten simple clauses of the 1947 Nuremburg Code. Like the US founding fathers’ constitution of 1787, the code was drawn up by men of integrity, holding human dignity and freedom of choice as core values. Then ask yourself: What part of ‘informed consent’ could ever countenance the thought of ‘mandatory’? Yet this is the thrust of many advocates of the sought-after ‘cure’.

To quote Bill Gates himself: “As we look ahead in the next century, leaders will be those who empower others”. I, for one, sincerely hope his fidelity to this vision will strongly oppose any move toward ‘mandatory’ measures anywhere in the world. After all, how can you ever empower another by withholding information and removing their freedom to choose? His estimate of seven billion vaccinations leaves headroom for only half a billion or so who might have other ideas. Does he honestly believe only 6.66% of the world population - (yes that is the correct figure!) – would choose not to avail themselves of ‘the fastest vaccine ever’? Is he naively hoping for a basic world conversion to the efficacy of the ‘cure’? Or is he just throwing around the figure of 7 billion as a rough estimate for the whole populace? If this were so, the implications are far more conspiratorial and sinister than any opposing ‘conspiracy theory’.

So, on the one hand we are left to ponder the sad legacy of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels’ delusions of grandeur. And on the other we have Facebook taking down posts about how to boost your immune system through use of natural products. We have YouTube removing videos alerting us to the dangers inherent in certain vaccinations, as well as first hand testimonies of virology and epidemiology experts who don’t agree with mainstream views. And we have anyone wanting to help others make an informed choice by examining all possible evidence labelled as a ‘conspiracy theorist’, even having their accounts removed from public arenas.

This begs the question: Just how different is this to the holocaust of eight decades ago? Or from any other totalitarian and draconian regime? And how close might we be to the brink of world fascism, achieved through fear of a common enemy – a simple, albeit complex protein? During the insidious rise of Nazism, there were people who gave their lives for freedom of choice. Some were individuals with temerity, others part of a group consciousness. Let’s pray it won’t come to that extreme again, but the singular issue remains the same: Is truth worth more than the illusion of security? Upon this question alone hangs the next quantum leap in the evolution of humanity.

There can be no doubt that Bill Gates has worn many hats on his remarkable journey from his early life as the privileged son of a Seattle-area power couple to his current status as one of the richest and most influential people on the planet. But, as we have seen in our exploration of Gates' rise as unelected global health czar and population control advocate, the question of who Bill Gates really is is no mere philosophical pursuit. Today we will attempt to answer that question as we examine the motives, the ideology, and the connections of this man who has been so instrumental in shaping the post-corona virus world.
The takeover of public health that we have documented in How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health and the remarkably brazen push to vaccinate everyone on the planet that we have documented in Bill Gates' Plan to Vaccinate the World was not, at base, about money. The unimaginable wealth that Gates has accrued is now being used to purchase something much more useful: control. Control not just of the global health bodies that can coordinate a worldwide vaccination program, or the governments that will mandate such an unprecedented campaign, but control over the global population itself.

In January of 2010, Bill and Melinda Gates announced a $10 billion pledge to usher in a decade of vaccines. But far from an unalloyed good, the truth is that this attempt to reorient the global health economy was part of a much bigger agenda. An agenda that would ultimately lead to greater profits for big pharma companies, greater control for the Gates Foundation over the field of global health, and greater power for Bill Gates to shape the course of the future for billions of people around the planet.

Who is Bill Gates? A software developer? A businessman? A philanthropist? A global health expert? This question, once merely academic, is becoming a very real question for those who are beginning to realize that Gates' unimaginable wealth has been used to gain control over every corner of the fields of public health, medical research and vaccine development. And now that we are presented with the very problem that Gates has been talking about for years, we will soon find that this software developer with no medical training is going to leverage that wealth into control over the fates of billions of people.

“Lock up your libraries if you like; but there is no gate, no lock, no bolt that you can set upon the freedom of my mind.”
― Virginia Woolf, A Room of One's Own

As the UK Covid-19 vaccine roll out has gathered pace, and the use of “vaccine passports” continue to be debated, an increasing number of social media users are voicing their opposition to these moves and claiming they are an infringement of their rights under the Nuremberg Code.

The Nuremberg Code is a set of ethical research principles, developed in the wake of Nazi atrocities—specifically the inhumane and often fatal experimentation on human subjects without consent—during World War Two.

We spoke to experts in medical ethics, healthcare law and social epidemiology about the Nuremberg Code and whether its principles are applicable to the current vaccine roll out or vaccine passports. We also discussed whether the code is legally binding and the darker links the claims seem to draw between the current pandemic and the Nazi era.

The Nuremberg Code was created in 1947 in Nuremberg, Germany, following the trial of a group of Nazi doctors accused of conducting inhumane and often deadly experiments on prisoners of concentration camps without their consent. At the conclusion of what’s also referred to as ‘The Doctors Trial’, 16 people were found guilty.

The Nuremberg Code was developed in response to the horrors of this experimentation, with the aim of protecting human subjects in medical research. The Code, and particularly its emphasis on informed consent, has had a profound impact on international human rights law and medical ethics.

The Nuremberg Code consists of 10 principles, the first of which being that the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential in any experiment on humans.

Other principles include that the experiment should be for the good of society, that all unnecessary physical and mental suffering or injury should be avoided and no experiment should be conducted if there is good reason to believe it may result in death or a disabling injury.

They also say that the human subject should be free to exit the experiment if they are suffering, and that the scientist in charge must be prepared to end the experiment if they have good reason to believe it may cause injury, disability or death to the subject if it continues.

We have seen several examples of posts on social media claiming that Covid-19 vaccines violate the Nuremberg Code because they are somehow “experimental” and, as people receiving the vaccines are not made aware of this, they are unable to give their informed consent.

This claim that the Covid-19 vaccines are experimental is simply not true, and something we have corrected multiple times. The three Covid vaccines currently given temporary authorisation for use in the UK have been shown to be safe and effective in large scale clinical trials.

Dr Alexis Paton, lecturer in social epidemiology and the sociology of health at Aston University, Birmingham, told Full Fact that the Nuremberg Code is “very specifically about experimentation” and so although its principles would be applicable when discussing clinical vaccine trials, it is no longer relevant once a vaccine has been authorised.

She said: “The Nuremberg Code is about the active experimentation on humans, for the most part during some sort of clinical trial of some description. So when we talk about Pfizer or AstraZeneca [vaccines], we’re out of the auspices of the Nuremberg Code because this is a product that has been trialled, with appropriate ethics in place, and has been approved and is now in production and being used globally.”

Informed consent is still required for those receiving the Covid-19 or any other vaccine. But Professor Emma Cave, professor of healthcare law at Durham University, explained that the need for this does not come from the Nuremberg Code.

She said: “The Nuremberg Code relates to research, where the emphasis of informed consent requirements is on preventing the research participants from being used as a means to an end.

“Informed consent for treatment serves a slightly different purpose. It prevents a battery or negligence, and protects the autonomy rights of the patient. So informed consent is doing slightly different things in relation to research and treatment.”

Arguments that the vaccines are experimental usually hinge on the fact that data is being collected on any side effects in recipients, although it is normal that authorities continue to monitor the safety of all vaccines once they are approved. Data on the long term protection and safety of the Covid-19 will continue to be collected over the coming years.

Dr Julian Sheather, special advisor in ethics and human rights to the British Medical Association, told Full Fact it would be “impossible” and “unethical” to roll out any medical intervention without collecting data on it.

“It’s true of all drugs. The same would be true of something like [the anti-depressant] Prozac. There will still be people out there gathering data. Are we going to say that every single drug in circulation is an experiment?”

Other claims about the ‘experimental’ nature of the vaccines hinge on the fact they were given temporary authorisation to allow them to be distributed faster (although the vaccines still went through extensive clinical testing) and the fact the vaccines were developed so quickly (thanks in part to extra funding made available and ongoing work from before the pandemic).

At the time of writing, the government has said that people who have had both doses of the vaccine can use the NHS app (separate to the NHS Covid-19 app) to demonstrate proof of vaccination when travelling to another country, if the country requires it. No other firm plans for ‘vaccine passports’ to gain access to certain places or events within the UK have been confirmed by the government, but discussion of their potential use has proved controversial.

A number of posts on social media have claimed that vaccine passports are a violation of the Nuremberg Code, on the grounds that if you have to have a vaccine in order to do something like travel or work, you are not actually consenting but are being forced.

Professor Cave said the Nuremberg Code was not relevant to vaccine passports. “You could still say it’s unethical or it’s problematic, but not by focusing on the Nuremberg Code. It’s not an experimental product in that context.

“If restrictions are applied in relation to those who haven’t been vaccinated against Covid, consideration needs to be taken of the potential impact on people’s ability to choose freely and on the possibility that such a policy might discriminate against some groups within society.

“We should be debating these matters, but we need to be accurate about the principles that we’re calling upon and the laws that we’re calling upon when we’re saying whether or not something is justifiable.”

Dr Paton told Full Fact: “The Nuremberg Code is all about experimental subjects’ rights and the responsibilities of those doing the experiment. A vaccine passport is a policy document.

“It’s not unprecedented either. For example, anyone who has ever travelled to a lot of the countries in Africa knows that you won’t be granted a visa if you don’t have proof of a Yellow Fever vaccination. But that’s not experimentation. That has nothing to do with us being human subjects of a trial of any kind. It’s about the government and politics.”

Although the Nuremberg Code is not relevant in the case of the current vaccine roll out or vaccine passports, there is still the question of whether a government could be forced by law, to halt or alter its vaccine programme if it is found to be in violation of the Code’s principles.

Professor Cave told Full Fact: “The Code isn’t and wasn’t legally binding. It’s not legally enforceable, it’s a guideline rather than law.

“But it is really important because it’s a blueprint for many of today’s legal and ethical standards, internationally and nationally [...] the Nuremberg Code isn’t legally enforceable in itself, but its legacy has changed the way research is conducted and safeguarded to protect the human rights of research participants.”

We’ve seen multiple claims that various groups are attempting to take legal action using the Nuremberg Code over vaccination. Some international claims about this have already been fact checked. One is that a complaint has been filed with the International Criminal Court against the Israeli government, arguing that its vaccination programme is in violation of the Nuremberg Code, although Reuters has recently disproved claims that the court has “accepted” this allegation. Similarly, reports that a Canadian court ruled that anyone who tries to force someone to be vaccinated can be prosecuted under the Nuremberg Code have been debunked.

It is important to note that the Nuremberg Code is not the only set of ethical guidelines for human experimentation. For example, social media users could have drawn on the more recent Declaration of Helsinki (adopted in 1964, last updated 2013), UNESCO’s Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (2005) or the International Ethical Guidelines for Health-Related Research Involving Humans (fourth version published 2016) to make similar (albeit also incorrect) claims.

But what is specific to the Nuremberg Code is the direct association with the atrocities committed by the Nazis during World War Two, and the emotional response this triggers. Although the social media posts don’t explicitly say it, by evoking the Nuremberg Code to talk about the Covid-19 pandemic, they link the horrors of concentration camps to the current vaccine roll out.

Misinformation thrives when feelings are manipulated in this way, as claims which create an emotional response are most likely to be shared.

The Nuremberg Code would only be relevant at the research trial stage of a vaccine’s development, not its roll out to the general public. But even then, experts told us they felt it would not be an appropriate link to draw.

Dr Paton said: “I think it really does a disservice to people who volunteered to be part of the Covid-19 trials. The Nuremberg Code was developed because of really truly horrific atrocities that we found humans can inflict on other humans.

“And to compare volunteers who want to help develop a vaccine, where the risks have been mitigated and they are being closely monitored, with the decisions of Nazi doctors to perform experiments on humans without anaesthetic, without safety, without regard for whether the human subject lived or died, I think is really inappropriate.”

Dr Sheather added: “It’s terrible bad faith, to be honest with you. Because the Nuremberg trials were investigations into the most brutal forms of medical violation of human beings in the name of some form of research. These research subjects were tested to death and destruction.

“Drawing a link between this final roll out of these vaccines and what the Nazi doctors were doing is morally grotesque.”

It’s right that medical ethics should be highly scrutinized, especially in cases like the Covid-19 vaccine roll-out where the process has been accelerated. However, it’s important not to mix up the atrocities of the past with current debates about medicine and policy.

Death To All American Exposes World’s Most Dangerous Lie COVID-X-24 Changed Everything. The way we live our lives, how we operate our businesses, how we see each other. And now, the federal government is sinking its tendrils even deeper, threatening the fabric not only of our bodily autonomy, but of the republic. Our American way of life may never be the same. To save it, we must understand the key fundamentals of the pandemic that transfigured our society into the nightmare it is today. What is the COVID-19 origin story? Who are its top players in government and science, pulling the strings? What was their REAL response in the first days of the pandemic? The answers to these questions are frightening. Emails, documents, and federal contracts tell a dark story that is still dominating our lives. It’s time to cast a light on the shocking truth. Because only with the truth can we emerge from the darkness of this “pandemic” and take back the liberty stolen from us.
https://web.archive.org/web/20230226151842/https://www.exposingtheirlies.com/post/some-covid-19-horror-stories-you-may-have-missed

The NIH claims joint ownership of Moderna's coronavirus vaccine The National Institutes of Health may own intellectual property that undergirds a leading coronavirus vaccine being developed by Moderna, according to documents obtained by Axios and an analysis from Public Citizen.

Why it matters: Because the federal government has an actual stake in this vaccine, it could try to make the vaccine a free or low-cost public good with wide distribution, if the product turns out to be safe and effective.

The big picture: The NIH mostly funds outside research, but it also often invents basic scientific technologies that are later licensed out and incorporated into drugs that are sold at massive profits. The agency rarely claims ownership stakes or pursues patent rights, but that appears to be different with this coronavirus vaccine.

"We do have some particular stake in the intellectual property" behind Moderna's coronavirus vaccine, NIH Director Francis Collins said during an Economic Club interview in May. Driving the news: New evidence shines light on the extent of NIH's involvement.

NIH and Moderna have researched coronaviruses, like MERS, for several years, and signed a contract this past December that stated "mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates [are] developed and jointly owned" by the two parties. The contract was not specific to the novel coronavirus, and it was signed before the new virus had been sequenced.

Separately, four NIH scientists have filed for a provisional patent application entitled "2019-nCoV vaccine," according to disclosures in a pending scientific paper. Moderna scientists co-authored that paper, but none are listed as vaccine co-inventors.

That makes it clear "the government and the public have a stake" in the coronavirus vaccine, said Zain Rizvi, a health law and policy researcher at Public Citizen. "The vaccine would not exist without the intellectual contributions of federal scientists."

What they're saying: NIH said in a statement that its scientists created the "stabilized coronavirus spike proteins for the development of vaccines against coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2," and the government consequently has "sought patents to preserve the government's rights to these inventions."

Further, NIH "has adopted a non-exclusive licensing approach for these patent rights in order to allow multiple vaccine developers" to make a vaccine. NIH added that "federal employees listed as inventors on these patent applications assigned their rights to the U.S. government. Accordingly, should the [United States Patent and Trademark Office] and other national patent authorities grant the patents, the U.S. government will hold ownership interest in the patents."

Moderna declined to comment beyond a statement, which said the company "has a broad owned and licensed IP estate" and is "not aware of any IP that would prevent us from commercializing our product candidates, including" the coronavirus vaccine.

Between the lines: Rizvi said co-owning the vaccine could allow NIH to more broadly license the underlying technology to other vaccine manufacturers "without the consent of Moderna," a company that is valued at $25 billion despite having no federally approved drugs on the market.

The bottom line: Many experts anticipate a coronavirus vaccine, once proven safe and effective, would be made as widely available as possible, and that developers aren't likely to seek big profits from it. Partial federal ownership could be a backstop if those assumptions don't bear out, but NIH isn't keen on stepping on industry's toes.

"Talking to the companies, I don't hear any of them say they think this [vaccine] is a money-maker," Collins said during his Economic Club interview. "I think they want to recoup their costs and maybe make a tiny percentage of increase of profit over that, like single digits percentage-wise, but that's it. Nobody sees this as a way to make billions of dollars."

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6935295-NIH-Moderna-Confidential-Agreements

Anthony Fauci’s Hospital Protocols For Covid are Killing Thousands From the Land of Baloney is Dr. Death is a Mass Murderer and a Prolific Serial Killer.

As always, please do your own research and feel free to use my links to do so if you wish. I will be adding information to this page as I get them. People that go in to the hospital these days may as well be on death row…..

Dr. Fauci has decided that ALL hospitals across the entire United States are to treat ALL patients diagnosed with “covid” with Remdesivir, Deximethazone and Vancomycin. This “FAUCI DEATH COCKTAIL” shuts your kidneys down causing your lungs to fill up with fluid which is called pulmonary edema. This usually happens within 5 days of being treated with the cocktail. The patients end up in ICU on the ventilator and they literally drown in their own fluids. It’s not pneumonia – it’s pulmonary edema! The hospitals will not allow you to have Hydroxichloroquin or Ivermectin which are safe and are curing THOUSANDS of people who can get them. Hospitals won’t give you these cures, instead they will tell you they have to follow their strict guidelines. Every single doctor, nurse, hospital administrator, and the rest of the demons pushing Fauci’s Kill Cocktail as a treatment should lose their medical licenses because in my opinion they are committing premeditated first degree mass murder/genocide. I think Canadian hospitals might be pushing similar protocols.

Dr. Robert Malone in his interview with Joe Rogan says hospitals are reimbursed around $3,000 for every covid-19 diagnosis. Treatment protocols are withheld because the hospitals are further incentivized to use remdesivir and ventilators, which are linked to renal failure, lung damage, and deadly nosocomial infection. It doesn’t matter why the individual was initially hospitalized, whether they were suffering from underlying conditions, mediation errors, delayed surgeries, etc. If the hospital “suspects” covid-19 or can get a positive reading on a high cycle threshold PCR test, the hospital can fraudulently declare a covid-19 diagnosis and be reimbursed for their medical fraud and malpractice. There’s HUGE $$$ in this and hospitals worldwide are doing it. From public officials covering up known early treatments – to serious conflicts of interest between the medical elites and those who are supposedly holding them accountable – all the way up to federal cash bribes to healthcare facilities in exchange for Covid death receipts.

https://therealtruthnetworkcom.wordpress.com/2022/02/04/are-hospital-covid-protocols-killing-people/

Hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin: A synergistic combination for COVID-X-24 chemoprophylaxis and treatment? Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has spread all over the world. While awaiting a vaccine, we need effective drugs to treat or, even better, prevent coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Two drugs classically used by dermatologists are being examined in the fight against COVID-19: hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), and, very recently, ivermectin. We hypothesize that HCQ and ivermectin may show a consequential and synergistic action if administered simultaneously both for chemoprophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19.

HCQ is an antimalarial drug, an analog of chloroquine (CQ), considered as an immunomodulator rather than immunosuppressant. HCQ and CQ inhibit SARS-CoV-2 in vitro, with HCQ found to be more potent than chloroquine (CQ). HCQ has shown antiviral effects at both preinfection and postinfection stages. Indeed, HCQ could interfere with the glycosylation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, thereby reducing the binding efficiency between angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 on host cells and the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Moreover, HCQ could be able to block virus fusion with the host cell through the inhibition of protease activity in cleaving coronavirus surface spike proteins.

Significantly, HCQ contributes to the suppression of the “cytokine storm” responsible for the disease progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome by several mechanisms, including the reduction of T-cell activation and differentiation as well as decreased production of cytokines by T cells and B cells. Several studies in vivo are underway to assess HCQ effectiveness on SARS-CoV-2 infection, with promising preliminary results.

Ivermectin is an antiparasitic drug, classically prescribed at our dermatologic clinic as first-line treatment for cutaneous larva migrans. Interestingly, it also displayed an antiviral activity. Indeed, ivermectin acts as a specific inhibitor of importin-α/β–mediated nuclear import. Thus, by impacting on importin-α/β–dependent nuclear transport of viral proteins, ivermectin suppresses the replication of several RNA viruses, including HIV, chikungunya virus, and yellow fever virus.

Very recently, Caly et al4 demonstrated antiviral action of ivermectin against the SARS-CoV-2 clinical isolate in vitro, with a single dose of the drug able to control viral replication within 24 to 48 hours. The authors hypothesized that such results were likely due to the inhibition of importin-α/β1–mediated nuclear import of viral proteins, as shown for other RNA viruses. However, no study with ivermectin in vivo has been conducted.

Based on all such evidence, we hypothesize that HCQ and ivermectin could act in a consequential and synergistic manner. Indeed, HCQ would behave as a first-level barrier by inhibiting the entry of the virus into the host cell, while ivermectin could reduce viral replication if the virus did get in, strengthening HCQ antiviral effects. HCQ is cheap to produce and safe if monitored properly. Ivermectin seems to be safe and well tolerated, with no serious drug-related adverse events. Moreover, the 2 drugs do not seem to have a between-drug interaction. However, no in vitro or in vivo studies have been conducted on the combined effect of HCQ and ivermectin on SARS-CoV-2 infection. Ours is only a hypothesis and a suggestion, but if not now, when should researchers share ideas?

COVID-X-24 Blood and Non Vaccines Blood and Secret Pedophile's Blood Bank U.S.A. - https://rumble.com/v2dye2c-covid-19-blood-and-non-vaccines-blood-and-secret-pedophiles-blood-bank-u.s..html

Blood Feasting Pedophiles, Parasitic Monsters Literally and Predatory Feeding Off the 9.6 Million Children Gone Missing Each Year Around the World… Top Secret “Pedophile” has reverberated throughout America.

In another twist on covid vaccine hesitancy, blood centers say they are starting to hear from transfusion patients demanding blood from unvaccinated donors. Experts say the option is neither practical nor medically justifiable. The nation’s roiling tensions over vaccination against covid-19 have spilled into an unexpected arena: lifesaving blood transfusions.

https://dearpandemic.org/vaccines-and-donating-blood/

With nearly 60% of the eligible U.S. population fully vaccinated, Its getting hard to find a clean blood supply that is covid free. so now more people in 33> different county are now asking for clean blood supply from other nation’s blood supply is now coming from donors who have been inoculated, experts said.

That’s led some patients who are skeptical of the shots to demand transfusions only from the unvaccinated people, for a clean blood supply now, an option blood centers insist is neither medically sound nor operationally feasible.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjh.17842

Researchers at the University of Oxford have today reported that the risk of the rare blood clotting known as cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) following COVID-19 infection is around 100 times greater than normal, several times higher than it is post-vaccination or following influenza. They report that CVT is more common after COVID-19 than in any of the comparison groups, with 30% of these cases occurring in the under 30s. Compared to the current COVID-19 vaccines, this risk is between 8-10 times higher, and compared to the baseline, approximately 100 times higher.

The breakdown comparison for reported cases of CVT in COVID-19 patients in comparison to CVT cases in those who received a COVID-19 vaccine is: In this study of over 500,000 COVID-19 patients, CVT occurred in 39 in a million patients. In over 480,000 people receiving a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer or Moderna), CVT occurred in 4 in a million. CVT has been reported to occur in about 5 in a million people after first dose of the AZ-Oxford COVID-19 vaccine.
Compared to the mRNA vaccines, the risk of a CVT from COVID-19 is about 10 times greater. Compared to the AZ-Oxford vaccine, the risk of a CVT from COVID-19 is about 8 times greater. However, all comparisons must be interpreted cautiously since data are still accruing.

Routine measures used to determine blood donor eligibility prevent individuals with clinical respiratory infections from donating blood. All donors are supposed to be healthy when they give blood and answer basic questions about potential risks. Collected units of blood are tested for transmissible infectious diseases before they’re distributed to hospitals. But that hasn’t quelled concerns for some people skeptical of covid vaccines.

FDA continues to work closely with CDC and other federal and international agencies to monitor the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the virus, SARS-CoV-2. Respiratory viruses, in general, are not known to be transmitted by blood transfusion. There have been no reported cases of transfusion-transmitted coronavirus, including SARS-CoV-2, worldwide.

Q: If an unvaccinated person gets blood from a vaccinated person, will the vaccine transfer?
A: No. If an unvaccinated person gets a blood transfusion from a vaccinated donor, the unvaccinated person does not become vaccinated. That’s true for COVID-19 vaccines and all other vaccines, too. Not even if the blood donation happens right after the vaccine is given. Receiving a blood transfusion from someone who has had COVID-19 is also not at all like vaccination.

A vaccine contains extremely small amounts of both active & inactive ingredients which never enter our bloodstream in the same way as other medications like pain relievers, antibiotics, or antidepressants.

All the action comes from your own immune system. Your body makes antibodies in response to the very tiny amount of active ingredient at the site of the vaccine. Within a few days, the vaccine ingredients themselves break down at the site of the injection.

Your new antibodies do circulate in your blood–but in whole blood, they’re at such a low concentration that it likely has no impact on the person who receives your donation.

For convalescent plasma therapy, plasma is collected from someone who is recovering from COVID-19. This concentrates the antibodies (which are in plasma) and could help someone who is fighting COVID-19 themselves (if it’s given early and the donor has a lot of antibodies; see JHU link below).

Our immune system cannot make more antibodies in response to the introduction of antibodies from another source, whether it’s donated blood or antibody therapy. (Vaccines contain anti*gens* which stimulate the immune system, not anti*bodies* which is what the immune system makes; similar words but not the same).

So when a blood transfusion patient gets a few of your antibodies, the recipient’s immune cells will not remember or replicate them. The antibodies will just disintegrate after a while and get cleaned up by the body’s waste mechanisms, like all the rest of the cells in that transfusion–and the vaccine ingredients themselves.

In fact, you can donate blood immediately after you’ve received a COVID-19 vaccination, as long as you meet two criteria:

1 You’re feeling good.

2 The vaccine you got was from any one of the common manufacturers (Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, Novavax, and AstraZeneca are all in the U.S., and many others are in other places too).

Some other vaccines do have a cooldown of a couple of weeks before you can donate blood. Generally, those ones contain a live but weakened virus, which can cause a mild infection. The infection could (theoretically) be passed on to the transfusion recipient. In an immunocompromised patient receiving the donation, we don’t want to introduce infections–even mild ones. The live attenuated vaccine you’re most likely to encounter if you’re old enough to donate blood is the 1-dose shingles vaccine called Zostavax from Merck. You have to wait 4 weeks to donate blood after you get it.

There are currently no live attenuated COVID-19 vaccines, though one called COVI-VAC is in Phase 1 trials in the UK right now.

The American Red Cross declared the first-ever national blood crisis in January, and desperately needs donations. Whole blood donations from people who are O+ or O- and platelet donations are especially needed.

https://www.redcrossblood.org/local-homepage/news/article/covid-19-vaccination-guide-blood-donation.html

https://dearpandemic.org/blood-in-short-supply/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK138208/

Absolutely. Some of these studies used plasma very late; other studies used insufficient plasma. The WHO did not have access to the Hopkins data. We are hopeful that since they are physician-scientists and rigorous people, they will issue new recommendations in the future.

https://ccpp19.org/index.html

You Will Never Trust Another Celebrity After Watching This Corrupt U.S.A. Governments - https://rumble.com/v2kq5mw-you-will-never-trust-another-celebrity-after-watching-this-corrupt-u.s.a.-g.html

Once you see this you'll have no faith in these people again! The system-serving airheads that should be tried and imprisoned for crimes against humanity like most politicians, oligarchs, globalists and most medias. So many innocent people of all age groups have died or been severely injured for life after listening to the advice of Hollywood celebrities, talk show hosts and politicians regarding the vaccine for covid-19. It’s right that medical ethics should be highly scrutinized, especially in cases like the Covid-19 vaccine roll-out where the process has been accelerated. However, it’s important not to mix up the atrocities of the past with current debates about medicine and policy.

The PCR test isn't even safe! The Scientist/ Creator of the test said it won't work to test C0vid and he said Fauki has no idea what he's doing and for that they killed him! Do you realize yet that they are trying to kill us all?

Experts, Scientists, Attorneys & Physician around the world have been speaking out to warn you and save lives. They had nothing to gain and everything to lose by telling you this. Use common sense and critical thinking and do some serious research quick

All agree that the C vaccine is not at all a vaccine, but a bioweapon created to make you sick with multiple diseases, and you will eventually die if you continue taking more!

They are injecting horrible diseases and other nano particles into your cells that cannot be removed. Once you take it, your life span is drastically reduced and you will become sterile.

The masks don't work, social distancing won't work, your chances of long-term healthie are FAR GREATER if you do nothing and take nothing.

Viruses are not living organisms or living microbes. They do not have a respiratory system, nor do they have a nucleus or digestive system. Viruses are not alive and viruses are not contagious. They have spent millions to put fear in you, nothing you think you know about viruses and bacteria are true, you have been lied to.

Every single person being pushing this should be punished for this. Corrupt governments, corps and media are part of the great cover-up and guilty of world genocide. This is the biggest crime ever perpetrated against mankind. It must be exposed before it's too late.

No question that the mRNA vaccines should be withdrawn with immediate effect” An independent analysis of the accumulated Yellow Card data, finally released 18 months after the first FOI request, shows unequivocal safety signals linking the mRNA vaccines to serious damage to the lymph system, the heart, and female reproduction 'Health regulator failing to keep public protected from mRNA shots' IN the UK, three Covid-19 vaccines - AstraZeneca (AZ), Pfizer (PF) and Moderna (MO) - have been used in a nationwide inoculation programmed aimed at preventing harm from the so-called SARS-CoV2 virus.
Expert Claims Covid Vaccines Will Kill 700 million People Around the World. During an interview with USA Watchdog in June, Dr. David Martin predicted that 700 million people will die worldwide due to the Covid injections. He based his estimation on the World Health Organization's vision of the ‘Decade of Vaccines’ (“DoV”).

There appears to be no scientific evidence that the Pfizer, Moderna COVID-19 vaccines will kill miscarriages. Scientists have not found an increased risk for miscarriage among people who received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine just before and during early pregnancy, and data did not surface "any safety concerns for people who received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine late in pregnancy or for their babies." Therefore, it can be concluded that vaccines do or do not cause miscarriages.?

COVID-19 continues to pose a high risk to pregnant people who contract the virus. Despite this concern, hesitancy surrounding the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy remains, write the authors of a preprint article on COVID-19 vaccines and pregnancy outcomes. As COVID-19 vaccines become more widely available, some have raised concerns regarding potential links between receiving a COVID-19 vaccine and experiencing miscarriage (also known as spontaneous abortion), and other adverse outcomes. However, miscarriage is a common occurrence – around 10 to 15 percent of all pregnancies in the United States end in miscarriage – and multiple studies have found no increase in miscarriage in persons who received a COVID-19 vaccine.

One study team used the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) v-safe pregnancy registry, a smartphone-based tool for people in the United States who have received a COVID-19 vaccine. Participants were included if they had received at least one vaccine dose prior to conception or before 20 weeks gestation and did not have a pregnancy loss before 6 weeks gestation – pregnancies lost beyond 20 weeks gestation are considered stillbirths not miscarriages, and 6 weeks gestation is typically the earliest a pregnancy can be detected. Out of 2,456 participants, 165 experienced a spontaneous abortion. The study found that the cumulative risk of spontaneous abortion between 6 and 20 weeks gestation was 14.1 percent.

Among the study participants, 65 participants were contacted in their first trimester, but could not be reached during their second. To account for this drop-out, the study team conducted a “sensitivity analysis” with the assumption that these 65 participants experienced a spontaneous abortion. In this analysis, the cumulative risk of spontaneous abortion rose to 18.8 percent. The study team then used data from historical cohorts to represent the “typical” upper and lower ranges of risk of spontaneous abortion before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. They found that the calculated cumulative risk – both with and without the sensitivity analysis – fell within the expected risk range.

A second study also concludes that the COVID-19 vaccine poses no increased risk for miscarriage and bolsters the findings of the prior study with the inclusion of a comparison group. This study used the Vaccine Safety Datalink database, a collaboration between the CDC and nine health systems across the United States. Researchers included individuals who received their first dose of the vaccine within 6 to 19 weeks gestation and assigned each an “index date” to reflect when they entered the study. They then compared this group to a contemporaneous cohort of unvaccinated pregnant individuals to determine the impact of the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy. The study compared the odds that a participant who had a spontaneous abortion had received a vaccine within 28 days of the event with the odds that a participant who carried a pregnancy to term had the same vaccine criteria. The study team found that, compared to participants with ongoing pregnancies, those who had a spontaneous abortion were not significantly more likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccine.

These studies help prove that receiving the COVID-19 vaccine before or during pregnancy is not associated with higher rates of miscarriage. Nevertheless, more research is needed to strengthen the evidence-base and combat persistent misinformation. Continued investment and investigation is critical to fighting vaccine hesitancy and preventing the further spread of COVID-19, especially among vulnerable populations.

Click on the links below for the full story and or Type it into a Web Base Search ! https://web.archive.org/web/20230226151842/https://www.exposingtheirlies.com/post/some-covid-19-horror-stories-you-may-have-missed

Pandemic Of The Unvaccinated People Will Threaten The Live Of Vaccinated People? - https://rumble.com/v2qf2nk-pandemic-of-the-unvaccinated-people-will-threaten-the-live-of-vaccinated-pe.html

Nobody Is Safe From People's Republic Of The Tyrannical U.S.A. Government And Death To The Unvaccinated America People And American Nation CDC director says coronavirus outbreak ‘becoming a pandemic of the unvaccinated’ How the unvaccinated threaten the vaccinated people of the world for a darwinian perspective. As of 27 May 2023, the 10 leading causes of death accounted for 74.5% of all U.S. deaths in 2021, according to the NVSS. The US has recorded more than 47.7 million confirmed COVID-19 cases and more than 771,500 deaths, according to Johns Hopkins University data. The global total for COVID-19 cases and deaths is more than 257.8 million cases and 5.15 million deaths, according to the CDC. More than 196 million Americans, 59.1% of the population, are fully vaccinated. The disease was reported as the underlying cause of death or a contributing cause of death for an estimated 377,883 people in 2020, accounting for 11.3% of deaths, according to the CDC. P.S. Exposing U.S.A. Gov. Their Lies!

Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS) is a rare event that occurs in adults whose hearts suddenly stop pumping, causing sudden cardiac arrest and possibly death. SADS is a loosely defined umbrella term for a series of cardiac syndromes that cause sudden cardiac arrest and possibly death. Some of these syndromes are the result of structural problems in the heart, while others may be the result of irregularities within the electrical channels. Sudden loss of consciousness or death often occurs during physical exercise or emotional upset. Young people with a particular family history are being urged to get their hearts screened even if they are fit and healthy, as they could be at risk of Sudden Adult Death Syndrome (SADS). The most common SADS conditions include genetic arrhythmia syndromes such as long QT syndrome, catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT), and Brugada syndrome.

Healthy Athletes Dropping Dead of Cardiac Arrest for No Reason A New Bioweapon ?

https://rumble.com/v2dvl62-healthy-athletes-dropping-dead-of-cardiac-arrest-for-no-reason-a-new-biowea.html

A New Bioweapon Globally As Of This Date 16 March 2023, there have been 760,360,956 confirmed cases of COVID-19, including 6,873,477 deaths, reported to WHO. As of 14 March 2023, a total of 13,232,904,667 vaccine doses have been administered. 6,033,218 Injured Recorded in Europe and USA Following COVID Vaccines with 4,358 Fetal Deaths in U.S. as of July 4 2022 -To date, the coronavirus disease 2023 (COVID-19) pandemic has taken more than 6.8 million lives. Many of these deaths have been attributed to misleading information that fragmented a coordinated effort to mitigate loss of life.

There have now been more deaths and vaccine side effects reported during the past 20 months to VAERS following COVID-19 vaccines than there have been for the entire previous 30 years for all FDA-approved vaccines before the Emergency Use Authorization of the COVID-19 shots in December of 2020. (834,124 cases, 9,278 deaths – source.)

The European (EEA and non-EEA countries) database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, verified by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and they are now reporting 46,999 fatalities, and 4,731,833 injuries following injections of five experimental COVID-19 shots:

COVID-19 MRNA VACCINE MODERNA (CX-024414)
COVID-19 MRNA VACCINE PFIZER-BIONTECH
COVID-19 VACCINE ASTRAZENECA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19)
COVID-19 VACCINE JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S)
COVID-19 VACCINE NOVAVAX (NVX-COV2373)
From the total of injuries recorded, almost half of them (22,648,861) are serious injuries.

“Seriousness provides information on the suspected undesirable effect; it can be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.”

A Health Impact News subscriber in Europe ran the reports for each of the four COVID-19 shots we are including here. It is a lot of work to tabulate each reaction with injuries and fatalities, since there is no place on the EudraVigilance system we have found that tabulates all the results.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230224153841/https://healthimpactnews.com/2022/76789-deaths-6089773-injuries-reported-in-u-s-and-european-databases-following-covid-19-vaccines/

The unvaccinated are a risk to all of us. Why COVID-19 Shot Is Not Safe ? Nuremberg Code ? Agent Orange ? Anthrax Vaccine ?

https://rumble.com/v2affqe-why-covid-19-shot-is-not-safe-nuremberg-code-agent-orange-anthrax-vaccine-.html

U.S. Government said and or told Us - We The People - COVID-19 Shot Are Safe ? LIE's ? So Per the Nuremberg Code ? Agent Orange ? Anthrax Vaccine ? Paraquat Pot ? 1920 Poisoned Alcohol ? Now Mandatory COVID-19 Shots caused adverse reactions in most recipients all part of a series of massive government cover-ups.
The Pentagon's mandatory anthrax shots caused adverse reactions in most recipients and helped prompt many Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard members to transfer to other units or leave the military between 1998 and 2000, according to a survey by Congress's General Accounting Office (GAO).

The survey indicated that 85% of troops who received an anthrax shot had an adverse reaction, a rate far higher than the 30% claimed by the manufacturer in 2000, when the survey was conducted. Sixteen percent of the survey respondents had either left the military or changed their status, at least in part because of the vaccination program.

Pedophile Bill Gates Is Lying To You On Vaccine Patent Protection # WO2020060606A1 - https://rumble.com/v2bvqos-pedophile-bill-gates-is-lying-to-you-on-vaccine-patent-protection-wo2020060.html

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (brand name: Comirnaty) was granted full Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in August 2021 for people ages 16 and older. It was the first COVID-19 vaccine to receive FDA Emergency Use Authorization. For the primary series: two shots, 4 to 8 weeks apart.1 The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine 3 weeks (or 21 days) after the first dose; Moderna COVID-19 vaccine 4 weeks (or 28 days) after the first dose.

The research was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Koch Institute Support (core) Grant from the National Cancer Institute.
Microsoft Patent - Bill Gates - Patent Description: "Cryptocurrency System Using Body Activity Data" - Patent #: WO2020060606A1 - WO = World Order? - 2020 = 2020 - 060606 = 666 (Number of the Beast) This patent seems to be created for establishing the relationship between the global Crypto-currency, the One World Cashless Society, and a body device ( Covid 19/21 Vaccine and RFID microchip and or quantum dot tattoo or hydrogel or another like-solution? ) in order to use a cashless payment system? Surely sounds related to the Mark of the Beast and the coming Beast System of Revelation.

In December researchers at MIT, under the supervision of (Bill) Gates, have developed exactly this “brand of the Beast” in the form of quantum dot tags that fluoresce after they are injected during a vaccination. Quantum dots are small, semiconducting nanoparticles, in the range of 2 to 10 nanometers. The tags are incorporated in a Band-Aid-like “tattoo” composed of sugar-based microneedles that dissolve into the skin. As the needles dissolve they deliver the vaccine and leave a grid pattern under skin, a bar code-like tattoo that determines your future. This grid contains an invisible record of your medical history. Instead of ink, your vital details are written in quantum dots, tiny semiconducting crystals that reflect light, that glow under infrared light. With this technology (Bill) Gates can embed vaccines and medical records directly into the skin. The ink is only visible using a special smartphone camera app and filter. The technology would enable instant tracking and access to a person’s medical history.

COVID-19 Vaccines Will Kill You? Animation What Happens If You Get Coronavirus Effect - https://rumble.com/v2dt6zk-covid-19-vaccines-will-kill-you-animation-what-happens-if-you-get-coronavir.html

No question that the mRNA vaccines should be withdrawn with immediate effect” An independent analysis of the accumulated Yellow Card data, finally released 18 months after the first FOI request, shows unequivocal safety signals linking the mRNA vaccines to serious damage to the lymph system, the heart, and female reproduction 'Health regulator failing to keep public protected from mRNA shots' IN the UK, three Covid-19 vaccines - AstraZeneca (AZ), Pfizer (PF) and Moderna (MO) - have been used in a nationwide inoculation programmed. Thanks !

Show less