WhitneyWebb_testimony_corona.md 23 KB
I would first of all point to youtube's parent company, Google, which among other things has invested heavily directly in the AStraZeneca vaccine through vaccitech. And broadly thispush by silicon valley to basically remake the health care system entirely, and a lot of this about moving to telemedicine and basically changing the normal paradigm of medical care nad they are invested in this specifically because they along with microsoft and other companies want to replace doctors with AI apps. there's efforst in the UK to replace the NHS with something called MHSX which is an app along these lines that they are seeking to basically replace the medical system down the lien. And they had plans to do this before Covid 19.
In the US Eric Schmidt was in charge of the national security commission on artificial intelligence and they had a presentation that they authored in 2019 didn't come out till ayear later that said the changes tehy need to see in the implementation of emerging techhnologies had to happen in health care first, and we've seen that happen over the past year or so.
So tehy're using health car to get full control
Yeah, I think that's where t they've started they start to reimagine health care is a way of taking control of people's lives tell them it's for the colelctive for public health and their personal health, whereas it's realy a way to sort of implement these sort of transhumanist or technocratic technologies
and google is heavily invested in all of this and they're actually partnered on a lto fo this with the US military so the fact that they're censoring stuff that goes against the narrative that they want to put forward, whether covid 19 or something ekse, shouldn't surprise anyone
Goiogle is invested in AZ?
Yeah, so the AZ vaccine they've been publicly framing for a long tim as non-profit that's not realy true bceause the two developers of that at the Jenner instiitute at Oxford have a company on which the techniology is based called Vaccitech and Google Ventures is one fot he main investors in that company, which is set to make a lot of profit as soon as they decide that the pandemic from their perspective has ended, and that declaration they can make as a company whenever they feel like it, actually.
What is your background?
Mint press news - became their senior investigative reporter - Did an Epstein article which got al to of buzz Started to do my own thing and partnered with The Last American Vagabond
We didn't - I didn't quite understand, how does this work - how can they end the pandemic, and what happens if they
Well it's how they set this up - they just declare it as that but htey don't need to make a public statement, and then they can start generating more of a profit than they have been.
I should mention that in addition to google, the UK government is directly invested in Vaccitech and is expected to make a profit. The other main stakeholder is Bravos Capital, which if IMNMistaken which is set up by the former head of Global equity trading at Deutschebank
And also here you know that this Curevac which has the patents on teh BioNTech Pfizer vaccine, the German government had invested heavily in that
So is that all, we have now three shareholders that have invested in Vaccitech
Well technically the bRavos investmentt is through Oxford Science Innovation. So they sort of hide it with some indirection.
Sequoa capital Chinese branch and Fo Soom Pharma. And the Wellcome Trust, also.
Wellcome Trust is intimiately involved with the AZ vaccine, period. They have some pretty disturbing eugenecists links.
It's through Oxford Science the Wellcome Trust investment.
So this is somethign I have never heard, before - is this one of the major vehicles tha twe're discusison right now, in the context of this vaccine scheme?
Well, ti's specifically for the tech used in the AZ vaccine and they plan to use more vaccines with that and a lto of this produced at the Jenner institute because the people founded each. Conducting trials in Africa right now for a Universal malaria vaccine. Nasty track record, Jenner institute, lead by Adrian Hill, with being not quite honest with parents about the risk of vaccine I believe it was in South Africa about 7 infants died, and they new in advance the vaccine was ineffective before the trial adn they just did it anyway, and so of course the conclusion of tha ttiral was that it was ineffective even though they knew that well in advance.
And they still went forward with it?
In 2009, they have a track record of being very dishonest in their trials they also hid results of animal trials from parents.
What's the general purpose of the institute?
Well, so originally they were a public private partnership with Glaxo Smith Kline in the UK Gov in the 1990s, and eventually Glaxo Smith kiline pulled out and they were renamed in 2005 - one of the main vehicles at Oxford U for vaccine development but also more broadly for vaccine funding research ing eneral because Adrian Hill si also the chief person at the UK Vaccine Network which decides which vax to fund and give to public in UK and globally through Vaccine Philanthropy.
Are they independent or public?
It's part of Oxford University, it used to be a public/private partnership but Glaxo removed themselves.
Wellcome Trust is named for Henry Wellcome and aprt of Glaxo Smith Kline before the 1990s when they merged with Glaxo was the company Burroughs Wellcome.
This seems to be hte crowd that pushes AZ but then there's another crowd, probably around the Gates Foundation, that's pushing the mRNA vaccines
Yes, btu slightly different - if you notice over time the AZ vax has been banned in developed countries or restricted its use, mainly for elderly. In some countries they hav ebanned it outright. But Covax, the Gates backed effort to vaccinate the developing world, relies almost completely on AZ despite developments which led to developing companies eblieving it wasn't safe enough for use, but it's still good enough for Africa Latin aAmerican South east asia, India, so clearly that's a considerable double standard, and if you look into the history of the wellcome trust foundation and also the gates foundation and that's essentially experimenting on the developing world on things that predate covid considerably. Also broadly the pharmaceutical indsutry does this, like the polio vaccine, ti was previously a live-virus polio vaccine, and it was not discontinued despite the evidence that it was causing more vpolio than it prevents, it's actually still widely used in the developing world - including where I usedd to live in Chile.
I have another question this moderna and JJ, are these sort of backup vaccines? HOw do they play into this?
So, I know a lto more about the AZ vacc because I did a long report on it which got my deplatformed by Patreon.
THE JJ vaccine, J&J has a pretty bad track record that looks very obvious whneever someone looks into pahrmaceutical companies. I think the mRNA vaccine is targeted for the developing world.
I think ti was signifincant that J&J was manufactured in the US by emergent biosolutions, which previously was bioport, which was created as a spinoff of Port and Down of the UK, like a bio defense lab, with the former head of the US joint chiefs of staff under Ronald Regan. they were intimately involved with the 2001 anthrax attacks - the onyl way they could save their mandatory for US Personel Anthrax vaccine program. They were involved in scandals ever since but were still chosen to manufacture it in spite of that, and the person in charge of the manufacturing had no experience with that field whatsoever - his background was being head of military intelligence teams for the US in Iraq and Afghanistan - doesn't make sense that he would be in charge of that. These batches were ruined and unusable and who knwos what would have happened if anyoen would have used them. It's interesting that this company manufactured the vaccine. Also connected to CIA and military contractor in Ohio which has a lot of ties with Anthrax attacks as well.
I'm very interested in who's controlling the contents of the jabs - is there a control which is independent from the producer? Or is there a possibility - is there something very transparent controlling what is really in teh jabs - because we have a situation that it's all emergency stuff that is used now, so tmany controls are bypassed now - an dwe are a little bit suspicious that maybe the pharmaceutical industry or the industry for vaccines is using this possibility to find out what is possible with nucleic acid and with mRNA vaccines and all this stuff - because normally there are very strict rules when they wanted to use sucha technology - and now they can do all they want so I would be very intested to see if somethign is scanning the patents that have been issued or asked for in this field - I think they msut have grown rather rapidly because tehre is sucha chance to use this technology in many fields where it was a taboo before- Did they use this chance to make clinical studies under cover? funny pictures people putting metal on their vaccine site - and nothing declared about the contents that could explain this phenomenon - perhaps it's a fake, but I do not know - I thtink we should have some means to control what is really in the jabs - so we find out that there are some jabs where physiological sodium chloride water was in it and so it's maybe the conrtol they use when they want to trry out something - so they can just do everything now, they can make us the laboratory rats
Sounds like 2 questiosn.
First thing, there needs to be more attention given to the manufacturers of the vaccine, because the developers just develop the formula whic his then given to the manufactureres who actually produce and create the vaccine that is injected into people.S o in the case of hte US the main manufacturer is that same company , Emergent Biosolutions which has an awful track record of you know they basically the pentagon lost a law suit in 2004 where they wer accused of using military personnel as lab rats in an off-label use of the vaccine they were producing - so they have a really nasty track record - the pentagon in the US is intimately connected to Bioport Emergent Solutions.
In terms of the mRNA tech, I agree that they seized on this opportunity to use it more widely so the hidden hand i would argue again with the mRNA is once again the US military if you look at the Pfizer and Moderna they started with a significant investment in 2013 from DARPA the advanced research branch of the military - they are intimately involved in other ORwellian and ranshuanist technologies for US soldiers and also in general public - heavily invested in research regarding brain-machine interfaces, among other things - and a lot of people there are very extre e- they recentl teamed up with the Wellcome trust to create something called Wellcome leap-
If you look abck a couple years when they're talking about Moderna in mainstream media - more health focused - they talked about how moderna had run into problems with their vaccine technology platform - they were highly secretive that even people who were interviewed for jobs had to sign non-disclosure agreements just for the interview with this company - and hte problem taht they back then was tha tthey couldn't get their vaccines because if they had too few nanolipid particles to deliver the mRNA the vaccine wouldn't wokr and if it was too high it ended up beign toxic to the people that received it - and there's no indication that the problem was ever solved by the time it was rolled out and essentially from that article in 2016 in a seubsequent one from Stat News which is as mainstrea as it gets in terms of health care - they basically said that Moderna needed some sort of saving-grace to save the company - becauase it was the most highly valued private company in biotech but had no products on the market just a lto on their pipeline and needed a way to get their products to hthe public.
DARPA in 2013?
Yes. And same with Pfizer's vaccine technology - developed with money and infleunce from DARPA. ANd the person who green-lighted the investments left in 2012 - investments not formally made util 2013 - Regina Dugan - who later left DARPA to basically create a DARPA equivalent for Google and later facebook as well and she is the one who teamed up witht he Wellcome trust to create this basically DARPA equivalent for the Wellcome Trust. Regina Dugan.
Was that after the Anthrax attakcs that they developed a vaccine?
No they had it before and it didn't work and was killign people, basically, and it was getting to the point wher ethey were tieing peopel down and forcefully injecting them.
How?
Meryl mass - sh eis the person to talk about all of that with - she was involved in the lawsuit that was brought against the government by military veterans - vaccine policy int he late 90s, 98 - when bioport was made and basically only had this one product. In sSeptember 2001 the pentagon was going to release a report about how to continue the vaccine policy without this company and their antrhax vaccine, and of course you have 9/11 happen so the report doesn't come out, and then the Anthrax attakcs happen, and suddenly the concern are replaced with wide calls to use it not only in the military, but in first-responders, police, teachers even
When did the accidents happen?
So it was announced the case in early October 2001, btu right after 9/11 people intimately tied to the Bush and Neocons wer talking abot how Al Quaeda were going to attack Americans with Anthrax and variosu things and I think the NY Times did 27 articles in a couple weeks about Anthrax and one of the main authors of those articles was Judith Miller who later received a fake anthrax letter in the attacks and she along with many top officials were involved in a simulation what would be the Anthrax attacks essentially called Dark Winter that took place in June 2001 and a lot fo people the same peopel who rpdouced the Dark Winter simulation and then later personally brief Dick Cheney about it are the same peopel that oversaw and moderated event 201 last year before the Coronavirus situation.
But this is not Johnson and Johnson, but emerging bio solutions
Yeah, who manufacture the Johnson and Johnson vaccine now
Wolfgang hypothesizes that vaccine rollout experiments the amount of lipid nanoparticles - asks about leaking
We don't know what they're doing with the vaccines in that sense, but what Moderna said specifically at least 2 years before Covid-19 was that this is a problem they have they could not solve. Now that it's used widely in emergency use authorization - tehy ahve a lot more leeway, potentially, to do so - would not surprise me - they were desperate as a company - if you want to get around that quickly, you need some type of crisis where they can obfuscate the nature of that issue
What do you think about these vaccines - since we know that we're not dealing with a medcial problem, in the sense that there si a full blown epidemic - there must be other - what's the agenda behind it? Financial, Eugenics, ? Military heavily connected with vaccines - is there are a conclusion that can be drawn?
I would argue so- what I mentiojned at the beginning, sort of the Silicon Valley push to redo healthcare - Precision medicine - they describe it as medications and vaccines and gene thereapies targeted to the individual - targeted to your genome - increase under the guise of COVID-19 testing - amass genetic data across the world - a lot of this is being held by the same silicon valley companies - western US - a lot of COVID-19 testing has been done by Verily - Google subsidiary - which is at the same tim trying to make their AI healthcare based on this genetic data - a lot of those same technologies come from the US military, or involve predictive diagnoses based on an AI algorithm - you are likely to have this disease, before showing symptoms, take their word for it - Co-developed by Google with the military - defense innovation unit - I would argue that the wide-ranging use of these mRNA vaccines and treating them as regular vaccines - instead of when they were previously in years past described by US media as gene therapy - a way to normalize the same kind of silicon valley precision medicine
So funny that we can observe in the legislation - 2009 Summer / July - German Bundestag changed the law to change the definition of vaccine - giving nucleic acids may not just be called genetic therapy but can be named vaccine - just before the German election (swine flu time) - they just changed it, so they opened the possibility to call this gene therapy "vaccines" if it is aimed to fight infections
Right, it's essentially the same thing, but part of a broader move to normalize this type of medicine - vocabulary normally associated with traditional medicine, but can apply it to things that are not traditional at all
This gene editing, sort of push within medicine - if you look back to Julian Huxley, first director of UNESCO and former president of the British Eugenics society (which still exists today) - it's called the Galton Institute - renamed in 1989 - Adrian Hill of the Astrazeneca vaccine spoke at their 100 year anniversary, celebrating 100 years of eugenics, and the Wellcome Trust hosts their archive - which they think is of great use to medicine
Going back to Julian Huxley he said in 1946 you should make the unthinkinable thinkable again and 10 years later he coined the term Transhumanism and said that gene editing as a science had to be applied with these new efforts to merge humans with machines as a way to create a new human being, or human being 2.0 , and that's when he coined the term transhumanist. So that's going back to 1957. New Bottles for New Wines?
And then you have someone at the Galton institute, the Eugenics society, more recently, one of their board memebers, David Galton, publishing a book that was positively reviewed in the UK press about eugenics in teh 21st century, and front and center are these gene editing medicines.
Wasn't that in connection wtih the founding of UNESCO?
He was the founding director general of UNESCO.
So with this push for precision medicine, is this money-making? You can sell this targeted/tailored medicine. We are running into a big economic problem, so I can't see how people can pay for this medicine
I think it's about control and, at the end of the day, eugenics. I think they want to employ this medicine so much that I fully expect the Biden administration - Obama administration in the US funded a lot of these precision medicines considerably - Biden is going to be funding a Health DARPA that is going to be championed by Eric Lander, who has ties to eugenecists, was funded by JEffrey Epstein among all people - there is this push for socialized medicine, medicare for all, so they will allow that to take place but only if it's these precision gene-edited medicines that they will offer to people for free.
What role did Jeff Epstein play in this - he wanted to create new people with his own DNA?
Yeah, he wante to seed the human race with his DNA - he had a lot of ideas, but what's important is that now that he's gone, the scientists that he funded are still very m uch around - one of them, a key person, is someone like George Church who is a Harvard geneticist who has been openly accused of promoting eugenics in the mainstream press - he has promoted unethical human experimentation by trying to resurrect neandertals by implanting them into a human woman - and all of this stuff, really bizarre stuff, but he's actually pretty heavily promoted - what' sintresting about Epstein, is that yoyu have to look at something called the Edge foundation - operating as a front for Jeffrey Epstein, He was their only donor 2001 - 2017 - vast majority came from Epstein - a way for Epstein to gain influence over people both in silicon valley who were big into these, and a lot of geneticists at Harvard. Epstein was an operative - but I think thre's a couple of different things there - he woroked for more than one Intelligence Agency doing different things, but I think that honestly his main handler at the end of the day is going to be this group of Zionist billionaires called the MegaGroup - which is basically Lesley Wexner and the Bromfman family - both of whom have ties to organized crime, going back to the 20s and 30s, with considerable influence over Israeli politics. In terms of his involvement - he was involved in both the science and tech angles - but he definitely wasn't alone or the orchestrator - just a cog in the machine, as it were - people like Ghislaine Maxwell's sister, isabell maxwell, a WEF tech pioneer with ties to Israeli intelligence also intimately involved in aspects of that. And of course an Epstein associate whose ties they claim to be investigating right now, btu are actually covering up is someone like Bill Gates whose ties actually go back to the 1990s based on considerable evidence that mainstream media refuses to pursue.
Evidence: if you believe the MM Narrative, they didn't meet until 2011, but there's a 2001 Evening Standard article written by a reputable reporter - never retracted - writen before Epstein was notorious for anything - which said that his main business partners were Lesley Wexner, Donald Trump and Bill Gates - you have at least one survivor Maria Farmer who worked for Epstein between 1995 and 1996 hearing them discuss Bill Gates as though they were good riends, and she expected Gates to visit one of Epstein's properties, though she didn't see him, btu they obviously were discussing him, they knew each other - There's also a documented relationship between Ghistlaine Maxwell's companies and Bill Gates specifically - 2001 Guardian article where Maxwell where she's very open abou thaving inherited the Israeli Espionage portfolio - called "Israeli's super spy" - Guardian's way of describing it - She starts purring when she talks about Bill Gates and starts talking in a fake southern belle accent, even though she has a British accent - she has never done this in any other interview - she said she prsonally persuaded him to invest to maintain his tax-free status - and his company com-touch which was basically a front for Israeli military intelligence - the only way he could have done that to be tax-free was to use hte Bill and Melinda Trust - Philanthropic investment vehicle - to invest in that particular company. Epstein had ties to Bill Gates' closest advisor - Nathan Mervald - who was also CTO at Microsoft. Throughout the 90s Epstein traveled with him to the Russia conference. In 1998 - and Mervald threw food on his plane several times - documented. He was seen taking underage women to Merval's offices for reasons we don't quite know - other executives there as well, and of course Epstein's science advisor in the 90s became Bill Gates' top science advisor by 2005 - Melanie Walker - and so if we are to believe that Bill Gates didn't know about Epstein until 2011.
why would he hire a womna to be science advisor for his