SLAVERY

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

Do Not Wear a Mask

and Do Not Get a Shot:

Never Comply!

Gary D. Barnett

October 31, 2020

“The doctrine of blind obedience and unqualified submission to any human power, whether civil or ecclesiastical, is the doctrine of despotism.”

~ Angelina Grimke: Sarah Grimke, Angelina Grimke (2015). “On Slavery and Abolitionism: Essays and Letters”, p.97, Penguin

    This country that at one time was populated with mostly intelligent, hard-working, self-responsible, and tough individuals, has become a country filled with idiots, weaklings, and fools. I do not say this lightly, nor am I attempting to berate all, but most of those that populate America today were taught to become weak and ignorant, to become divided and hateful, to ignore tradition, to disrespect truth and honesty, to throw aside family, to become robotic drones, and self-aggrandizing socialists. While this result was planned by the ruling segment of society, and implemented over a long period of time, it was nonetheless voluntarily accepted by the masses. Due to the current attitudes evident today, the acceptance of all-consuming immorality, war, torture, theft, redistribution of private wealth, and disregard for fellow men and property, are apparent, and there is widespread and pitiful sensitivity among the herd that borders on lunacy.

ORIGINAL POST

 

 

SWINE FLU

© MMXX V1.0.0

by Morley Evans

SAME STORY

Same Story, Different Decade: How WHO’s Definition of a Global Pandemic Benefits Big Pharma

When WHO broadened its definition of a global pandemic in 2009, H1N1 vaccine makers profited at taxpayers’ expense. COVID vaccine makers will likely reap even more benefits.

By Jeremy Loffredo

In the years leading up to 2009, the World Health Organization (W.H.O.) worked alongside vaccine manufacturers, namely GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), to ensure that European and African countries entered into contracts to vaccinate their citizens in the event of an unforeseen global flu pandemic. 

These dormant, or “sleeping contracts,” stipulated that if a global pandemic were to occur, it would trigger the contracts, specified pharmaceutical companies would manufacture flu vaccines. The respective governments would pay the vaccine manufacturers. 

On June 11, 2009, WHO Director-General Margaret Chan declared H1N1 swine flu to be a global pandemic, triggering the dormant contracts and throwing the pharmaceutical and vaccine industry into high gear. 

Chan was able to make this declaration based on the W.H.O.’s the official definition of a pandemic, which was updated just a month before declaring the H1N1 pandemic — The W.H.O. deleted its definition of a pandemic from the organization’s website and replaced it with a new, more flexible definition. 

Under the new definition, the W.H.O. no longer required that anyone die from an illness before the organization could declare a pandemic. The new definition stipulated only that infections be geographically widespread. 

CONTINUE HERE

 

FEARMONGERING

© MMXX V.1.0.1

by Morley Evans

These trusty French soldiers are ready to shoot any viruses that threaten France. They are wearing face masks to stop viruses that haven't been killed by bullets. France is safe! But is Saskatchewan safe? 

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

The FEAR CAMPAIGN desperately needs to show deaths. The Imperial College in London predicted death. Deaths MUST be increasing at alarming rates. People MUST believe that SARS-CoV-2 is an existential threat to life on earth. Anyone who can read knows Saskatchewan desperately needs more deaths. ☠️ Otherwise, the general population will start to get the idea that the public "health" authorities are not telling the truth. Heavens to Mergatroid! People might conclude that we are being led by LIARS, IMBECILES, CRETINS, HALF-WITS, OR WORSE! Are we?

We need to be stepping over dead bodies in the street as Bill Gates leads us into the dystopia following mass death. People who haven't been killed by The Virus will be killed by Bill's vaccine. Bill will lead survivors into dark, cold caves where they will cower behind their facemasks to be harangued by insane witch doctors. Hello, Greta! In the Brave New World that Bill and Greta are creating, modern civilization will be gone. Gone will be food, plastic, oil, and electricity. They are evil. 

They made a scary movie called Contagion. What's going on is just like that. IT MUST BE TRUE.

BE AFRAID.

RF KENNEDY, JR INTERVIEW

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CG3HA0Ynx1A/?utm_source=ig_embed

NO ACCIDENTS

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

TULSI

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

https://www.facebook.com/TulsiGabbard/videos/1058107837988828/

https://www.facebook.com/TulsiGabbard/videos/744769392918311

Robert F. Kennedy, JR.

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

MAN THE BARRICADES

AMERICAN GAMBIT

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

THE AMERICAN GAMBIT

1). The United States creates a war between leading military powers.

2). The United States remains neutral while selling food and weapons.

3). The United States enters the war on one side and tips the balance after belligerents have exhausted themselves.

4). The United States takes credit for ending the war and restores peace on its terms.

5). The United States begins collecting what it has loaned to the belligerents to pay for American food and weapons.

This is a variation on the British colonial template to create unrest and restore order with the British in control of the unruly uncivilized natives who would kill themselves were it not for civilized Christians helping.

This was done in World Wars I & II. During the interwar period, the Washington Navel Agreement reduced the Royal Navy while the Secretary of the Navy, Franklin Roosevelt, built up the U.S. Navy. The British disarmed after WW I. The British spent everything they had to buy American food and materiel in WWI. In WW II, Winston Churchill transferred gold and securities to Montréal to buy American goods. When that was gone, American banks loaned more. In WW II, the Soviet Union was loaned money to buy American materiel. Food was supplied free of charge, according to a Russian source. 

The Soviet debt was substantially reduced at Yalta when Stalin said the communists could not pay it. Germany and Japan grew rich after the war, thanks to American support, while the main American ally shrivelled and blew away as a poodle of Washington. The British had been sucked dry.

World Wars I & II replaced the British as world hegemon with the United States ascending the throne. The wars completed the American War of Independence that began in 1776. Was that the plan or was it an accident? Franklin Roosevelt told us, "In politics, nothing is an accident." That comes from The Great Manipulator, himself. Skilled politicians themselves, Stalin and Churchill had nothing on Roosevelt. Let's give credit where credit is due.

In the movie, East of Eden, Cal had made a fortune buying beans at a fire-sale price from desperate California farmers and selling them for an exorbitant price to desperate British buyers. Cal's father thought that was immoral. He told Cal to return the money he stole. That sums it up.

© MMXX V.1.0.3
by Morley Evans

DEMOCRATS

American politicians were Republican-Democrats until the Civil War when Abraham Lincoln became the leader of a new party called the Republican Party. (founded about 1861)

Why is the Republican Party called "The Grand Old Party"? It was founded 33 years after the Democratic Party. 1861-1828=33 years. It's another mystery along with the myth that Democrats are permanent underdogs.

Here's a handy list of American Presidents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States

Democrats say, "A clown was elected in 2016. We have had a circus ever since." Really? Who made it a circus? Let's look at the Democrats. Who were the worst Presidents? Following are Democratic Presidents. You can make your own list of Republican Presidents and compare the two. 

What does a Democrat believe in?

The modern Democratic Party emphasizes egalitarianism, social equality, protecting the environment, and strengthening the social safety net through liberalism. They support voting rights and minority rights, including LGBT rights, multiculturalism, and religious secularism.

Democrats were in power most of the time in the twentieth century. They were in power for World War I, the Great Depression, World War II, and the Cold War, including the Korean War and the War in Vietnam. Democrats created the military-industrial complex, the U.S. Navy, the world-wide imperial empire, nuclear weapons and the Triad, the CIA, and the National Security Act which amended the Constitution. 

Democrats own Broadway and Hollywood as well as television, newspapers, newsmagazines, and radio. Democrats own Big tech too. Democrats run the trade unions, especially "public service" (government) unions. Democrats control what most people do and what most people think. They control the mob.

Wall Street is intimately connected to the United States Treasury, the Federal Reserve System, and the Democratic Party. All billionaires are not Republicans. More than a few billionaires are Democrats.

Democrats have cultivated their image as peace-loving, home-spun, friends of the middle class, and the champions of women, blacks, Jews, and Hispanics. In contrast, they have demonized Republicans as evil greedy owners who exploit workers and run everything for their own fun and profit. "They should be made to pay their 'fair share'."

Andrew Jackson founded the Democratic Party. He was called a jackass by his opponents. Jackson adopted the jackass as the symbol of his party. (founded 1828) Jacksonian Democracy expanded political power and the expectation that one can and should use it to expand one's income at the expense of someone else, ensuring a permanent war of all against all.

James Polk waged war on Mexico and added half of Mexico to the United States. Today that includes New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, and Oregon. Texas had been extracted from Mexico already.

The Democratic "Safe South" was the former Confederacy. It was "safe" because the Southern aristocracy, the planters who were the slave owners, were Democrats who ensured a political block for the Democratic Party. Try to reconcile that with black block-support of the Democratic Party. 

Woodrow Wilson created the mess we have lived in since he and Colonel House engineered the Treaty of Versailles in 1915. Wilson suspended the Constitution, lied about peace, and got the U.S. into World War I. Wilson played the American Gambit.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt presided over the Great Depression (which the Democrats probably created on purpose); he engineered World War II; initiated the development of the atom bomb and authorized dropping it on Japan. FDR played the American Gambit and made the USA the Capo di tutti capi. Roosevelt introduced socialism with the New Deal. Much more can be said about this blackguard who is revered as a saint by most Americans.

Democratic Party left-wing ideology snuggles up to Marx, Lenin, Trotsky and has fully-embraced Zionism with its racist paranoia and ideology of Jewish supremacy.

Harry S. Truman dropped atom bombs on Japan, started the Korean War, created the National Security State and the CIA, and started the Cold War.

Lyndon Bains Johnson gave nuclear weapons technology to Israel; engineered the Six-Day War for Israel; hooked Israel up to the United States Treasury, engineered the War in Vietnam; introduced the Great Society programs; was President during the Great American Race Riots and was the CEO of the JFK assassination and cover-up. 

Jimmy Carter was President when the Iranians took back control of their country by kicking out the Shah and the CIA. They had been installed in 1953 with the coup d'état that was engineered by Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., and the CIA as part of FDR's post-war consolidation of the USA as the new world hegemon. Iranians have been put on the permanent hate-list for daring to defy the imperium. The master cannot afford to tolerate any insubordination.

Bill Clinton starved Iraq with sanctions, bombed Serbia into the Stone Age, and filled his pockets as President with help from his bride, sweet Hillary.

John F. Kennedy was a pretty good President. Robert F. Kennedy was a pretty good Attorney General. They were assassinated along with Martin Luther King, Jr.

The Fear Campaign has created a world-wide mass psychosis resulting in a shutdown of the world's economy through Lockdowns. It was initiated and continues to be supported by Democrats. Democratic Governors and mayors invariably support Lockdowns and "social distancing".

The Fear Campaign is a direct extension of the Democratic Hate Campaign that has run 24/7 on all channels for four years to oust President Donald J. Trump by any means possible, regardless of the cost. 

The Democrats would and will destroy the United States to regain control. Nancy and Chuckie believe, "It's better to rule in Hell than it is to serve in Heaven."

Some people have an unconstrained vision of the world, while others have a constrained vision of the world. The former see problems for which they have solutions. The latter see trade-offs. They think some things can be made a little bit better by making other things a little bit worse. Stalin knew "You must break eggs to make an omelette." Democrats have no end of brilliant schemes to solve problems. Democrats are smart. Invariably, the unintended consequences of their solutions are worse than the problems they try to solve.

Full-cost accounting looks at both costs and benefits. People who refuse to recognise the problems their ideas have caused are common. Such people are smart. They can be extremely creative when covering up messes they have created. It is rare when someone accepts responsibility for what he has done. 

Government accounting is notoriously deceptive. It conceals more than it reveals. Bureaucrats are past-masters at this. Politicians and bureaucrats NEVER take responsibility for what they do. Someone else (taxpayers) always foots the bill and cleans up the mess.

Many fortunes over the years have been created when recipients have shifted some or all of their costs onto others, or they have appropriated assets they don't own. Governments are used to facilitate this. This is not the same as attracting customers with better products at lower prices from suppliers who offer inferior products at higher prices. Governments frequently shelter favoured suppliers from the competition.

Are you planning to vote Democratic?

 

JEREMY R. HAMMOND

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

www.jeremyrhammond.com

Hi Morley,

In my last newsletter, I discussed common misconceptions about the PCR tests and how they are being misused to diagnose COVID-19. One of the things I said was that the popular claim that SARS-CoV-2 has not been isolated is wrong: the virus has been isolated and its whole genome sequenced by scientists all over the world.

As I anticipated, I got numerous pushback emails from readers for saying that. Most were respectful, fortunately, although at least one was rather nasty.

This is not a topic that I really want to get into because I view it as a total distraction from real issues. But I had to say it, and because there are readers who respectfully shared their genuine confusion, I do feel compelled to address it more substantively. 

There is so much misinformation about this that I could not possibly take the time to fully address all the claims being widely shared about it. So, in the interests of time, I'm just going to address one source that several readers mentioned in their emails to me. It is representative of the nature of these popular claims about the virus never having been proven to exist.

It's an article that I've seen spread very widely on social media in recent weeks. Actually, it's a series of articles, written by Jon Rappoport of NoMoreFakeNews.com. They all rely on the same underlying claim, so let's look briefly at the one titled "The fake coronavirus and the missing study: the secret in plain sight".

In it, Rappoport begins by noting some pushback he'd received himself:

I have also been sent a CDC document that claims the COVID virus has been isolated. However, that document is dated two months earlier [May 5] than the CDC document that admits they do not have the virus [July 13]. So it means nothing.

Last week, I wrote and published two articles (here and here) exposing the root of the poisonous tree: the CDC admits it does not have an isolated COVID virus.

The central claim he's making here is false. The CDC did not admit in July that it did not have an isolate of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. (COVID-19 is not the name of the virus, although it's frequently misused that way.)

The CDC rather said that back in February. What Rappoport noticed was that version 5 of the document, in which the CDC states "no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available", is dated July 13. That's because there was an update in July. The original version was back in February.

The context was that the CDC was developing a PCR test for detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA. At the time its test was under development, as it stated back in February, it had no isolated virus in its possession.

Soon thereafter, though, CDC researchers did isolate the virus, as discussed in the May 5 document.

So, the CDC document dated May 5 does not mean "nothing". The CDC did not claim to have isolated the virus only to admit two months later that it had not done so. This is totally wrong.

You can see that this PCR document was published on February 4 -- not July 13 -- right here.

Later versions of the document were not intended to revise its original contents. Notice, for example, that version 5 still refers to the virus as "2019-nCoV" even though it was subsequently named "SARS-CoV-2". It would make no sense to alter that original content, such as the statement about the CDC not having the virus in its possession. That statement is specifically relevant to that moment in time back in February.

The purpose of the update is rather stated by the CDC right here: "Additionally, FDA approved an amendment on July 13, 2020, to add the Promega Maxwell® RSC 48 as an authorized extraction instrument for use with the CDC 2019-nCoV RRT-PCR Diagnostic Panel."

In sum, the CDC's statement that it did not have the virus in its possession was true not in July but in February. The CDC did not say that it still had not obtained an isolate of the virus in July. The CDC document discussing its isolation of the virus in May is not contradicted by the July update of its PCR document. The claim that version 5 of the PCR document proves that the virus has not been isolated is completely false.

This is precisely the kind of misinformation I was alluding to when I wrote in my prior newsletter that the virus has been isolated. Claims to the contrary are of this nature, which is to say that they are not grounded in fact or science, but in dismissals of science -- such as the many studies in which scientists from all over the world describe isolating and whole-genome sequencing SARS-CoV-2, or this international database of genome sequences.

I find it regrettable that Rappoport has made this claim. I'd much rather be debunking propaganda from the New York Times or other mainstream media, like usual, than addressing such errors by fellow independent journalists.

However, I'm compelled to do so since such claims are being so readily accepted by so many people and being so widely spread on social media. The one reason I feel it is worthwhile to address it briefly in this newsletter is I want to emphasize that such claims are distractive and do not help to advance our cause. 

Specifically, these claims do not help effectively combat the authoritarian lockdown regimes and their mass vaccination endgame. On the contrary, they serve to legitimize lockdown advocates' dismissals of lockdown opponents as "conspiracy theorists" spreading "misinformation". We in the health freedom movement must do better.

So, I hope you will join me in setting aside the belief that the virus isn't real but some elaborate hoax and instead focusing on ways to effectively counter the mainstream lies and propaganda about SARS-CoV-2 that serve to manufacture consent for increasing authoritarianism.

With Respect and In Solidarity,

Jeremy

P.S. -- As I just mentioned, the explicitly stated endgame of the authoritarian "lockdown" measures is mass vaccination, with much talk already about forcing a COVID-19 vaccine on us by one means or another (such as talk of having to have an "immunity passport" to exercise basic freedoms).

Additionally, lockdown advocates ignore the massive harms of these measures. The economy was already in bad shape before the outbreak, and deliberately shutting down economic activity has pushed millions of people around the globe toward financial ruin and poverty. And the economic costs are measurable not just in dollars but also in health and lives.

If the situation has made you consider the need for greater independence financially, there's a documentary series coming soon that you'll definitely want to check out. 

If you saw the docu-series Vaccines Revealed, this one is by the same team.

It's called Money Revealed, and it features many people who've forged their own path, sharing their knowledge about how to create and preserve wealth. Whether you're interested in starting your own online business, investing in real estate or stocks, avoiding government theft (i.e., "taxation"), or building a nest egg for retirement, it promises to provide valuable and actionable information:

CDC UPDATE

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

The U.S. Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention (CDC) recently updated its estimated Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) parameters to include age-specific data showing the vast majority of people who contract COVID-19 survives.

CDC’s new IFR estimates broken down by age are part of the agency’s September 10 update to its “COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios.”

Based on the “Scenario 5: Current Best Estimate” for the IFR, Breitbart News confirmed the updated age-specific survival rates: 0-19 years old, 99.997 per cent; 20-49 years old, 99.98 per cent; 50-69 years, 99.5 per cent; and 70 years old or older, 94.6 per cent.

That means that for people 69 years old or younger, the survival rate is between 99.5 per cent and 99.997 per cent, while for those 70 or older, it is an estimated 94.6 per cent.

Breitbart News gleaned the survival rate figures from the CDC’s IFR estimates: 0-19 years old, 0.003 per cent; 20-49 years old, 0.02 per cent; 50-69 years, 0.5 per cent; 70 years old or older, 5.4 per cent.

Driven by the high rate among seniors age 70 and older, the average of the age-specific IFRs included in the CDC document stands at an estimated 1.5 per cent. That is much higher than the seasonal flu’s mortality rate of about 0.1 per cent but substantially lower than death rate estimates before the nationwide lockdowns intensifying.

Excluding the fatality rate for seniors results in the average IFR dropping to 0.174 per cent.

In May, the CDC suggested the overall IFR stood at 0.26 per cent, about eight to 15 times lower than earlier mortality rate estimates of two to four per cent.

The IFR, or true fatality rate, accounts for all infected individuals (asymptomatic and symptomatic). Meanwhile, the Case Fatality Rate (CFR) only includes confirmed cases.

The IFR tends to be lower and considered more accurate because it is a more comprehensive representation of the death rate.

Asymptomatic cases are harder to detect, so officials often use estimates based on tests for antibodies against the novel coronavirus disease.

The five scenarios mentioned in the CDC document are meant to help inform “decisions by public health officials” and help them “evaluate the potential effects of different community mitigation strategies,” including social distancing.

Data in the planning scenarios document may “also be useful to hospital administrators in assessing resource needs,” the agency said.

“Mathematical modellers are using the planning scenarios throughout the Federal government,” it added.

Despite the U.S. leading the world in the number of cases, more people have contracted the virus in this country without dying as compared to other nations.

DELUSIONAL PSYCHOSIS

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

DELUSIONAL PSYCHOSIS

Delusional disorder, previously called paranoid disorder, is a type of serious mental illness — called a “psychosis”— in which a person cannot tell what is real from what is imagined. The main feature of this disorder is the presence of delusions, which are unshakable beliefs in something untrue. People with delusional disorder experience non-bizarre delusions, which involve situations that could occur in real life, such as being followed, poisoned, deceived, conspired against or loved from a distance. These delusions usually involve the misinterpretation of perceptions or experiences. In reality, however, the situations are either not true at all or highly exaggerated. [1]

The so-called public "health" bureaucrats around the world, led by the WHO and the FDA, NIH, CDC, the big pharmaceutical companies, people advising the President of the United States, such as Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, and the Democratic Party, have managed to create with the Fear Campaign a worldwide psychosis affecting hundreds of millions of people. Their campaign has encouraged the destruction of the global economy through Lockdowns.

People who are wearing face masks are advertizing they have been infected with this disease.

This psychosis is the real pandemic. The Fear Campaign MUST stop immediately.

KARY MULLIS

© MMXX V.1.0.2

by Morley Evans

Not the usual Nobel Laureate

KARY MULLIS

I discovered Kary Mullis a few years ago. He was an honest man. He thought things out, concluding that science has been completely corrupted by government money. Anyone whose book title is Dancing Naked in the Mindfield is my friend. Here is what I found. 

Kary Mullis didn't believe in Global Warming; he thought "Climate Science" is a Joke. Mullis didn't think that HIV causes AIDS, either. He was awarded a Nobel Prize for creating the widely-used PCR technique, which is used today to test infections of COVID19. Mullis died a few years ago. It would be interesting to hear what he thinks about what is being claimed for his test. Is it being misused? Would Kary Mullis agree with Professor Chossudovsky? This is what Mullis thought of the hypothesis that HIV causes AIDS.

HIV & AIDS

Scientific Thinking

Chemistry

(continued)

Knut M Wittkowski, Ph.D, ScD

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

The interview was censored by YouTube. Readers can and should turn off anyone who joins the campaign to destroy honestly. You can ask yourself, "What don't they want me to know? Why don't they want me to know?"

https://www.collective-evolution.com/2020/04/29/leading-scientist-claims-lockdown-quarantine-is-a-human-catastrophe-new-interview/

WORLD DOCTORS ALLIANCE

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

Medical doctors and nurses around the world are standing up to the COVID insanity being carried out in their name.

https://wsau.com/2020/10/19/92820/

NEWSMAX

 © MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

http://www.newsmaxtv.com/

ATTENDANCE at 2020 Presidential Rallies

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

It looks like the attendance at Hillary Clinton Rallies before the 2016 election. Then the mainstream media predicted Hillary was going to destroy Trump, they had polls to prove it. Hollywood celebrities hated Trump. Wall Street supported Clinton.

JEREMY R. HAMMOND

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

https://www.jeremyrhammond.com

Hi Morley,

Since the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the "lockdown" responses, we've heard a lot about reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests. There's a lot of confusion about these tests and plenty of misinformation, so here, briefly, is what you need to know.

First, there are popular claims still being spread widely that the virus has never been proven to even exist. This is false. The virus has been isolated, and its whole genome repeatedly sequenced by scientists all over the world. There are sequence databases scientists use to track evolutionary changes in the virus as it moves through the human population.

There also seems to be a fairly widespread belief that PCR tests produce lots of false positives because they don't discriminate between SARS-CoV-2 and viral RNA of common human coronaviruses, other viruses, or even human DNA. This is also untrue. The tests are specific to SARS-CoV-2 and will not return a positive result for other viruses, much less human DNA. What can cause false positives is contamination or other human error in handling or processing the tests.

The tests work by cyclically amplifying any present SARS-CoV-2 RNA. If a certain cycle threshold value is met, the result is "positive". If fewer cycles are required to reach the threshold, the inference is of a higher "viral load"; whereas if a greater number of cycles are required, the inference is that less viral RNA was present in the sample.

I've seen the belief expressed many times that if the threshold value is set high enough, the tests will be positive no matter what. This is also incorrect. If there is no SARS-CoV-2 RNA present in the sample, there is nothing to amplify, and so the result will be negative.

Where the cycle threshold (or "Ct") value really matters is in the implication concerning contagiousness. The key point, which I have emphasized repeatedly in my writings over the past several months, is that the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA is not necessarily indicative of the presence of the viable, infectious virus.

So when the New York Times and other media have reported, for example, that SARS-CoV-2 is airborne transmissible because the such-and-such study found viral RNA in air samples, they were stating a fallacious conclusion.

For another example, when they've said that children are contagious because they have "viral loads" at least as high as adults, they are stating a fallacious conclusion.

Similarly, PCR tests are highly relevant to the shifted justification for extreme lockdown measures. These measures were originally sold to the public on the grounds they were temporarily required to "flatten the curve" and prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed. But then, the justification shifted, and we were told that the measures must continue indefinitely to reduce "cases" to near zero.

The number of "cases" in turn is dependent on the numbers of "positive" PCR tests. You may have seen the term "casedemic" being used to describe the situation, and while that term can also be misused, it legitimately calls attention to the problem of using PCR tests for diagnostic purposes and justifying policies based on "cases".

For example, how meaningful a metric is an increasing number of "cases" when it's a consequence of increased testing? How meaningful is it when hospitalizations and deaths are declining?

The use of "cases" to justify lockdown measures is all the more absurd given the fact that a positive result does not even mean that "case" is infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Again, all it means is that viral RNA was present in the sample. Even the pro-lockdown New York Times has admitted that 90% of people identified as "cases" by PCR testing were probably not contagious, as inferred from Ct values indicating low viral loads and a high likelihood of "positive" results indicating the presence of non-viable RNA fragments as opposed to infectious virus.

The appropriate threshold for positive PCR test results has not been determined scientifically. They are arbitrary, and the Times acknowledged that the tests are wrongly being used to diagnose patients based on threshold values that are too high.

Also, even if a high "viral load" is inferred from Ct values, it still does not necessarily indicate the presence of the infectious virus. For example, in one study, researchers were unable to detect viable virus (using cell cultures to see whether there are cytopathic effects and viral reproduction) after 8 days since symptom onset despite continued high viral loads as determined by PCR tests.

In other words, there is not a perfect correlation between a high viral load and infectiousness.

Another aspect of the testing regimes is the mathematical implication of false positives, especially in areas with low prevalence. If 1% of results falsely indicate the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, then out of a tested population of 10,000 people, 100 people will be counted as "cases" even if there is no transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in that community. There can be a "casedemic" in areas of low prevalence just because there's a massive amount of testing happening.

So, to sum up, while PCR tests can be useful to confirm a diagnosis of COVID-19, they should never be used by themselves as a diagnostic tool. Yet, in "case" counts, that is precisely what's been done: people who do not have the disease and are not contagious are being counted as COVID-19 "cases", and these numbers, in turn, are being cited to justify continued lockdown measures.

In my latest article, "New York Times Lies about Science to Push School Closures", I discuss how policymakers and the media have misused, misinterpreted, and deceived about the meaning of PCR test results since the start of the pandemic to create fear and manufacture consent for extremely harmful lockdown measures.

In case you haven't read it yet:

Learn how the New York Times misreports science using PCR tests to advocate continued school closures.

Also, in case you haven't signed up yet for the free online viewing of the forthcoming Money Revealed docu-series, you can do so here.

It features over 30 successful entrepreneurs and investors sharing their insights into how to create and preserve wealth. Among them is Jeff Walker, whose freely shared knowledge about marketing I've personally benefited from. (In fact, I'm utilizing some of that knowledge in this very newsletter! It has to do with freely delivering real value to people via a mailing list as opposed to just trying to "sell" them something.)

To get a better idea of what I'm talking about, watch this sneak peek of the interview with Jeff Walker. 

Then be sure to sign up here for the free viewing of Money Revealed, episodes of which will be available to watch for a limited time starting October 17:

SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENTATION

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOtiRB3uyk

Kary Mullis discusses scientific experimentation.

LOCKDOWNS

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

www.jeremyrhammond.com

Hi Morley,

The "lockdown" measures that persist in various forms today were sold to the public as a strictly temporary measure to "flatten the curve" and give hospitals enough time to secure supplies and increase bed capacity so that they wouldn't be overwhelmed with COVID-19 patients.

The influential model from Imperial College London projected that without extreme measures amounting to the indiscriminate quarantine of the entire population, hospitals would be flooded and the death toll would be massive.

After the UK, the US, and other countries implemented measures appropriately given the prison-inspired label of "lockdown", the lockdown advocates in the scientific community, academia, government, and the media bewailed Sweden's choice not to follow the pack.

The consequence, the doomsdayers warned, would be total hospital overwhelm and a massive death toll. Time magazine said it would be "a historical massacre".

What actually happened was that Sweden successfully flattened the curve without resorting to authoritarian measures.

So what did the lockdown advocates do? Did they acknowledge that they had been wrong and concede that perhaps, just maybe, such extreme measures were not necessary after all?

Nope. Just as the justification for lockdown shifted away from "flattening the curve" to eliminating "cases", so did the criteria for judging Sweden's approach shift. Rather than acknowledging the success of Sweden's policy in its stated goal, they pointed to Sweden's rate of deaths per capita, decrying how it exceeded that of its Scandinavian neighbours, Norway, Finland, and Denmark, and attributing this to the absence of authoritarian measures.

Yet, Sweden's death rate still remained lower than other lockdown countries, including the UK. As of last month, the population-adjusted death rate in the US also surpassed that of Sweden.

Also, the single greatest factor in Sweden's higher death toll compared to its neighbours was the number of deaths among long-term care facility residents. Its government has acknowledged this failure -- which is something the governors of lockdown states in the US have refused to do.

The fact that Sweden's decision to not implement lockdown had nothing to do with the tragic number of deaths among nursing homes residents is easily demonstrated by the fact that 40% or more of deaths in the US have also been linked to nursing homes, a proportion that rises to 50% or more in dozens of lockdown states.

Having shifted the justification, lockdown advocates also remain narrowly focused on "cases" while ignoring the immense harms caused by the policies they favour. Neil Ferguson and his co-authors on the Imperial College paper stated explicitly that, while advocating lockdown, they were not considering the economic harms that would result.

Moreover, "cases" are a practically meaningless metric, especially in light of how their numbers are determined by counting "positive" results from RT-PCR tests that do not distinguish between the viable virus and non-infectious viral RNA. Even the lockdown-loving New York Times has admitted that 90% of so-called "cases" in the US have been individuals who were probably not contagious.

The harms of lockdown measures surely warrant consideration, as does their sustainability. Sweden's approach was based on the assumption that any policy measures must be sustainable over the long-term. 

Sweden has been accused of recklessly pursuing a "herd immunity" strategy, but the lockdown advocates are recklessly placing faith in vaccine technology to save us.

Natural herd immunity is basic epidemiology, and it is precisely what will enable those at highest risk to eventually come out of isolation, too, and enjoy their lives. The lockdown advocates say it's impossible to achieve without resulting in massive deaths.

Yet the number of daily deaths attributed to COVID-19 in Sweden has been in the single digits since July. How is that possible if not because a substantial enough level of population immunity has been reached wherein the transmission is reduced such that those at highest risk can be kept protected?

To achieve herd immunity, the lockdowners argue, 60% or more of the population would have to become infected, and serological studies looking at antibodies as evidence of infection have indicated that no more than around 10% of Sweden's population has been exposed.

But that argument ignores numerous studies explaining why the herd immunity threshold could be much lower. There is heterogeneity in transmission dynamics, so not everyone is equally likely to spread the virus to others if infected, and scientific evidence strongly indicates that there is already background immunity to SARS-CoV-2 due to cross-protective T-cell immunity gained from common coronaviruses that cause the common cold.

The lockdowners argue that natural immunity may wane quickly because antibodies wane over time. Still, they again ignore the fact that antibodies are neither always sufficient nor even necessary for immunity. Cellular immunity appears to play an equally if not more important role than antibodies. Plus, even if antibodies wane, memory B-cells can quickly produce them again as needed upon reexposure.

The cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy of the lockdowners are most glaring when it comes to their faith in vaccine technology. Natural herd immunity is unachievable, they argue, so we must continue lockdown measures until there is a vaccine that can confer herd immunity artificially.

Let's be clear: that is not a policy based on science but on faith. The arguments against natural herd immunity, such as the unknown duration of immunity, are all the more true and relevant for their goal of vaccine-conferred immunity.

This is not an academic debate. Both our health and our liberty are at stake. 

The idea that humans were created without a properly functioning immune system such that we all require pharmaceutical intervention to achieve good health is arrogant, narcissistic, and scientifically ludicrous. 

Likewise, the idea that we all require politicians to dictate our behaviour, as though politicians were a special breed of benevolent homo sapiens blessed with omniscience, is dangerously and preposterously naïve. 

Among the lockdown advocates, of course, are mainstream media corporations like the New York Times. In my latest fully referenced article, I demonstrate how the Times gets it wrong on Sweden and how it otherwise lies to the public by claiming that science supports the lockdown measures it advocates.

Learn how the New York Times gets it wrong on Sweden

With politicians having responded to the pandemic by deliberately shutting down the economy and driving millions of people toward financial ruin, there's no better time to get an education in how to become more independent financially. 

And given how severe COVID-19 is associated with having one or more underlying chronic illnesses, there's no better time to focus on bettering or maintaining good health.

Unfortunately, to stay healthy these days isn't exactly cheap. It's no coincidence that poverty is associated with worse health outcomes. Tragically, toxin-laden processed foods are less expensive than organic raw foods, for example (not to mention the difficulty many people have in being able to afford to dedicate the time required to prepare healthy homemade meals every day).

In the upcoming docu-series Money Revealed, numerous successful entrepreneurs and investors will explain the methods that have enabled them to create and preserve wealth -- the kind of wealth that would eliminate financial obstacles to better health outcomes.

If you ever saw the docu-series Vaccines Revealed, this is from the same filmmaking team. Money Revealed will be available to watch for free online starting October 27:

FLYNN

 © MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

BRAGGING!

Errol Flynn movies

MILA

MASKS ARE ILLEGAL

 © MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

PCR WHAT COULD GO WRONG?

© MMXX V.1.0.0
 by Morley Evans

What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

Thanks to Professor Chossudovsky for this beautiful graphic.

    When using PCR to determine SARS CoV-2 infection, quite a few things could go wrong, actually.

    Firstly, testing millions around the world has enormous logistical and quality-control problems. Carefully controlled conditions are required. The Chinese tested ten million residents of Wuhan in a few days. Professor Chossudovsky doesn't know what test was used. Do you? Was it PCR? Did Third World countries conform to rigid uniform standards? Could they? 

    The Peoples Republic of China (PRC) needed to reduce fear and get everyone back to work. They found 300 infected people and ZERO with symptoms after testing everyone (ten million). People went back to work, and services were reopened. Everyone was assured that they were safe. The opposite incentives exist outside China.

    Local public "health" bureaucracies all have political motives, not least of which are enhancing their own budgets. The test is the Polymerase Chain Reaction. The Fear Campaign requires scary numbers, and every bureaucrat's paycheque requires scary numbers. Here in Saskatchewan, the official reports indicate THERE IS NO EPIDEMIC, yet the Fear Campaign continues unabated. Everyone is wearing masks and "social distancing". Churches are obediently closed.

    The Fear Campaign is based on ICR. The information chain reaction, which is also known as gossip, stirs up hysteria. The Fear Campaign is in full-swing 24/7 on every channel throughout the world. Its purpose is to create panic. Panic permits millions to accept Lockdowns and their own destruction. Of course, police threats are helpful. I correspond regularly with people in Ukraine, Russia, Argentina, and Australia. They know all about the Virus panic.

    Secondly, every sample will contain myriad bits of viral and bacterial genetic material and who knows what else. Let's suppose the process can separate the SARS CoV-2 from everything else in the soup. But that is not what it does. The virus being tested must be isolated first.

    Thirdly, specifically engineered primers, must be added to the soup. They must be custom-designed for a previously unknown virus. Some say the existence of the virus has not been proven. They say it has not been isolated. How can primers be created, one wonders? If so, the whole matter would be dead on arrival along with the promoters of the Fear Campaign. That's DOA, for those people who are fond of initialisms.

    As planned, primers attach to the SARS CoV-2 genetic material if it is present. The "amplified" genetic material can be detected. From where did the specifically engineered primers come? Were they created by the wise old men at the top of the pyramid of medical science and money?

    Could the wise old men distribute primers for a known virus and say they are for SARS CoV-2? Medical researchers could be getting positive results for seasonal flu, the common cold, or some other wide-spread contagion. They would report SARS CoV-2 and not know the difference. Something like that could be proven. Physical evidence would exist. Courts love physical evidence. 

    Did the PRC create the Virus to attack the West? Some say the nefarious Chinese Commies did evil. "We hate them." Did the NIH fund that research? Some say it did. They say Tony Fauci's fingerprints are on it. "We hate him." These possibilities are not relevant to the question of safety. The PRC did the right thing. So should we. Reduce the fear; deal with the problem; get back to work, and get on with life.

    Is SARS CoV-2 and COVID-19 disease an existential threat as broadcast by the Fear Campaign? No.

    The current medical establishment — everything from pharmaceutical companies and their medical doctor salesforce to the government agencies (including public "health" bureaucracies) that were supposedly created to protect us — needs to be deconstructed and examined piece-by-piece along with the blind faith people have in the magical powers of medicine. 

    Medicine is not Healthcare. Repeat that a thousand times. Beat your head with a board, if necessary.

    The mainstream media that created this disaster needs to disappear. The broadcasters and their owners need to go to prison. "Heads on Pikes" may be too much to hope for but it is a nice thought. Bill Gates can give his billions to his victims.

    EDIT: Contamination is a problem. The sample cannot be mixed up with many different viruses and bacteria. Isolating the "SARS CoV-2" would not be necessary if the researchers were actually testing for a known virus, like flu, but thought they were testing for SARS CoV-2. They know how to isolate the flu. Everyone says the killer virus (Grr) has similar symptoms to flu and the common cold. The wise old men at the top of the pyramid of medical science and money could easily fool everyone. 

KARY MULLIS (continued)

Here is how Public Health Ontario is using PCR

The PCR test does not identify any virus. It "amplifies" whatever bits and pieces of virus and bacteria are in a sample, so they are large enough to be identified and studied. Identified by what? How? Sight? That requires another test. Sight is a test. Has the CDC isolated the supposed virus? How do the pompous medical poobahs decide someone has COVID19? Do they flip a coin? Once assigned, is someone shoved onto the public "health" conveyor belt that includes medication, vaccination, isolation (imprisonment), and death?

How does anyone know the Virus (Grrr) looks like this?

Remember Mary Mallon. Were any Rockefellers convicted of being "asymptomatic" contagions and sentenced to solitary confinement for life? Were any nurses, patients, or hospital workers where Mary was confined infected with typhoid? Was Queen Victoria tried and convicted of infecting and killing Prince Albert with typhoid? Were any other possibilities considered? What were they?

Limitations[edit]

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

Kary Mullis ( continued)

One major limitation of PCR is that prior information about the target sequence is necessary to generate the primers that will allow its selective amplification.[36] This means that, typically, PCR users must know the precise sequence(s) upstream of the target region on each of the two single-stranded templates to ensure that the DNA polymerase properly binds to the primer-template hybrids and subsequently generates the entire target region during DNA synthesis.

Like all enzymes, DNA polymerases are also prone to error, which in turn causes mutations in the PCR fragments that are generated.[37]

Another limitation of PCR is that even the smallest amount of contaminating DNA can be amplified, resulting in misleading or ambiguous results. To minimize the chance of contamination, investigators should reserve separate rooms for reagent preparation, the PCR, and analysis of the product. Reagents should be dispensed into single-use aliquots. Pipettors with disposable plungers and extra-long pipette tips should be routinely used.[15]

Environmental samples that contain humic acids may inhibit PCR amplification and lead to inaccurate results.

Jon Rappaport thinks PCR is the worst test for COVID19 that could have been chosen.

NOW HEAR THIS

Mass compulsory vaccination will be required before the Lockdowns will be ended. Will they ever end? We already live in a medical police state run by the public "health" authorities. Medicine is not health.

WHISTLEBLOWER NEWSROOM

© MMXX V.1.0.1

by Morley Evans

Radio interview with Professor Chossudovsky makes these points:

1). The PCR Test for which Karry Mullis won a Nobel Prize was not developed to specifically identify SARS CoV-2 (COVID19) or any other virus. All of the "positive" results are FAKE because these tests did not specifically identify even one case of COVID19. Any number of other things could have been responsible for a "positive" result. A "negative" result doesn't mean you don't have COVID19 — it doesn't mean anything. Got it?

2). All of the statistics derived from the PCR tests are FAKE. These FAKE statistics were deliberately exaggerated using FAKE data to make them even scarier.

3). Ridiculously small numbers of FAKE cases were used to launch the Global Fear Campaign.

4). The Fear Campaign that COVID19 would decimate the world population was used to justify the Global Lockdown and scare millions into accepting their own destruction. Of course, threats from the police were helpful.

5). The Global Lockdown forced hundreds of millions of people out of work and destroyed small and medium-sized businesses. Even some large corporations, such as major airlines, have been bankrupted.

6). Massive transfers of wealth and a further concentration of wealth and power have occurred. That's one of the reasons it was done. It was not done to protect anyone's health. Many benefitted. Many more were harmed. This was a massive CRIME SPREE.

7). Specific individuals are responsible. They are legally liable for what they did.

"Heads on Pikes" would be justified after the current medical system has been completely deconstructed and examined piece-by-piece, in my opinion. - ed

https://thewhistleblowernewsroom.podbean.com/e/the-whistleblower-newsroom-the-smoking-guns-of-a-manufactured-pandemic/

TROJAN VIRUS

© MMXX V.1.0.0

by Morley Evans

“ A vaccine with those reaction rates could cause grave injuries in 1.5 billion humans if administered to “every person on earth”. That is the threshold that Gates has established for ending the global lockdown.”

.

.– Robert F Kennedy Jr [1]

According to the most recent poll conducted by the research firm Leger, roughly two out of every three Canadians intend to get the vaccine for COVID, once it has been approved by Health Canada. Only 17% of the Canadian population said “no.” [2]

That makes a certain amount of sense if you factor in the panic generated by the Sars-CoV-2 virus. No other known bug has brought our society to the point of shutting down. No one ever witnessed the economic desecration. None saw countries closing their borders. And now, many are starting to see face masks and social distancing as the new normal. So, if the promise that the world will return to pre-pandemic normal, once that magical elixir has been constructed, who wouldn’t risk the shot?

The Director-General of the World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, is a major booster of immunization. He claims that vaccines are to credit for the near annihilation of smallpox, polio and other feared diseases. Now he promises that the COVAX facility, co-led by Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), and the WHO, will be delivering two billion doses of the COVID vaccine by the end of next year. [3]

The pharmaceutical corporations driving the vaccine push will certainly make tons of money getting a shot distributed to hundreds of millions around the world. But might there also be a risk associated with it? Is there another agenda that the authorities may be pursuing that patients may not even be aware of that will affect not only their health but their prospect of freedom? This is the question that the Global Research News Hour investigates in part four of this special series on Coronavirus.

In our first half-hour, the Global Research News Hour reassembles three of the guests from past episodes of this series, Sucharit Bhakdi MD, Meryl Nass MD, and Docs for an Open Debate, share their reservations about the COVID vaccine. In our second half-hour, Peter Koenig, an economist and geopolitical analyst with the background at the WHO, brings forward his perspective that includes an ID2020 nanochip that could ultimately raise the threat to a new level.

Sucharit Bhakdi, MD, is a physician and a post-doctoral researcher. He was named chair of Medical Microbiology at the University of Mainz in 1990, where he remained until his retirement in 2012. He has published over three hundred articles in the fields of immunology, bacteriology, virology, and parasitology, for which he has received numerous awards and the Order of Merit of Rhineland-Palatinate. He is a specialist in microbiology and one of the most cited research scientists in German history. His book, co-authored by Karina Reiss, is Corona: False Alarm? Facts and Figures. 

Docs for Open Debate is a group in Belgium doctors and health professionals intent on demanding more critical analysis of the pandemic fight, relaxation of the extreme emergency measures, and freedom to express their positions on mainstream media. They crafted an open letter to this end which has so far been signed by 515 physicians and 1767 medically trained health professionals. Their site is docs4opendebate.be

Meryl Nass, MD, is a General Internal Medicine Physician with 40 years of experience. She is an epidemic and anthrax expert and composes a series of blogs for the site Anthrax Vaccine as well as Global Research. She’s based in Ellsworth, Maine.

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a water resource and environmental specialist. He worked for over 30 years with the World Bank and the World Health Organization around the world in the fields of environment and water. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals such as Global Research; ICH; New Eastern Outlook (NEO) and more. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 291)