Who Are All the People Involved With Denying and Lying About the Lab Leak Theory?

The COVID-19 lab leak theory has sparked significant controversy and debate since the early days of the pandemic. While some have advocated for a thorough investigation into the virus's origins, others have denied and potentially misrepresented the possibility of a lab leak. This article explores the key figures and organizations involved in denying and possibly lying about the lab leak theory.

When Google is Wrong About Unreliable and Harmful Content

Google says our site is "Unreliable and has harmful claims and must fix".  This is an example of big tech censorship that has gone wrong.   Google is never specific about what it feels is harmful.  It makes broad generalizations about their claims with no specifics. 

List of Some COVID Lies Told by Government & WHO

Robert Malone Article Newsletter

Triple Vaxxed Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau Infected with Covid… AGAIN

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Monday tested positive for Covid-19 again.

Trudeau visited the United States last week and just met with Joe Biden, Gavin Newsom and others.

Mr. Trudeau attended the Summit for the Americas in Los Angeles and took a “family photo” with Joe Biden and other political leaders.

PM Trudeau said he’s feeling okay because he’s triple vaxxed and encouraged others to get vaccinated.

Makes sense.

“I’ve tested positive for COVID-19. I’ll be following public health guidelines and isolating. I feel okay, but that’s because I got my shots. So, if you haven’t, get vaccinated – and if you can, get boosted. Let’s protect our healthcare system, each other, and ourselves.” Trudeau said on Monday.

I’ve tested positive for COVID-19. I’ll be following public health guidelines and isolating. I feel okay, but that’s because I got my shots. So, if you haven’t, get vaccinated - and if you can, get boosted. Let’s protect our healthcare system, each other, and ourselves.

— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) June 13, 2022

List of COVID Disinformation Spreaders That Need To Be Investigated

Steve Kirsch believe that all of these people are involved in “The proliferation of false or misleading narratives, which sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions” and have collectively led to the tragic death of over 1M Americans.

Is the Mexican or US Government More Corrupt From Drug Money?

Dr. Robert Malone explains how Big Pharma influences public health policies implemented by the CDC and FDA on Candace Owens show. 

Stockholm Syndrome, Human Psychology, and COVID Lockdowns

Bill Gates has systematically monopolized the global response to infectious disease through non-profits. 

Who Are The 'Disinformation' Enemies of Truth?

The only way to know who your enemy is in the age of disinformation is to follow the money.

China's Wuhan laboratory is owned by GlaxoSmithKline which owns Pfizer the company that makes the vaccines. Dr. Fauci funded the research at the Wuhan lab through NIH.  GlaxoSmithKline is managed by the Private Equity finance division of Black Rock which manages the finances of Open Foundation Group for George Soros which manages the French Accent Group.  Soros owns the German company that built the Wuhan laboratory which was bought by the German Alliance which has Vanguard as a shareholder. Black Rock, Vanguard and Alliance control the central banks and also have a large stake in Microsoft where Bill Gates is the Chairman. Bill Gates is a shareholder of Pfizer and BioNTech and a sponsor of the World Health Organization. 

Billionaires Fund New Company Goodinfo.us to Fight For Monopoly of Truth 'Disinformation'

Bill Gates: My ‘best investment’ turned $10 billion into $200 billion worth of economic benefit. 

Over the past two decades, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has donated “a bit more than $10 billion” into mainly three groups: the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and the Global Polio Eradication Initiative.

10 Examples of How China's Corruption & Government Killed People

A plethora of politicians and government officials across the globe screwed up in their handling of the COVID-19 Pandemic. The Chinese government, however, was acutely damaging with its ineptitude, because it, more than any other entity, had a chance to limit the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus when it first emerged in late 2019. Instead of trying to contain the virus with the help of the international community, however, the Chinese government lied, misled, and stalled. All of humanity has experienced the disastrous result of this negligence.

In his new book, Uncontrolled Spread, physician, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and former FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb focused his considerable expertise on pointing out the ways in which the world's response to COVID-19 fell short, and how we can better prepare for the next inevitable pandemic. Early on in the book, he chronicled numerous examples of the Chinese government's inept, corrupt handling of what was then an emerging outbreak. 

Here are ten of them:

1. Silencing Genetic Sequencing.

 In late December 2019, doctors around Wuhan started noticing people coming in with a strange pneumonia, and began sending patient samples to genomics companies for sequencing. The reports they received back were disturbing – it was a never-before-seen, SARS-like coronavirus. By January 1, provincial health officials instructed these companies to stop testing samples from the Wuhan outbreak and to destroy their remaining specimens. Two days later, China's top health authority ordered genomics labs not to publish any data related to the novel coronavirus.

2. Censoring Doctors. 

Early on in the pandemic, Wuhan's local doctors quickly realized that a novel virus was spreading, and took to social media platforms like WeChat and Weibo to share information with each other. They were soon censored by the Chinese government, and posts related to what was then dubbed "Wuhan SARS' were suppressed. Many doctors were detained, interrogated, and threatened with prosecution. "Chinese scientists and physicians took risks, and their efforts saved lives," Gottlieb wrote.

3. Deploying Social Media Bots. 

According to ProPublica, more than ten thousand Chinese government-linked accounts on Twitter were used to cast doubt on early reports related to the outbreak in Wuhan.

4. Censoring Social Media.

 Citizen Lab documented thousands of keywords related to COVID that were suppressed by the Chinese government on platforms YY and WeChat. Many deleted posts criticized the government for their handling of the outbreak.

5. Not Reporting the Outbreak to the WHO as Required. 

As a signatory to major public health treaties, the Chinese government was required to notify the world community of any unusual, novel pathogen within its borders that could spread internationally, typically within 72 hours of detection. The novel coronavirus clearly met this description, yet Chinese officials withheld information about the virus for weeks.

6. Refusing to Share the Coronavirus' Genetic Sequence. 

When the genetic sequence of the coronavirus was first shared widely in early January, it was a heroic, rogue Chinese researcher, not the government, who did so. Dr. Zhang Yongzhen was directed not to release the information, but frustrated with what he perceived as irresponsibility by government officials, he defied their order. Within hours, Zhang's lab was shut down by the Shanghai Municipal Health Commission for "rectification".

7. Not Sharing Virus Samples.

 Very early on, global researchers were clamoring for Chinese officials to share samples of the novel coronavirus so they could evaluate it and begin developing diagnostic tests, vaccines, and therapeutics. Government officials never did. "Access to those samples at the outset could have helped the world prepare," Gottlieb wrote. "And without the source strains, it would be impossible to determine with any certainty the virus's origin."

8. Attempting to Avoid Travel Restrictions. 

In early February, as it started to become clear that China was losing control of the outbreak, the government was still privately clashing with the WHO to block the declaration of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). Government officials wanted to avoid burdensome travel restrictions which the PHEIC would likely lead to.

9. Misleading the World Health Organization. 

In the early days of the pandemic, the WHO publicly stated that it was in constant contact with Chinese government officials. This was true, but the dialogue was essentially useless. "The WHO would submit long lists of questions to Chinese officials, related to the scope and severity of the epidemic. In return, the Chinese government would provide achingly incomplete replies," Gottlieb wrote. Little of value was relayed.

10. Refusing to Allow CDC Scientists Into Wuhan. 

Roughly a dozen CDC staff are permanently stationed in Beijing. On January 1, 2020, CDC Director Robert Redfield emailed Dr. George Fu Gao, the director of China's CDC, requesting that these U.S. researchers be granted access to the outbreak hot zone to assist in identification of the novel pathogen. Gao refused, and would do so again when Redfield pressed the matter. At the time, Chinese officials were still saying publicly there was no evidence of person-to-person spread. Redfield believes that U.S. scientists would have quickly discovered that the coronavirus was spreading human-to-human, and doing so asymptomatically.

Joe Rogan & CNN’s & Sanjay Gupta on Vaccinating Children

Joe Rogan challenged Dr Sanjay Gupta on why parents are not concerned that their children should be vaccinated.

Rogan pressed Gupta on why CNN lied about him taking a “horse dewormer,” and Gupta couldn’t provide any real answer. That’s because he couldn’t say the honest fact: It serves our political narrative that we were pushing. Gupta said he didn’t know why the network did it, and didn’t bother to question that. Rogan said he was prescribed ivermectin by a doctor, which has been used, beneficially, by people around the world. While there’s a veterinary version of the drug, that’s not what Rogan took and ivermectin is a drug people use.

Rogan just exposed how empty and false Gupta and CNN were with all this.

But you wouldn’t know it, if you listened to the spin that CNN subsequently gave about the interview.

CNN’s Don Lemon tried to smooth things over for Gupta and justify the lies that CNN had told about Rogan. 

The problem with this effort at spin, they said that Rogan took the horse dewormer, which is demonstrably false and they leave out that yes, it’s a “people drug” that has been used by billions and even won a Nobel Prize for the guy who discovered it for the benefit to human medicine. It’s been used all over the world.

Here’s a sample where not only does CNN’s Jim Acosta lie about what Joe Rogan said, but the chyron lies as well, saying that Rogan said he took the “horse dewormer.”

Joe Rogan asks Sanjay Gupta if it bothers him that CNN outright lied about Rogan taking horse dewormer to recover from covid. This is fantastic: pic.twitter.com/PEgJqIXhSD

— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) October 14, 2021

Watch this. https://t.co/sV9NHPrtKR

— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) October 15, 2021

Dr. Fauci tells @Acosta that disinformation, like that being spread by Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan, is, "one of the enemies of public health." pic.twitter.com/4A3gUB3rWZ

— Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) September 5, 2021

California's Insane Plans for a Covid Vaccine Mandate for Kids

The question was: how are these vaccines different than other vaccines kids get before going to school?

Here are three answers:

1) Mechanism of action: the mRNA vaccines do not look or work like almost all other vaccines, which are far simpler biologically.

Most vaccines present an inactivated or attenuated viral particle to the immune system so that it can react to the "dead" virus as it would to the live virus. The mRNA and DNA/AAV vaccines instead hijack our own cells and cause them to make a piece of the Sars-Cov-2 virus to jumpstart our immune system.

It is now clear that this process carries significant risks - and more importantly, does not lead to the breadth or longevity of immune system response as normal infection with Sars-Cov-2. 

https://www.rockefeller.edu/news/30919-natural-infection-versus-vaccination-differences-in-covid-antibody-responses-emerge/

“While vaccination gives rise to memory B cells that evolve over a few weeks, natural infection births memory B cells that continue to evolve over several months, producing highly potent antibodies adept at eliminating even viral variants.

The findings highlight an advantage bestowed by natural infection rather than vaccination.”

2) Duration of protection: the Covid vaccines protect for only a few months at most; other childhood vaccines, with the exception of the flu vaccine, protect for decades or a lifetime.

This difference is especially important for children, who might have to take boosters for decades (or at least until we regain our sanity, if we ever do). Further, natural immunity to the original SARS appears to last for decades - we don't know yet if that is true of SARS-COV-2, but if it is the vaccines are an even worse bet.

3) Side effect profile: the COVID-19 vaccines have moderate to serious short-term side effects for an enormous number of people who receive them, far more than the flu vaccine or other common childhood vaccines.

They also cause medically significant heart inflammation in as many as 1 in 3,000 to 1 in 5,000 teenage boys who receive them. Given that Covid itself is little more than a cold for almost all healthy children and teens, the vaccines have a risk-benefit profile that is unacceptable for teenagers, much less children.

This is why many countries have not recommended them for people under 16. This is the current WHO recommendation for children and adolescents. They have rewritten it under political pressure, but if you read it carefully, you will see that they say children 12-15 "may be offered this vaccine" ONLY if they "are at higher risk of severe COVID-19." Basically, that means the morbidly obese and kids with severe immune deficiencies, cancer, etc.:

Vaccines are usually tested in adults first, and only later assessed in children when safety has been proven in adults, because children are still developing and growing. COVID-19 has also been a more serious and dangerous disease among older people. Now that the vaccines have been determined to be safe for adults, they are being studied in children.

WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) has concluded that the Pfizer/BionTech vaccine is suitable for use by people aged 12 years and above. Children aged between 12 and 15 who are at higher risk of severe COVID-19 [emphasis added] may be offered this vaccine alongside other priority groups for vaccination. Vaccine trials for children are ongoing and WHO will update its recommendations when the evidence or epidemiological situation justifies a change in policy.

WHO Source

WHO Leader Pleads Against Booster Shots For Everyone

Questioning Efficacy And Highlighting Risk Of ‘More Potent’ Variants

WHO says no conclusive data yet on need for a COVID-19 booster shot

I don't trust the WHO, but Now, I think they are trying to get some credibility back.

The World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on Wednesday that the data on the benefits and safety of a COVID-19 vaccine booster shot is inconclusive.

"When some countries afford to have the booster and others are not even vaccinating the first and second round, it's a moral issue," he said during a media briefing.

 The World Health Organization (WHO) is redoubling its appeal against Covid-19 booster shots as more wealthy countries move to offer a third dose, with the group’s head on Monday calling for a two-month pause to prioritize nations where vaccinations are severely lagging. 

The World Health Organization (WHO) is redoubling its appeal against Covid-19 booster shots as more wealthy countries move to offer a third dose, with the group’s head on Monday calling for a two-month pause to prioritize nations where vaccinations are severely lagging. 

He argued that wealthy nations stockpiling the vaccine increases the risk that stronger variants will develop in countries with low inoculation rates. 

Not only could the hyper infectious delta variant become “more virulent,” but “more potent variants could also emerge” if the virus gets “the chance to circulate in countries with low vaccination coverage,” Ghebreyesus warned.

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus pleaded with countries during a news conference in Hungary “to share what can be used for boosters” to help other places “increase their first and second vaccination coverage,” according to reporters at the event.

Furthermore, the WHO director called into question whether booster shots are “effective at all,” a comment that comes days after the organization’s chief scientist Soumya Swaminathan said, “data today does not indicate that boosters are needed.” 

Ghebreyesus said boosters should only be doled out to people with weak immune systems. 

Ghebreyesus said Monday that 75% of the 4.8 billion vaccine doses delivered to date have gone to just 10 countries. Meanwhile, about a dozen countries and regions have partially vaccinated less than 1% of their populations, and across Africa, less than 2% of people have been inoculated against the virus. 

A growing number of wealthy countries, including the United States, have moved to offer vaccine top-ups despite the ongoing debate over whether they are necessary. As they unveiled their plan to start rolling out a third dose in September (pending FDA and CDC approval), U.S. officials cited data showing diminishing protection against mild and moderate illness from the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines more than six months after inoculation. “We are concerned this pattern of decline we are seeing will continue in the months ahead, which could lead to reduced protection against severe disease, hospitalization, and death,” explained U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy. However, other experts have argued that countries pursuing boosters are making decisions prematurely based on incomplete data.

Research published in the journal Science last week backed up Ghebreyesus’ suggestion that stockpiling supplies could lead to new, possibly more dangerous variants of the virus and an increasing number of Covid-19 infections. Researchers found that sharing vaccine supplies could help alleviate long-term risks, reducing the overall number of cases long-term.

Read the full article on Forbes

When Are Natural Immunity Passports Coming?

The looming disaster of immunity passports and digital identity

A digital ID that proves immunity will raise serious human rights issues. And the failure of the digital ID industry to deal with the issues of exclusion, exploitation, and discrimination puts the entire industry under question.

'Immunity passports' are a theoretical credential - most likely digital - that someone can prove that they have either had the virus and recovered, or have had a vaccination. 

Immunity passports are being hyped as a solution to ending lockdowns around the world by actors including the proponents of digital identity; the digital identity industry; think tanks; and the travel industry.

Yet there is currently no scientific basis for these measures, as highlighted by the WHO. The nature of what information would be held on an immunity passport is currently unknown.

The social risks of immunity passports are great: it serves as a route to discrimination and exclusion, particularly if the powers to view these passports fall on people's employers, or the police.

The digital identity industry - pushing their own products as immunity passport solutions - is failing to protect against these harms: they are interested in building wider digital identity systems, based on their pre-existing models, rather than developing a genuine solution to the risks of these passports.

Immunity Passports have become a much-hyped tool to cope with this pandemic and the economic crisis. Essentially, with immunity passports, those who are 'immune' to the virus would have some kind of certified document - whether physical or digital. This 'passport' would give them rights and privileges that other members of the community do not have.

This is yet another example of a crisis response that depends on technology, as we saw with contact-tracing apps. And it is also yet another instance of trying to rapidly respond to complex problems, as governments did after 9/11, by reaching for identity systems.

Fundamentally, for identity system design form must follow function. Identity systems are complex systems that can alter the relationship between the individual, the state, and all the companies and agencies who are granted power in between.

Yet proponents of immunity passports do not yet know the extent of the problem they are solving. Companies selling their pre-existing digital identity solutions should be viewed with suspicion; this is not a problem that has been 'solved' as we have yet to define what the problem is.

In fact, the scientific validity/rationale of 'immunity' is still under question. It is premature to start designing a system without a better understanding of immunity. Crucial questions have to be answered first:

1. how and in what ways immunity to the virus is conveyed?
2. what a testing regime would look like? For example, is it home-based or does it require a lab? Is it something that can be rolled out at scale quickly to broad populations or is it only accessible to some?
3. how long does immunity last? and
4. what are the prospects for a vaccine, how long will it last, and how will that be deployed?

Without an understanding of these issues, it is not possible to design a system that both 'works' in terms of giving the information that's needed for public health reasons and for managing the next steps of measures to manage lockdowns including the associated economic and social strains associated, while at the same time protecting fundamental rights.

Once answered, then we will all know what problem the identity system is designed to solve. Without the knowledge of how immunity works, we cannot possibly yet say what the design should be.

And even if that is resolved, the risks to individuals and communities emerging from 'immunity passports' are severe. Read the full article to explore all these issues.

What Is Stakeholder Capitalism + COVAX + Big Tech + WHO + UN

What is stakeholder capitalism & how does big tech, COVAX, WHO, and UN play a role in coordinating to expand globalism. 

76 countries, including Japan, Germany and Norway, have now signed up to the COVAX scheme.  The COVAX initiative aims to “accelerate the development and manufacture of COVID-19 vaccines, and to guarantee fair and equitable access for every country in the world”. That, again, sounds wonderful, especially given the staggering inequalities in vaccination levels between rich and developing countries.

But why is the World Health Organization (WHO), which is part of the UN, not calling the shots? “Countries together, through multilateral agencies like the WHO, were supposed to make decisions about global health issues, with maybe some technical support by others,” says Sulakshana Nandi from NGO People's Health Movement, which has recently brought out a Policy Brief on COVAX.

Big Pharma investment opportunities

COVAX was set up as a multi-stakeholder group by two other multi-stakeholder groups, GAVI (the Vaccine Alliance) and CEPI (the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations), in partnership with the WHO. Both GAVI and CEPI have strong ties with the World Economic Forum (which was one of the founders of CEPI) as well as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and both are also connected to companies like Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson through manufacturer partnerships (GAVI) or as 'supporters' (CEPI). Even though COVAX is funded predominantly by governments, it is these corporate-centered coalitions that are overseeing its roll-out.

The contrast between the multi-stakeholder approach and a 'classic' multilateral one came to the surface when South Africa and India proposed the so-called TRIPS waiver at the end of last year. They requested a temporary lifting of intellectual property rules on all COVID-19 technologies in order to boost the manufacturing and distribution of vaccines and other essential medical products in mainly developing countries. WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said in a speech that he backed the proposal. “But GAVI, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – even Bill Gates himself – and Big Pharma opposed this proposal very strongly,” said Nandi. “It's more important for them to protect their interests and market mechanisms than to protect universal health or protect people from COVID.” The WHO was approached for comment but has not replied.

Again, there is a stark choice between a human rights-led approach carried out by the UN and a profit-led approach carried out by multistakeholder bodies representing the interests of corporations. In the case of COVAX – which is failing to meet its modest aim of vaccinating 20% of the populations of low- and middle-income countries – the former has won out.

Something fishy really is going on in the realm of global governance. If you value your right to public health, to privacy, to access healthy food or to democratic representation, be wary of the words 'stakeholder capitalism’ when they pop up at the next Davos summit.

Big tech governing big tech

Another landmark in the development of stakeholder capitalism can be found in the Big Tech sector. As a part of his 2020 Roadmap for Digital Cooperation, the UN Secretary-General called for the formation of a new ‘strategic and empowered multi-stakeholder high-level body’. Again it's not easy to find a list of stakeholders but after some digging a long list of ‘roundtable participants’ for the roadmap includes Facebook, Google, Microsoft and the WEF.

Although the functions laid out for this new body are quite vague, civil society organizations fear it will come down to Big Tech creating a global body to govern itself. This risks institutionalizing these companies' resistance against effective regulation both globally and nationally and increasing their power over governments and multilateral organizations. If the body comes to fruition, it could be a decisive victory in the ongoing war GAFAM (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft) is waging with governments over tax evasion, antitrust rules, and their ever-expanding power over society.

More than 170 civil society groups worldwide have signed another open letter to the secretary-general of the UN – this time to prevent the digital governance body from forming. The secretary-general was approached for comment but had not replied at the time of publication.  Here is the full article. 

Stakeholder Capitalism by McKinsey 

The McKinsey Global Institute concluded that those with a long-term view—something that is essential to stakeholder capitalism—outperformed the rest in earnings, revenue, investment, and job growth. Other McKinsey research found that companies with strong environmental, social, and governance (ESG) norms recorded higher performance and credit ratings; other research has found that such companies perform better during crises.

WHO Says Booster Jabs Are Not Needed - Soumya Swaminathan

Current data does not indicate that COVID-19 booster shots are needed, World Health Organisation (WHO) chief scientist Soumya Swaminathan said on August 18, 2021.  Most importantly this was published by Reuters.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) has revealed that the current data does not indicate that COVID-19 booster shots are needed, however, it maintains that the most vulnerable people worldwide should be fully vaccinatedhttps://t.co/gZri8Z0NTO

— CGTN Africa (@cgtnafrica) August 18, 2021

Coronavirus Genome Sequencing vs Patent Records - Dr David Martin

There was no novel Coronavirus. Check of gene sequence vs all patent records showed no novel since 1999! There are 120 patented pieces of evidence showing the total fallacy of claim 'novel'!

 

A manufactured illusion. Dr David Martin with Reiner Fuellmich 9/7/21.  

Please watch this important video next on Reiner Fuellmich's global class action lawsuit. 

Since mid-July 2020, the Corona Committee has been conducting live, multi-hour sessions to investigate why federal and state governments imposed unprecedented restrictions as part of the Coronavirus response and what the consequences have been and still are for people.

In this video, Dr. David Martin refers to Peter Daszak a lot. 

Who is Dr. David Martin?  

Dr. Martin has founded several for-profit and not-for-profit companies and organizations and serves on several boards.  He was a Co-Chair of the ADC (Australia Davos Connection) Forum’s Leadership Retreat and Critical Infrastructure and Cybersecurity Councils.  He was the founding Director of Melbourne’s Centre of Applied Innovation.  He served as Chairman and CEO of eSurface®. He was the founding CEO of Mosaic Technologies, Inc., a company that developed and commercialized technologies in advanced computational linguistics, dynamic data compression and encryption, electrical field transmission, medical diagnostics, and stealth/anechoic. He was a founding member of Japan’s Institute for Interface Science and Technology (IIST). He founded and served as Executive Director of the Charlottesville Venture Group. He has served as a board member for the Research Institute for Small and Emerging Business (Washington, D.C.), the Academy for Augmenting Grassroots Technological Innovations (India), the Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce (Virginia), and the Charlottesville Industrial Development Agency (Virginia), Humanitad (U.K), Global Urban Development, and many other agencies dedicated to ethical human development.  As international policy contributor, economist and futurist, Dr. Martin’s work at The Arlington Institute (U.S.) included accurately forecasting the global financial crisis of 2008 and working with the launch of Singapore’s Risk Assessment Horizon Scanning initiative. 

Dr. Martin’s work as a Fellow of the Batten Institute at the Darden Graduate School of Business Administration at the University of Virginia and his related work at the Indian Institute for Management Ahmedabad, India, has brought unprecedented curricular focus to areas of intangible-asset risk management, finance, and accounting standards. In addition to his academic work, Dr. Martin has closely advised innovation-based finance and investment programs in India, Bermuda, Brazil, China, Denmark, the European Union, the United Kingdom, South Africa, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the United States, Mongolia, Egypt, Ecuador, Singapore, Germany, Slovenia, Vietnam, and the United Arab Emirates. He has served as the Constitutional and Economic advisor to the Autonomy Committee of East New Britain and New Ireland, Papua New Guinea and has worked with ethical trade frameworks for the Kingdom of Tonga, the Independent State of Samoa, Fiji, and Papua New Guinea.

His work has been the subject of two internationally awarded documentaries, Patent Wars which highlights his work on reform of the global innovation system and Future Dreaming: A Conversation with David Martin which is a dialogue about humanity and its optimal interaction in the universe.  He has spoken at the United Nations General Assembly on citizen-led peacemaking initiatives and has been featured on Bloomberg television and HBO’s Last Week Tonight with John Oliver.   

A speaker, author, business executive and futurist, Dr. Martin’s work has been engaged in every country on Earth.  He works with his family in every endeavor of life.  Together with his wife Kim, he directs the Breathing Enterprise workshops and facilitates implementation of Integral Accounting.  Dr. Martin received his undergraduate (BA) from Goshen College, his Masters of Science from Ball State University, and his Doctorate (PhD) from the University of Virginia.

Has The World Health Organization (WHO) Lost All Credibility?

If you read the almost 30,000+ comments on this WHO propaganda page you can see that ship is slowly turning or maybe even sinking. This is not informed consent and they have NO DATA to back this up. The Facebook WHO page has also lost control of censorship. 

The WHO doesn't provide any data or help about how to treat this disease like many doctors are doing around the World. I think you are going to see more governments start focusing on treatments alongside vaccines using repurposed and genetic drugs like many other countries are doing (Ex India and Sweden)

Why Isn't Ivermectin Being Used Promoted For Treatment?

BECAUSE IT IS A CHEAP DRUG AND THERE IS NO MONEY IN IT FOR BIG PHARMA

India destroyed covid with Ivermectin in a few months with only a 2% vaccination rate back in May. In those two months, they brought cases and deaths down 97% wherever it was used and gained herd natural immunity, which prevents spread. The vaccines can't do that because they don't prevent spread. 

A 97% decline in Delhi cases with Ivermectin is decisive - period. It represents the last word in an epic struggle to save lives and preserve human rights. This graph symbolizes the victory of reason over corruption, good over evil, and right over wrong. It is as significant as David’s victory over Goliath. It is an absolute vindication of Ivermectin and early outpatient treatment. It is a clear refutation of the WHO, FDA, NIH, and CDC's policies of "wait at home until you turn blue" before you get treatment.

Dr. Pierre Kory told the world on December 8, 2020, that Ivermectin "obliterates" this virus. Obliterate means to decimate, demolish, or annihilate. It means to eliminate or destroy all trace, indication, or significance.

This graph shows that Ivermectin, used in Delhi beginning April 20, obliterated their COVID crisis. No one should be able to talk you out of this - not a salesman, a drug company, a television celebrity doc, and certainly not the top doctor for the WHO or the NIH who is paid to do that.

Will you believe this 97% eradication graph, or will you believe the propaganda pitched by the Big Media, Big Pharma, the WHO, and the FDA, who share massive financial conflicts of interest – those who say there is insufficient evidence?

What evidence could be any clearer than a 97% reduction in five weeks? That number is better than the current vaccines and beyond the reach of most medicines.

The WHO cautioned India they were making a mistake by using Ivermectin. They told them it could be dangerous, that there was no evidence it worked. How many lies will you buy before you stand up for the truth?

India, Argentina and Mexico are using this drug successfully to treat! 

 

Dr. Pierre Kory, the chief medical officer of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance, called the U.S. government’s decision to grant $1.2 billion to develop a drug to combat COVID-19 a “colossal waste of taxpayer money for a drug we don’t need,” especially since ivermectin works so well.

 

YouTube banned this video

A Global Class Action Lawsuit Is Coming - Crimes Against Humanity

Crimes Against Humanity - The PCR Test Fraud and COVID-19 will be the Case of the Century

Reiner Fuellmich - Update on Court Case & PCR Test Fraud

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich returns to explain how PCR Testing is a pandemic because it cannot tell us anything about infections.  This virus is not fake but our misuse of PCR testing.   He is the co-founder of the German Corona Investigative Committee, Lawyer. 

Please watch this important video next on Reiner Fuellmich's video on coronavirus patents. 

If you think there has been an organized global misinformation process that has led to unnecessary damage to the fabric of society in many ways, social, economic, and health matters, please take some time to watch this video of Dr. Reiner who has successfully brought legal accountability to large organizations before

Dr. Reiner  Fuellmich has taken on a grand responsibility which he is driven to carry for the misjustices carried daily as a consequence of the PCR Test Fraud and COVID-19 government and media fraud, that humanity has been subjected to. Fuellmich is not alone, he is supported by the work of an international team of court judges, doctors, scientists, economists, entrepreneurs, experts and business lawyers who will plead the biggest tort case of all time, the Covid-19 fraud scandal is the biggest fraud of the century.

According to the Corona Committee the assertion that the lockdown was necessary because there were so many different infections with SARS-COV-2, and because the healthcare systems would be overwhelmed is wrong for several  reasons, and from other data that has become available in the meantime:

A. The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating. By the time the lockdown was imposed, the alleged infection rates were already dropping again.

B. There’s already protection from the virus because of cross- or T-cell immunity. Apart from the above-mentioned lockdown being imposed when the infection rates were already dropping, there is also cross- or T-cell immunity in the general population against the coronaviruses contained in every flu or influenza wave. This is true, even if this time around, a slightly different strain of the coronavirus was at work. And that is because the body’s own immune system remembers every virus it has ever battled in the past, and from this experience, it also recognizes a supposedly new, but still similar, strain of the virus from the corona family. Incidentally, that’s how the PCR test for the detection of infection was invented by now infamous Professor Drosten.

C. And this is the most important part of our fact-finding: the PCR test is being used on the basis of false statements, NOT based on scientific facts with respect to infections. In the meantime, we have learned that these PCR tests, contrary to the assertions of Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, do NOT give any indication of an infection with any virus, let alone an infection with SARS-COV-2. Not only are PCR tests expressly not approved for diagnostic purposes, as is correctly noted on leaflets coming with these tests, and as the inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, who died in 2019, has repeatedly emphasized. Instead, they’re simply incapable of diagnosing any disease.’ 

Why Wearing A Face Mask Outdoors Isn't Necessary

Each orange dot represents a dose of respiratory particles capable

of infecting someone if inhaled by breathing, speaking, and shouting

In the worst-case scenario (lower right corner) – shouting or singing in a closed space for an hour – a person with Covid-19 releases. 

Risk of coronavirus infection changes depending on the number of contagious particles you breathe in. El Pais illustrated the differences when you take certain measures, namely wearing masks, ventilation, and decreased exposure time.  The suggestions are based on statistical models, so there is more uncertainty than I think the explanations provide, but the sequence of illustrations provides a clear picture of what we can do — if you must do things indoors.

In the spring, health authorities failed to focus on aerosol transmission, but recent scientific publications have forced the World Health Organization (WHO) and the CDC to acknowledge it. An article in the prestigious Science magazine found that there is “overwhelming evidence” that airborne transmission is a “major transmission route” for the coronavirus, and the CDC now notes that, “under certain conditions, they seem to have infected others who were more than six feet [two meters] away. These transmissions occurred within enclosed spaces that had inadequate ventilation. Sometimes the infected person was breathing heavily, for example, while singing or exercising.”

At present, health authorities recognize three vehicles of coronavirus transmission: the small droplets from speaking or coughing, which can end up in the eyes, mouth, or nose of people standing nearby; contaminated surfaces (fomites), although the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicates that this is the least likely way to catch the virus, a conclusion backed by the European Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (ECDC) observation that not a single case of fomite-caused Covid-19 has been observed; then finally, there is transmission by aerosols – the inhalation of invisible infectious particles exhaled by an infected person that, once leaving the mouth, behave in a similar way to smoke. Without ventilation, aerosols remain suspended in the air and become increasingly dense as time passes.

At the beginning of the pandemic, it was believed that the large droplets we expel when we cough or sneeze was the main vehicle of transmission. But we now know that shouting and singing in indoor, poorly ventilated spaces over a prolonged period of time also increases the risk of contagion. This is because speaking in a loud voice releases 50 times more virus-laden particles than when we don’t speak at all. These aerosols, if not diffused through ventilation, become increasingly concentrated, which increases the risk of infection. Scientists have shown that these particles – which we also release into the atmosphere when simply breathing and which can escape from improperly worn face masks – can infect people who spend more than a few minutes within a five-meter radius of an infected person, depending on the length of time and the nature of the interaction. In the following example, we outlined what conditions increase the risk of contagion in this situation.

If the buildings are properly ventilated, with good air conditioning,  there is less risk.  University of Colorado Boulder atmospheric chemist Jose-Luis Jimenez has released an airborne transmission pilot tool that may help us answer some of these questions, or at least provide some informed guidance.