This short video was pushed out by me in response to a previous stream by Dr McCairn with Ryan Dawson . Although I find myself largely in agreement with Dawson’s Geo-political analysis and his disdain for conservative Christian-Zionist with their unstinting and unquestioning support for Israel I object to his characterization of all Christians and his ridicule. I asked Dr McCairn to send him the following message and video:
Can you pass this onto Ryan Dawson? He should stick to his wheelhouse (geopolitics) rather than mimicking talking points by Bishai and Green. He is out of his depth. And by the way the bronze age collapse was not due to plague ask the archeologists about burn layers etc. He does not know what he is talking about just like Bishai blaming the burning of the library of Alexandria on Christians. Utter BS. So far, I have countered an occultist school shooter adjacent Marxist and a Classics Graduate who had his initial dissertation rejected and who does not quote sources. Christianity is under attack, and I am getting sick of people repeating BS talking points.
Response to Ryan Dawson (13 min)
Some good advice from Michael Heiser.
Why you should read the Bible as if it were fiction (4 min)
Dawson did not accept the invitation to debate me and left some silly message about talking snakes. A childish response that highlights his ignorance. I ended up doing a full stream with Dr McCairn. See below for links to other articles with similar themes. Starts at 16 min.
Addressing Glow-Op Goy-Slop for Armageddon Fetishists: A Christian’s Response to Ryan Dawson (2:21 min)
I was late joining the debate at 45 mins into this four-hour stream.
Classical vs Gnostic Christianity With John Brisson & Robert Ferrell (4:00 hrs)
Robert Ferrell’s area of expertise is the the Gospel of Thomas from the Nag Hammadi find in 1945. John Brisson is an Evangelical Christian who used to be a Gnostic and recently made a video demonstrating Rockefeller connections with the funding of Gnostic research and publications.
My first point is that in addressing Gnosticism we face an epistemological challenge as claims of hidden knowledge and expertise closes any debate as does any claim of special revelation. The difference with Christianity is that any truth claims are not hidden but open to examination and can be tested with regards to prophetic and historic veracity. Jesus makes a point about transparency: “I have spoken openly to the world, I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret” (John 8:20). On the surface this may seem to contradict his penchant for speaking in parables so that, seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand (Matt 13:13) but the parables acted as a filter because anyone who did not understand (like his disciples) could come to him afterwards and ask and he would willingly explain. So, the idea of secret knowledge only available to initiates (which was practiced in many occult religions) was contrary the gospel teachings. There was no special “in-group”.
Robert focused on the similarity of language and concepts found in the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, but this should not come as a surprise as it comes from a similar milieu as the synoptic traditions, but it has not developed the complex theology and intertextual as scripture. Intertextuality is a hermeneutical strand of poststructuralism whereby texts imbed, reuse, allude to or echo precursor materials so that innovation is grounded in established tradition. Gnostic writings can make no claim to this complex development. In fact, the Nag Hammadi library is an eclectic collection that includes a Gnostic Redaction of Plato’s republic (Coptic translation) and the words of the pagan text “Eugnostos the Blessed” put into the mouth of Jesus as “The Sophia of Jesus Christ”. The Gnostic text is trying to gain legitimacy by attributing the pagan text to Christ. I would suggest that this is the Gnostic modus operandi, namely parasitizing and infiltrating established religions a tactic which was familiar to Judaism who in later centuries syncretized and adopted some of the Gnostic teachings such as the divine sparks found in the Kabbalah. In the complex Gnostic cosmogony Sophia or Wisdom is one of the various emanations of God but in this theology, it is “Wisdom” who rebels against the spirit and creates Yaltabaoth or the demiurge Yahweh of the Bible. That does not sound very wise to me but rather stupid. Thus, the material creation or “prison” is the result of Sophia rebelling. Of course, the opposite is the case in Biblical literature were wisdom is personified or a hypostatization such as in the poem of Proverbs eight and where (Prov 9:10) the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (the first use of the word afraid is when Adam hid himself from Yahweh in Gen 3:10). The stream Egypt Redux has a transcript and video in which I discuss James Dunn’s research on wisdom in Christology in the Making.
What is referred to as the “Book of Enoch” is actually a collection of three different parts (1, 2 and 3 Enoch) with only 1 Enoch being dated before the New Testament, with a range of 2nd BC – 1st AD according to Charlesworth (The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols), Charlesworth, James, (ed). Doubleday: 1983). but more probably close to the Maccabee period ca.167 BC (middle of the range) as the first 36 chapters seem to be pre-Maccabean. The other sections are dated after the NT; 2 Enoch (late 1st AD) and 3 Enoch (5-6th AD). Borger suggests that Enoch could be the 7th king in the Sumerian King list. First, let’s note that the Sumerian version is more elaborate, more ‘spectacular’, more miraculous, and more complex than the biblical version. The surprisingly long-life spans in the bible (i.e. hundreds of years) are DWARFED by the tens of thousands of years in the Sumerian list! The Sumerian heroes of each period are twofold–a king AND a sage–instead of a single leadership figure as in the OT. (Borger in “I Studied Inscriptions from Before the Flood”: Ancient Near Eastern, Literary, and Linguistic Approaches to Genesis 1-11., Hess, Richard, and David Tsumura (eds.), Eisenbrauns: 1994). The function of ascribing a later document to an ancient Israelite hero such as Moses, Enoch, and Joshua is known as pseudepigrapha (or, more properly, pseudonymity), and scholars today are still unsure of exactly why the authors did this…It is not at all clear that they actually intended their audience to believe that, in the case of Jubilees, that Moses actually contradicted himself or omitted portions of his ‘earlier’ work the Pentateuch. A basic methodological principle of comparative studies in the ANE, stated by noted Assyriologist Kitchen is that in the Ancient Near East, the rule is that simple accounts or traditions give rise (by accretion and embellishment) to elaborate legends, but not vice versa. In the Ancient Orient, legends were not simplified or turned into pseudo-history (historicized)… (Ancient Orient and Old Testament., Kitchen, KA, IntervarsityPress: 1966.)
The book of 1 Enoch shares many terms with the OT book of Daniel begging the question if it is dependent (or vice versa). J. Goldingay comments as follows on the Similitudes; “The Parables are uninstanced at Qumran, and current opinion regards them as belonging to the Roman period. Their most interesting parallel to Daniel (more likely suggesting dependence on Daniel than on a common source) is their taking up the humanlike figure and the one advanced in days of 7:13. “That Son of Man” (1Enoch) 46-48, alongside the “head of days” with hair white like wool; see also chaps.62; 69), God’s elect and righteous one, is eventually identified with Enoch (71.14). Thus Daniel 7 is one of the texts that is used to interpret the significance of Enoch and his translation, reported with such tantalizing brevity in Gen 5; and it leads to or justifies a belief in Enoch’s functioning as eschatological judge”. J. Goldingay, Daniel, (Word Biblical Commentary, ed., D.A. Hubbard, G.W. Barker, J.D.W. Watts, R.P. Martin; Nelson Reference & Electronic, 1989), Intro, xxviii. Jude but Peter reference Enoch in a polemical fashion not because they were promoting the pseudepigrapha but because they were countering an antinomian subversion (on this see my article on Fallen Angels).
The priestly and cultic background of 1 Enoch is also increasingly recognised, particularly the role of the Day of Atonement ritual in the “Watchers Cycle” where scholarship understands the story of the “Fallen angels” as a mythological satire against the Samaritan schismatic’s – who (joined by some of the Jerusalem priests) established their own priesthood and form of worship. Moreover, the sending away of the scapegoat to Azazel (= the strong one) on the day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) reflects sending the nation into Babylonian exile (dry places= the wilderness). The only place the word is found in the Hebrew bible is in Leviticus 16: 8-10 as a proper name but it does appear in 1 Enoch where it is embellished into a story about fallen angels and demons. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (vol 2) suggest that the Aramaic forms point to dependence on Leviticus (Gabelein, Frank E. (1990). The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. pp. 590). Be that as it may, Jesus references the Atonement ritual and the Passover ritual and explicitly mentions Azazel (strong one):
Luke 11:21-26: When a *strong [man] armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: 22 But when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils. 23 He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth. 24 When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out. 25 And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished. 26 Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first.
* the word [man] is not in the original Greek
The context of the discussion is the accusation that Jesus is casting out demons by the power of the chief demon Beelzebub. Jesus had cast out the unclean spirt with the miraculous healing of Legion and placed the unclean spirit in the swine that drowned in the “abyss” (Luke). Legion was found healed and sitting at Jesus’ feet listening to the gospel. That is an acted atonement ritual but the unclean spirit is not ritually placed by the priest on a goat and then sent away (into the wilderness) but on an unclean animal (pig) that drowns. The nation had returned from Babylonian exile and found the “house” clean because Jesus had swept the temple and removed the money-changers in imitation of the pre-Passover feast of unleavened bread where Israelites spring cleaned their homes and “removed the leaven” (corruption) in preparation for the Passover sacrifice of the Lamb. Moreover, in the parable, after having gone through the cleansing ritual (exile) the man takes in seven more demons and becomes completely possessed. This is obviously a reference to the dynasty of the high priest Caiaphas and his relatives seven of whom controlled the priesthood until its destruction in AD 70. The “house” was removed because they had gone completely insane. In Jewish lore (probably under Hellenistic influence) Azazel becomes the red, hairy goat like devil. This is a conflation of the biblical story of Edom the brother of Jacob who is described as red and hairy combined with the scapegoat that “bears the iniquity of the nation”and was sent into the wilderness (dry places). Thus, another myth is born. The story of Cain and Able is also based on the Day of Atonement Ritual with Abel being slain (at the entrance to the Sanctuary of Eden) and Cain being sent away into exile (representing the Jewish nation) and being called a vagabond, which term is picked up in Acts 19 when Paul speaks about the “vagabond” Jews and the exorcist Sceva and his “seven sons” which flee the house naked and wounded.
This brings us to Ephesus which was a very important city in Asia Minor (Turkey) and a center of Jewish and Christian interaction. In Church tradition John (the brother of James and disciple of Jesus) took the mother of Jesus (Mary) to Ephesus and looked after her. It is off the coast of Ephesus on the island of Patmos that John is said to have been banished and received the Apocalypse delivered to seven churches in Asia Minor. It is where Paul (in Acts 19) discovers disciples of John the Baptist who had never heard of Jesus (Paul re-baptises them into Jesus). It is also where Paul encounters the “sorcerer” Sceva. It is in my view the destination not only of the Epistle to the Ephesians, but of the Fourth Gospel and the Epistle to the Hebrews (probably written by Barnabas). It is notable that the epistle to the Ephesians contains (in polemical fashion) references to Gnostic theology cf. Ephesians 2:2; “ Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince (archon) of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience” (Eph 2:2) which is juxtaposed with “the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself” (Eph 1:5) and what then of Kosmokrator (see my article) which is the counterpart to the angel of death. These are polemical texts addressing the attack on the church by gnostic and Judaistic elements. The Fourth Gospel should also be understood against this background particularly with reference to the Prologue which de-mythologizes and reuses Platonic, gnostic and Philonic terms in a masterpiece of bringing out new meaning. The gap between the Greek philosophic understanding of form and pure reason was bridged by the essence or LOGOS becoming material in the person of Jesus Christ which Christians refer to as incarnation (I prefer manifestation) this is why Christians rejected the docetic/gnostic teaching that Jesus was not real (he was just a ghost or spirt) and not flesh or blood which becomes a litmus test in the first century (1 John 4:1-3). Gnosticism was rejected by the early church. However, “Gnostic language” is encountered (Proarkhe (“before the beginning”, Greek: προαρχή), Arkhe (“the beginning”, Greek: ἀρχή)) with John the Baptist explicitly stating (though using different Greek): “This (Christ) is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me”. (John 1:30). One of the reasons for writing the gospel of John was to demonstrate the superiority of Christ over the patriarchs and John the Baptist. The synoptic gospels and the Fourth Gospels are not “history” (but they contain history) they are not biographies (but they contain biographical material) they are not theology (but they contain theology) they are sacred history, and each gospel is different because they were written to counter specific problems in the church using Jesu’s ministry as an example and were sent to different churches (audiences). And they all concentrate (focal point) on the Passion narrative (last week). The Fourth Gospel is enigmatic because its style is so different and is seen as late and therefore unhistorical. However, the scholar John A.T. Robinson (Redating the New Testament/The Priority of John) following his mentor Dodd argues the case that the writer had access to very early material. This would make the gospel both early and late (do you see the problem?). The Rylands Library Papyrus P52, also known as the St John’s fragment, was discovered in Alexandria and has been dated by different scholars in a range from 100-150 AD and 125-175 AD. My own investigations (especially the story of Nathaniel) show connections with the Bar Kochba revolt (ca.132-135 AD) where the false messiah was recognised by the chief Rabbi (Akiva), but this does not mean that it is ex-eventu (John 5:43 I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.) I can recommend Andersons’ book The Fourth Gospel and the Quest for Jesus: Modern Foundations Reconsidered although I am not in complete agreement with his historical outline of Johannine Christianity (pp. 196-199). As to Hebrews, it demonstrates (in my view) awareness of the problem in Ephesus; Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God (Hebrews 6:1), this is the Baptism of Repentance (of John the Baptist): “If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame” (Hebrews 6:6). In other words, you cannot progress from the Baptism of Repentance (John) to the baptism of Jesus and then revert to John. It is my view that the Gnostic Mandeans who revere John the Baptist and who now live in Australia (as Iraqi refugees) and practice multiple washing and Baptisms originated with the movement in Ephesus that Paul discovered. Moreover, the message to the Hebrews (Jews at Ephesus) corresponds with the message given by Christ to Ephesus in the Apocalypse.
Note that the message in Revelation 2:1-7 to Ephesus is based on the garden of Eden and with the seven branched candlestick (menorah design is based on a tree) symbolizing the tree of life (v.7).
And the Correspondence between Hebrews and Ephesians:
The Gnostics at Ephesus claimed superiority of “illumination” (compare the Illuminati) or special knowledge brought by the serpent in Eden. Not illumination by God’s spirit. Then there were the Judaists who claimed superiority via the Law. At some historical point Judaists and Gnostics syncretized certain doctrines in the Kabbalah which together with the Kybalion became the New Age teaching of the technocrats (full title: The Kybalion: A Study of the Hermetic Philosophy of Ancient Egypt and Greece) is a book originally published in 1908. And so we have gone full circle from Egypt the home of Hermetics, alchemy, magic and illumination. It was Egypt were Moses challenged the Hermetic “magicians” Jannes and Jambres by casting down a serpent (2 Tim 3:8). Paul warns Timothy to avoid profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science (gnosis) falsely so called (1 Timothy 6:20). It is ironic that the KJV should translate gnosis as “science” almost as if they are pointing towards ancient Hermetic alchemy and transformation as practiced by the transhumanist science in their quest for immortality. The serpent and the Eden mythology is key to Gnostic theology which points to ancient pre-Sumerian origins. From the Serpent, Nawcash, in the Garden of Eden; Atum, the Egyptian snake-man; and Quetzalcotl, the feathered serpent god of the Mayans to the double-helix snake symbol of Enki/Ea in ancient Sumerian literature, the serpent has been the omnipresent link between humans and the gods in every culture.
Do the “Lizard people” represent a priestly class that practiced head binding (as among the Peruvian elite)? When it says that the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made (Gen 3:1) is the beast a reference to an empire (like they are in Daniel) eg. the Ubaid. (??). The symbol of cyclical destruction is the ouroborus (snake eating its own tail) with reference to the 25,920-year “Precession Year” when creation is unmade and “reset” (The Great Reset). It seems to me (still examining the idea) that the serpent story represents two different ways of overcoming the existential threat, namely, to transcend and become gods through knowledge and science (Gnosticism-transhumanism-technology) or through faith in the promise delivered to Eve and the Abrahamic Revelation which rejects both the Hermetic/Gnostic approach and the superstitious approach of sacrificing children to a “solar deity” to appease wrath. If I am correct, then the ancients were aware of cyclical destruction and solar flaring, and this seems likely as our ancestors must have survived previous catastrophes. Someday I must write a book about the subjects that I have only briefly touched upon here, but I feel we are running out of time. I chose to follow the path of faith, believing that life has purpose and meaning and that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. Here are more resources which include links to my articles on Ephesus (three articles)
Search the Gnostic tab on my blog for further resources.
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15)
3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted....(2 Corinthians 11:3-4 )
We either diffuse the bomb or we take down the whole building. Let it burn. No half measures. They must NOT be allowed to walk away from the death and mayhem that they caused. What do we do? The only thing we can do is walk away. “Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues” (Rev 18.4).
Lethal Weapon 3 Bomb Scene (5 min)
The video below this one is a 20 minute clip from Dr McCairns previous stream in which he discusses THE FORBIDDEN DEBATE the topic from the ‘Better Way Conference’ in May, Del asked the forbidden question: “Do Vaccines Have a Role In the Better Way Forward?” The first day speakers were: ROBERT F KENNEDY, JR • DR ROBERT MALONE • DR JESSICA ROSE • DR PETER MCCULLOUGH • DR TESS LAWRIE • GEERT VANDEN BOSSCHE • KIM WITCZAK • BRET WEINSTEIN • DR PAUL ALEXANDER • DR MARIA HUBMER-MOGG • MAAJID NAWAZ • SHABNAM PALESA MOHAMED.
EPISODE 275: THE FORBIDDEN DEBATE
A limited hangout, or partial hangout, is a public relations or propaganda technique that involves the release of previously hidden information in order to prevent a greater exposure of more important details. It takes the form of deception, misdirection, or coverup often associated with intelligence agencies involving a release or "mea culpa" type of confession of only part of a set of previously hidden sensitive information, that establishes credibility for the one releasing the information who by the very act of confession appears to be "coming clean" and acting with integrity; but in actuality, by withholding key facts, is protecting a deeper operation and those who could be exposed if the whole truth came out. In effect, if an array of offenses or misdeeds is suspected, this confession admits to a lesser offense while covering up the greater ones.
Bret Weinstein’s brother Eric (another brainiac) was involved with Epstein hence the reference by Kevin to the “massage enthusiast” because the lawyer Dershowitz claimed he only went to the Epstein Mansion for massages and kept his pants on (lolz). Eric did a cringe worthy interview on YT (can’t remember where) making excuses blah (said he had permission from his wife or something like that). Heather E. Heying is Bret’s wife an evolutionary biologist and former professor together they do the Dark Horse podcast that draws a large audience which even mentioned Jonathan Couey and Charles Rixey (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAGw1VThJek&t=2279s).
However, the stuff that Charles and Johnathan are talking about should have been already known by these “expert” PhD’s and Doctors?? I knew this more than a year ago. This is the deliberate drip feed of a a bit of info to lend credibility….but trust me a Jew like Bret does not have a big presence on a Jewish Platform (YT) unless he is saying something that they approve of. Dr Robert Malone has connections with DOD and DARPA (which to his credit he admits) and holds patents on mRNA and vaccines etc. Geert is a vaccinologist who wants to continue the childhood vaccine schedule but has been preaching dire consequences of ADE caused by vaccinating into a pandemic. So Geert is actually a traditional vaxxer (trad vaxx) as are many of the other guests. Perhaps some of the vaccines are safe and perhaps if we halt all vaccines we invite a catastrophic resurgence but at this point who knows? Firstly, the covid vaxx is not a vaccine it is a gene therapy and secondly it is dual use and I would argue triple use. They want to base their next health platform on the development of mRNA gene therapies because they have proven that they are safe (lolz). At the same time the Military wants to use mRNA technology as a weapon because it is deadly and gene therapy can be race targeted. Both parties are wrong because we are dealing with something that in my view is far more complex with unforeseen consequences. The health consequences and the war-fighting consequences are in no way clear and have overlapping domains. We must not throw out the baby with the bathwater but the whole historical vaccination drive is under a cloud especially because it has attracted so many transhumanists and eugenicists. That by itself should raise alarm bells. Nevertheless, we should support these “dissidents” as they have their place in warning people…they act as a “gateway drug” until users graduate onto the “hard stuff” (Dr Kevin McCairn lolz) where they OD on scientific red (black) pills and casual misogyny, homophobia and racism (lolz) in the ongoing battle against woke science and culti-Marxi insanity.
Diffuse the Bomb (19 min)
The Forbidden debate is not vaxx vs. anti-vaxx. The forbidden debate is dual use (or triple use) biotechnology. It forms the basis of transhumanism, gene threapy, eugenics and raced based bio-warfare. It heralds the end of humanity in more ways than one.
I am glad that Kevin made a rebuttal and did so in such an amicable manner. To be frank I was disappointed in the stream by Johnathan and surprised that he did not acknowledge Kevin’s contribution to the fact that Spike-protein (whether delivered by aerosol or injection) is the cause of systemic disease. It was Dr Kevin McCairn that warned people nearly two years ago. As a systems neuro scientist he is well placed to recognize systemic failure. He warned about amyloidogenesis and “seeding” and prionopathy cascades, fibromyalga and clotting. I know because I have been listening to him warn people for two years in the same way that I listened to you present a coherent and instructive narrative on immunology. Not only has Dr McCairn called the science correctly he has help establish an alternative platform (on which he has offered you to stream for free) and he is building a home lab and trying to do lab work. So kudos to Dr McCairn for fighting this. That said, I have enormous respect for Johnathan and how he stood up to be counted thus sacrificing his career showing personal integrity.
The likes of the Bailey’s, Kaufman and Cowan etc do not believe that viruses exist. That is the basis on which they build their castles of sand. It is perfectly valid to point that out and to establish a baseline. As I have said before the military (in every country) would not spend millions researching something (viruses) that does not exist. What were they trying to weaponize then? What were they sequencing? Jonathan admits, “all this (sequencing etc) is at the heart of GOF research.”
You will never win over people by going along with the lie. How can you ally yourself with liars and con-men? How does it benefit you to hitch your wagon to people who are cranks and grifters? You cannot pander to these people because they are either useful idiots or people who wish us harm. You will be tarred with the same brush and you make your scientific position untenable by pandering to non-cogent arguments.
Finally on Kevin’s style which you term “garbage”. You do realize that we are in a culture war instigated as far back as the 1930’s when certain Jewish/German scholars of the Frankfurt school went to places like Berkley and subverted the culture. Shall we just ignore the onslaught? The push androgynous sterile lifestyles the leveraging of race, gender , sex etc to shut people up. Are you going to ignore the Epsteinization of science? Are you going to ignore the war mongering by dual citizens? Are you going to ignore the financialization and hyperinflation by the banksters? Do you think a “proper understanding of biology” will stop that? They want you to shut up. They want you to self-censor. When you do that you concede power to them. They should be offended. They need to be offended. They deserve to be offended. Their weapons of cultural Marxism, PC and pilpul need to be neutralized. I for one will overturn the tables of the moneylenders and offend them as much as is necessary:
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it" (John 8:44).
Here are two memorable quotes from the video:
Talking about the consequences of teaching people that viruses are not real:
"Skip away in the mine field those mines aren't real"
Talking about the known unknowns and the complexity of life:
"There is a lot to viruses that we just don't get...there is a lot of things that we don't get about life and all the measurements that we can make with respect to life to the point that life has evolved to the cusp where we have an established way of engaging in philosophical thought,scientific investigation, I would argue that we have the same with artistic merit..."
Dr Kevin McCairn recently hosted a debate with Eric from Hot Topikz. Eric placed a a clipped version of the debate on his own website (https://youtu.be/m9cbs_7cwfs) with the following write up:
... I had to cut over an hour out of it from the beginning middle portions and end, otherwise youtube would have taken it down, but you will see its bad enough as is. They hated Jews Blacks, gays, and pretty much all religions and suspected them of "stalking his family" causing them to become "transhumanist"... and of course they pretty much implied that "the Jews" are the only ones in banking lol, and the only ones powerful enough to destroy the world... Paranoia and ignorance at its finest... After I left them thumped and sore and embarrassed, this is what one of them left for me in my discord account.... And I quote... "..and u should learn to act your boomer age raised in communism you children of the 60's I bet you didn't even go to school be it primary or even high school with blacks you Jew lover blinded by Marxism on race at least I can say I have spent 100000000% more time with blacks colored Indians Chinese (lol) Eric may you rot in the soil and be greatly disappointed concerning your beliefs"
Now Eric is misrepresenting the views of Dr McCairn and Boergle but then again they are misrepresenting his views. The debate generated a lot of heat but very little light. What does point scoring and name calling achieve? I thought we were better than that. Everybody approached the debate with preconceived prejudices and had them confirmed (golf clap). It is truly a wondrous experience to behold Boergle in full flow mounting an expletive driven assault with his withering condescension and delicious accent……but it also makes him so easy to dismiss. And that is the problem…people would love to label Boergle (and people like him) as a racist and dismiss them. But it is not a simple black and white issue (pun intended). The Boers shed sweat and blood in a land they believe was covenanted to them and the history of that troubled period is not what is currently portrayed (which is why Boergle is archiving it before it is sanitized). Suffice to say that Marxism and Jewish agitation and activism was a driving force on one side balanced by Zionist support for apartheid with clandestine biological, chemical and nuclear weapons on the other side. Hegelian dialectic anyone? Neither is it antisemitic to note the fact that our current woes are beholden to Jewish ideology pursued by Jewish institutions, whether they be media, pharma or banking. Living in denial because you are afraid to be labeled a racist is not an option. We no longer have the luxury of self-indulgence, fictive realities and virtue signalling. Here then is the full uncensored debate (nearly five hours). I hope that someone on the Dojo will get around to time stamping the video.
My response to the debate is below. I think it is fair to ask questions regarding hermeneutics because methodology is very important. In the previous stream Dr McCairn analyzed a scientific paper showing shared immune responses when comparing Covid and HIV infections (at 01:45) Kevin had methodological questions such as “How long did the patients have HIV?” and at one point suggested that other influenza or coronavirus infections should have been used as control by way of comparison. That seems like a sensible idea when comparing overlap. Scientific methodology is like hermeneutics. You have to establish a credible framework otherwise you are building sand castles.
This video is a rebuttal of the after analysis of the debate with Christopher Bjerkness moderated by Dr Kevin McCairn. I was rather disappointed at the assessment with phrases like “Christopher won the debate” and “Paul was trounced” and the charge that I was not polite. I believe that whereas Christopher resented John Brisson sarcastic tone he actually thanked me and said he would look into some of the things I suggested because they were interesting.
Do I sometimes go on? Yes, because that is necessary when people make sweeping claims about things they do not understand. Kevin complained about the back and forth over the academic minutiae because it is about pointing out who is the enemy and who is the useful idiots. Well you can’t do that unless you understand the the academic minutiae otherwise you are at a disadvantage when false claims are made. If the foundation is built on sand the house collapses.
Christopher presents a deluge of information that he strings together but they come from different sources and different contexts on which he places equal weight. How can you place the same weight on the Old Testament as on the Zohar that appeared in 13th century Spain? He makes sweeping claims (without evidence) that the Greek Bible (LXX) is not a translation but that it is the original Old Testament (which they presumably translated back into Hebrew scrolls some even written in paleo-Hebrew and scattered around everywhere.) He even points to the Massoretic Text (MT) being written about 1000 AD as a “gotcha” moment (lolz).
This demonstrates to me that he has no understanding of textual transmission and his Biblical knowledge (inter-textual hermeneutics) is poor. I think I remained very polite and I had to bite my tongue and show restraint on numerous occasions. The problem is that there is some truth to what he is saying and it needs to be honestly examined but we cannot throw the baby out with the bath water.
I do not have to answer for other Christians nor do I carry the same burdens. Just because Tertullian and Origen misunderstood the typology of the scapegoat does not mean that I do. Just because some Christians may believe in Ransom theory and a bet with the devil does not mean that I carry that burden and it does not mean that Scripture even teaches it. As to burning in hell Christians would do well to remember that Jesus went to hell and came back on the third day. Moreover, who are we to judge another man’s servant? The Lord makes one vessel to honor and another to dishonor. The clay cannot cry out to the potter..why have you made me thus? Understand the meaning of the Lord’s name:
"And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy" (Exodus 33:19).
Some men’s hearts will be hardened, other will fall by the wayside and yet others will bring forth tares. Some will die in ignorance and some will be as if they had never existed. Your lot is not to judge but to do what is right towards your neighbor and love the Lord they God with all they heart, soul and mind. Amen.
This article will be regularly updated over the next few days and therefore you will need to refresh your browser to get the latest version because I intend to add new material and links over the next few days. I have ripped the audio and transcribed it using word online but it is rather messy and unstructured and is 94 pages long! This is therefore a work in progress. The first timestamps are just rough indicators (my own) before I used the automatic transcribe. I am hoping that I will get some input from the “Racoon” Discord. You should be able to download the transcript here: gig2.docx
This is the debate between Dr Jonathan Jay Couey the neurobiologist and the molecular biologist Dr Daniel Wilson from Debunk the Funk.
Debate (1:21 min)
Pre- Show talk (starts at 00:06:38)
In the Pre-show talk Jonathan was critical of Dr Kevin McCairn and remarked that pointing out the contamination in the vaccines and the blood work was a distraction. I beg to differ and think Jonathan is wrong. We are at the point of the mass vaccination of children and not everyone has the time or the mental capacity to engage in an academic discussion about immunology. Science has thrown sand in their eyes. Most people need a simple message to focus on and contaminated vaccine is a good starting point. We know there is contamination as people died in Japan and batches were withdrawn. We simply no longer have the luxury of the cut and thrust of academic debate and most people are simply bamboozled or find it overly complex. Setting the academic niceties aside the message must be simple and clear. When in the trenches you are forced to fight dirty, and it is time to go for the jugular. They have a huge propaganda machine and the medical establishment and pharma behind them. The demonstration of how the vaccine reacted with blood was powerful and simple to understand and with the help of Dr Fleming Kevin was able to reach a huge audience. We need to support each other otherwise we will go down the DRASTIC route. We all need to focus on our strengths and focus all our efforts on the enemy. Hold the line. Play to your strengths. You are all doing a great job keep the pressure up.
Dr Wilson: ( 00:21:55) What I think Geert got wrong was this idea that natural antibodies can neutralize and clear Sars-CoV-2 infection all on their own. We have antibodies in our body that could theoretically recognize any epitope to any pathogen….we have antibodies that can recognize any epitope from any pathogen that is due (22:42) to hypersomatic gene shuffling…… but those antibodies are not from class-switch mature antibodies so they are typically really low in abundance, and they are not going to be really good at binding…so you can detect them in cell assays…so they exist…they are a thing…but they are not good at binding…..the B cells making the antibodies that might bind Sars-CoV-2 need to undergo class switching and further hypersomatic mutation to create better antibodies IgM is typically not going to do much against a virus.
JC: 24:00 …when T cells are responding early to infection, they are not responding to spike protein epitopes, they are responding to the earliest expressed epitopes in viral infection….and when they then activate apoptosis in those infected cells there are viral particles and fragments of these digested cells and the viral particles that get digested by the macrophages that are there, that are then processed, and those need to be cleaned up. That is what the antibodies do in a natural “well done” infection…the antibodies are cleaning up the viral debris, they are not the primary way the body is stopping the virus from infecting cells. How would any antibody that is in your blood stop a virus infecting the epithelial cells of your lungs? It won’t. That is what T cells do and when they fight the infection they create debris which the body has to clean up, and that debris is often times very much the same from infection to infection and that is the reason why those IgM antibodies work at low concentrations and low affinity. And the only reason why you need to enrich antibodies for specific antibodies is for when the viral load reaches a level where it is systemic and that does not happen with every infection because T cells take care of that…and I think most of the TV biology ignores the fact that asymptomatic infection in a healthy person is T cells responding to the first genes expressed in viral infection and that is not the spike protein.
Dr Wilson. 26:00 The spike Protein is the first thing the body sees. JC: That is not true- the first thing the body sees is are the proteins presented on the HLA receptorswhen the cells are infected, and those proteins are viral proteins and that is how it works. Dr Wilson interjection: Including spike. J.C. (26:27) No, it is the first proteins that are expressed the spike comes afterwards, you first have to express the proteins that hijack the cellular machinery of the epithelium, and those proteins must also be expressed on the outside and they are the first T cell epitopes available. There is no other way to debate that, those are the first and most prolific T cell epitopes, they are identified in at least 10 different papers as the most immunogenic epitopes in the genome and that is because T cells respond to the earliest proteins.[i]
27:00 Dr Wilson….Geert is saying antibodies alone can clear an infection JC response…you are parsing things out (semantics) because Geert is a vaccinolgist with 20 years’ experience (of course he knows about T cells) but….vaccinologists have to look at antibodies because it is the only read out that they have got. Dr Wilson interjection: No, you can measure T cells
JC response: You can, but not all of them…because the memory T cells resides in the lungs and anyone who works on the immune system of a mouse knows that because you have to sacrifice the mouse to get the memory T cells you can’t measure them in a human, you have to get them when they are migrating. Dr Wilson interjection. No, you can get them from germinal centersJC…but they are not the memory cells, they are not the ones residing in the lungs, you can’t…it is not possible and there are no papers except for in mice. Dr Wilson refers to a longitudinal memory [ii] and they measured T and B cell responses. JC. Right, they are stimulated memory B cell responses…they are not the same thing….as the ones residing in the lungs…there are memory cells that migrate back and memory cells that stay from colonial expansion and from antigen affinity enrichment and there are also memory cells that reside at the site of infection. Wilson: And in germinal centers which you can assay. JC: Right, but you can’t assay the ones that matter the most…the ones which they only understand from mouse experiments and monkey experiments because they can remove the lungs. They can sample from the lungs…you are arguing against nothing though…because you are still not admitting that T cells do the job. What other cells are getting rid of the infected cells? Wilson: Macrophages. JC response: NO Macrophages cannot get rid of infected cells the way that CD8 positive cells can because they cannot target…(macrophages) they clean up. The primary response to any infection is CD8 and CD4 positive cells. It is not antibodies DUDE (30:18)
00:30:19 Wilson Antibodies are a frontline defense. JC They are not…..
Wilson If the titeris high enough, they are. If the titer is high Enough, yes, they are.
J.C. That’s that’s exactly why the titer does not stay very high in a healthy person because they are cleaning up. Wilson 00:30:28 They neutralize them, neutralize. If antibody titers are high, the virus will not be able to infect or spread very well. 00:30:38 JC Oh, is that is that, is that what you see in the data now that that that antibody titers correlate with people who can get? That’s ridiculous.
You know, that’s not true. Wilson 00:30:47 Well, we know that neutralizing antibody titers correlate with outcome and with infection and everything so. JC But but you you know that you know that I’ve done like six months worth of streaming to show that that’s not true. There are paper after paper………… 00:31:28 JC But they’re not as important as you think they are. Would you like to hear a virologist? 00:31:32 WilsonAdmit that like? ……. JC 00:31:38 That they don’t know what antibodies mean. Would you like? They don’t, they don’t. JC 00:31:43 They don’t know what antibodies mean. They do not know whether antibodies are a correlate of protection or not, and that’s because that’s because….
Wilson 00:31:52 So so, so there’s a difference there. OK, a correlate of protection has not been determined for SARS-CoV-2 so. That means that if you have really high antibodies from, say, a natural immune infection and also really high but lower titers of antibodies from a vaccine. From that difference. Is it we don’t know the significance of it. We don’t know the immune correlate of protection, but we do know that higher antibody titers do correlate with better outcomes for patients…..
SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody structures inform therapeutic strategies“Antibody sequencing revealed the expansion of clones of RBD-specific memory B cells that expressed closely related antibodies in different individuals…..Although there is currently no vaccine, it is likely that antibodies will be essential for protection. However, little is known about the human antibody response to SARS-CoV-2……In conclusion, most convalescent plasma samples obtained from individuals who recover from COVID-19 do not contain high levels of neutralizing activity”.
Wilson Heading:Presence of neutralizing antibodies is predictive of patient outcome:
JC 00:33:19 And it’s never, it’s never seen a coronavirus before? Wilson 00:33:23 Not Sars-CoV-2 JC Oh, I see. And so what’s so different about SARS Co V2 from the rest of the coronavirus is is it all the proteins or just a few? ………. JC 00:33:35 How different it’s 61% different in what’s that? 61 percent? Is it all spread out evenly, or is it found in certain proteins that are highly conserved across all coronaviruses? Or don’t you know that answer? Wilson 00:33:47 I know that it’s a 60% a 60% a 60% difference in the genome is huge. JC Yeah, it’s huge unless it’s not, unless it’s not all spread equally. My friend and it’s not, it’s not, it’s spread, it does because the immune system remembers the genes that don’t change. ……[iii]
Wilson 00:34:10 No. but it Doesn’t, it’s it’s clearly not able to recognize unclear source code B2 value though, when millions of people have died. JC 00:34:14 So how come 50% of the people who get infected don’t even get sick, don’t even know they’re infected. How do you explain that? That doesn’t happen with flu?……….
"Based on the available literature, we found that there is scant, if any, evidence that asymptomatic or presymptomatic individuals play an important role in influenza transmission. As such, recent articles concerning pandemic planning, some using transmission modeling, may have overestimated the effect of presymptomatic or asymptomatic influenza transmission. More definitive transmission studies are sorely needed".
Estimates of the asymptomatic fraction are affected by the study design, and the definitions of infection and symptomatic illness. Considerable differences between the asymptomatic fraction of infections confirmed by virologic versus serologic testing may indicate fundamental differences in the interpretation of these two indicators.
00:34:22 JC: Do you get high viral loads of flu and not show symptoms? You do not. Sorry, but you don’t. That’s complete baloney. Wilson: Yeah, in some cases we do you do. It’s it’s it’s. Very common to have an asymptomatic carrier of something that happens. It does happen. JC AGREES: Yes, it does happen, but it’s much more likely to happen now that we have these silly transfections going around. Wilson: TRANSFECTIONS? JC: Yeah, transfections, you know the…..Wilson: The yeah, no transfection is it’s a choice. 00:34:59 Wilson: It’s a choice to call the M RNA vaccine in a transfection but… JC: It’s not, it’s what it is. JC: It’s not a vaccine, it’s a transfection. Vaccines, have an adjuvant and a pathogen in them…… 00:35:12 Wilson [They] Have an adjuvant…It’s the mRNA….the adjuvant is the mRNA. They designed it specifically not to be immunogenic. Did you not read about how they did it? JC: I don’t know. 00:35:20 Wilson: Oh, I read about how they did it and it does act as an adjuvant because they’re able to purify it with HPLC that increases recruitment of dendritic cells to the site. They also pseudo-urodilate = (Pseudouridine) it, which also increases dendritic recruitment to the site that acts as an adjuvant.
00:35:36 JC: Oh my gosh, you are actually totally wrong. You know that, right? It’s actually the opposite.00:35:42 Wilson: You’re just saying I’m wrong, that’s. 00:35:43 JC: No, but I …. Wilson: That’s what happens. JC: I’ve interviewed, I’ve interviewed both Robert Malone and Luigi Warren. Luigi Warren is one of the guys who invented this. He’s the guy who came up with the pseudo you’re the idea of using this alternative. Wow man, you are shocking me right now. 00:36:02 Wilson: I mean, that’s literally how it works. pseudo-urodilation and HPLC purification increases dendritic cell recruitment. 00:36:09 JC Of what? where at? Do you mean at the site of injection? Wilson: yes JC: Because the mRNA acts as an adjuvant. I would love for you to give me a reference for that. I would love for you to give me a reference for that because it’s my understanding that the reason why they needed to use this alternative basis so that it would not be immunogenic because RNA is one of the most immunogenic things in the body. 00:36:46 Y Wilson: Yeah , yeah they went through a lot of trial and error to get this right. JC: To get it not to be immunogenic and now you’re telling me it’s the adjuvant and it’s completely wrong. Wilson: Oh, it’s that that’s definitely how it works. 00:36:58 JC: I’ve heard other people tell me it’s the lipid nanoparticle that is the adjuvant. You guys are crazy. Wilson: No, no. JC: There is no adjuvant. That’s the whole point of this. If the mRNA was the adjuvant, you would have such a problem. 00:37:09 Wilson: It is an adjuvant…OK, let me just get this reference for you. 00:37:19 JC: Is it from Moderna or Pfizer? Are you giving me a scientific reference from Pre con? 00:37:23 Wilson: No, this is a review of mRNA vaccines before COVID existed. JC: Cool, cool, cool. Send it to me please. Do they talk at all about the fact that they had to reduce the immunogenicity of the mRNA? Or how do they? Wilson: Oh, yeah, they had to try to figure out how to make it stable enough that the immune system wouldn’t totally just chew it up right away then. 00:37:48 JC: But the immune system doesn’t chew up mRNA dude. You’re a molecular biologist. You know that that’s not the immune systems job. There are just RNase that do that. Wilson: It’s passive immunity. JC: OK yeah OK. Well, I mean just don’t say that’s like the immune system, that’s that’s silly. Wilson: It’s, it’s a defense against foreign invaders that is part of the immune system. 00:38:14 JC: I’m so confused as to how this could be the adjuvant and also not immunogenic. I don’t get it. Wilson: It’s a balancing act. JC: It’s it’s not. Wilson: The immunostimulatory properties of mRNA conversely, can be increased by the inclusion of adjuvant…… blah blah blah blah blah.
Wilson was quoting this:
“The immunostimulatory properties of mRNA can conversely be increased by the inclusion of an adjuvantto increase the potency of some mRNA vaccine formats. These include traditional adjuvants as well as novel approaches that take advantage of the intrinsic immunogenicity of mRNA or its ability to encode immune-modulatory proteins”.
mRNA vaccines — a new era in vaccinology
Three decades of messenger RNA vaccine development
"Finally, we discuss the mRNA self-adjuvant effect as a
critical, but dichotomous parameter that determines the safety, efficacy and strength of the evoked immune response. Notwithstanding, the potency of this self-adjuvant effect of mRNA must be weighed against the risk of any adverse reaction inherent to it, including inflammation reactions and auto-immune event".
00:38:31 JC: inclusion of an adjuvant…you just said the words you dope. Are you reading Oh my God, you just read the words and you’re telling me I’m wrong? Wilson: I’m leaving, I’m finding it hard. JC: Find another paper dude. Holy **** I mean. Wilson: Chill out, chill out. JC: Dude, you’re starting to bother me because nothing you’re talking about is right. It’s the opposite. ……. 00:39:20 J.C. You cannot, but you can’t have it be not an adjuvant and an adjuvant or not immunogenic and immunogenic…..It’s like you just read the article today. 00:39:35 Wilson: It’s a balancing. 00:39:35 JC: You just read the text that said mRNA can be added with an adjuvant and then you stopped reading it because you knew you were putting your foot in your mouth.…00:39:50 JC: You should know it already because I’m talking about general principles of immunology and that is that mRNA is immunogenic and you’re telling me that this is the adjuvant. That can’t be true because otherwise the vaccine would not work like it’s supposed to, which is expressing a ton of spike protein so that the body will build antibodies to the spike protein. It’s one or the other. Dude, it’s crazy. It’s like you work for Moderna and you’re tripping over yourself to give us a stock portfolio presentation. 00:40:24 Wilson: Uh-huh sure. Yeah, so that’s that’s exactly what they do. HPLC and pseudouridilation recruit strength dendritic cells. JC: What there…you’re just said the same thing you said before. You’re not explaining to the biology of it. 00:40:46 Wilson: Yeah, it’s it’s in… it’s in this paper. JC: What is the biology behind it though? You explain that to me. How does that work that the mRNA gets in disguised in the lipid nanoparticle? So, then it doesn’t attract the immune system and it expresses spike protein and then it attracts the immune system.
How? What’s happening. Can you explain that? Because when a virus does it, a virus hijacks your cells and your cell’s machinery and the cells then signal out saying that I’m hijacked both by presenting the proteins that they have to express, and by sending out signals what?
What happens here, does it send out similar signals? 00:41:26 Wilson: It’s there by your body reacting to the foreign RNA. JC: I thought it was to the spike protein? 00:41:32 Wilson: No, that’s the recruitment of dendritic cells. JC: What is the recruitment of dendritic cells? The mRNA? 00:41:38 Wilson: They’re reacting to the mRNA, yes. JC: But the mRNA is in the cells. I thought the M RNA was in the cells, so then how is the? 00:41:47 Wilson: It’s foreign mRNA, not all of it is going to be encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles. Some of it’s going to be free floating some of its…. 00:41:53 JC: Oh wow, oh, this is all kinds of crazy **** that I didn’t know about the vaccine, yeah. 00:41:59 Wilson: Well, that’s what happens in a tube.
The mRNA question has been treated in a separate blog article which can be found here:
[iii] Even though it could be argued that 60% similarity still means that 40% of the virus is “unknown” one cannot argue for a “novel” virus. It depends how that 60% is distributed. It depends on the importance of that 60% (structural, functionality etc of the proteins). One cannot argue that the immune system has never encountered it before. Would you be able to identify a car if only 60% was photographed? Probably. Especially if you photographed the badge. And why would you repurpose other coronavirus drugs unless you knew they could be effective? Genetic comparison among various coronavirus strains for the identification of potential vaccine targets of SARS-CoV2“The whole-genome sequence alignment of CoV revealed 54% identity among varying CoV strains, whereas, the genome sequence alignment of the nsp-coding region alone of CoV shows 58% similarity and that of the structural protein-coding region shows 43% similarity, suggesting that nsps (non-structural proteins) form the conserved region of the genome with high percent identity, contrarily, structural proteins in need of adaptation to new hosts are more diverse” (Chen et al., 2020). In the conclusion they state: “So, drug/vaccine repurposing is the current hot research area and researchers are aiming for the use of potential target antigen sequences of previously known coronavirus strains to come up with a suitable vaccine for novel SARS-CoV2 strain”.
Heated Vaccine Debate – Kennedy Jr. vs Dershowitz.
Robert Kennedy has a voice that is difficult to listen to. He has a condition called spasmodic dysphonia, a specific form of an involuntary movement disorder called dystonia that affects only the voice box. I urge you to watch the debate because he “schools” the clever Jewish lawyer Dershowitz who originally came out so vehemently for a mandated vaccine being thrust into your arm. Despite his urbane mannerism and outward charm I do not trust Mr Dershowitz who was hired by Trump to fight the impeachment but previously defended Epstein. Apparently he also received “massages” but he kept his trousers on (lol). So, I do not trust dirty Dersh and found his fawning over the Kennedy family sinister because rumor has it that you know who had a hand in the assassination. Maybe it was just a gentle reminder to Kennedy not to overstep the mark. Or maybe it was just my imagination.
I do not think the debate was “heated” but it was very informative and Dershowitz was not impressive. His lawyer tricks did not work against the barrage of scientific information. So, if you want to make the case against mandated vaccines or masks for that matter you need to watch this video. Master class. This video has not been backed up because I doubt that even Youtube would dare remove the video debate with senator Kennedy.
Breakdown with timestamps
Copy and paste the timestamp link in your browser if you want to go directly to that section (everything after the = sign)
The Takeaway is that Kennedy wins the debate. He is on top of his brief and passionate. None of the vaccines have been tested in double blind placebo testing. The current Oxford vaccine is being tested against another (dangerous) vaccine instead of against an innocuous placebo. This is done to make it look better. It is called cheating. Moreover the CDC etc holds patents and stands to make themselves rich. All of the oversight bodies etc stand to make billions. There is conflict of interest and corruption everywhere. And all this for a disease (emergency) that has a 99.74% survival rate.
Click here for a large image. You might want to print this off and hand it out to the morons yelling at you. Our government just announced that if you don’t have a mask you can use cloth or a scarf instead. Utterly ludicrous. Channel Nine news recommends using a mask while exercising despite two Chinese school children recently dying from wearing masks during exercise. Channel Seven claims that our hospital ICU wards are overflowing and that the Nurses working 12 hour shifts without a break. They support this by showing four month old footage from Italy. When someone checked out the hospital it was virtually empty. They are criminals and liars.
If we continue with lockdowns economic collapse is inevitable. The masses seem hypnotized into a stupor. The barrage of propaganda is doing its job. They are almost completely conditioned into a primal state of fear and completely infantile and dependent. We are almost ready for the hunger games. In Victoria they are also releasing prisoners early “because the virus”. They are doing this across the world. The agenda is maximum chaos and empty prisons for dissenters (law abiding citizens).
Prepare for Alien Invasion
This year is so crazy about the only thing we have not had is an Alien invasion. Remember I warned about Project Blue Beam? Well have a look at this:
“Apparently just recovered, are off world vehicles not made on this Earth”
We must be careful as to WHO will be declassifying supposed info and WHAT exactly they will be saying. Remember, these UFO narratives are being headed by the fake news/CIA. We’ll see what Tucker says tmrw pic.twitter.com/VjF8RF0sUN