Coronavirus epidemic news

[Richard Stanley]

We've already covered all of these issues on this thread Claude, so the only thing that is a dead-ender is fascism and your neofascism, which you've failed to demonstrate or explain how it is an improvement.

The anti-HCQ studies are not "fake science", they are Corrupt Science, designed to fail. They are corrupt in support of the underlying globalist, neofascist agenda with profiting Big Pharma at the same time.

HCQ works because it is a zinc ionophore. You can likely achieve the same kind of benefit from the supplement quercetin. And, possibly even from zinc loading (with copper for balance) daily.

HCQ use has been purposely associated with our feckless president for the sake of marginalizing it in the eyes of the majority. If he wasn't in on the scam he'd be issuing an executive order making HCQ easily available. If he wasn't in on the scam he'd be asking publicly why we, via Fauci, are funding the gain-of-function research at the Wuhan virus lab, at Fort Detrick, and elsewhere that seeks to boost the exact features that Covid-19 has. It's all a fake dog and pony show because he hates dogs and ponies.

Doctors getting good results that aren't part of the realpolitik narrative are thus ignored, or in the case of the video's black woman doctor from Africa - sensationalized in the corrupt MSM because she believes in demonic incubi and succubi.

Lockdowns are part of the complex web of decisions that can be plausibly employed under the Trump facilitated fog of war. But, of course, his typical unmanagement has made every aspect of this experience go badly, including the lockdowns. Importantly, he has politicized it all, with lockdowns and other measures (and their effectiveness / non-effectiveness) part of the urban elite / rural hillbilly dialectic. He has effectively turned a laundry list of possibilities into a binary. No freedom lover can use a mask or distance themselves, yet when they went to school and work they sheepishly complied with dress codes and such. (If men aren't supposed to wear dresses why would they comply with a dress code?)

Trump didn't kill George Floyd, but he may as well have done so, and yes, the protests and the jackboot reaction and provocateurs actions to further inflame the protests have only increased the infection numbers. But so has all the drunken sex on the beach. You can't keep God fearing American Christian volks from doing their thang, specially when their taking their zinc.

 

[Richard Stanley]

Martenson discusses more data on lockdowns being problematic.

 

[Jerry Russell]

Martenson discusses more data on lockdowns being problematic.

I appreciate Martenson because he doesn't try to minimize the nastiness of the virus. If anything, he's overly sensitive to bad news. Even in this video, he acknowledges that "herd immunity" requires that at least 20% of the population gets infected, if not more. Such massive case counts must inevitably lead to a substantial death toll. Possibly more importantly, many of the survivors are going to wind up with severe damage to the heart, brain and/or kidneys.

In spite of all of this, Martenson is now willing to argue that lockdowns are doing more harm than good. He's a bit late to the party: many others have been saying this for months, or since the beginning. But in my view it's a much more difficult judgment call if one acknowledges the seriousness of an infection with this virus. Martenson is changing his tune at this late date, because of the emerging evidence that some 60% to 80% of the population have some natural immunity, and also because experience is showing that the virus is virtually impossible to keep contained on a sustainable basis.

In the video, Martenson also discusses the possibility that good nutrition and supplements (D3, Zinc, etc.), early treatment with HCQ and Azithromycin, and late stage treatment with steroids, anticoagulants and other advanced protocols, have the potential to reduce the unavoidable toll of death and mayhem.

This is all fine and good, but what to do about the hysterical anti-HCQ campaign in the mass media? What about those who actually like the economic damage, because it helps mitigate global warming, or because it helps increase public support for Universal Basic Income?

 

[Richard Stanley]

What about those who actually like the economic damage, because it helps mitigate global warming, or because it helps increase public support for Universal Basic Income?

It must be working because here this is the coolest July and August I can ever remember. Tomorrow will be in the high 80's instead of 100+ typical.

Trump is now suggesting that the next stimulus checks will be in excess of $1200.

 

[Claude Badley]

Good to read that Martenson is not being treated in the Jackie Gleeson manner i.e. "Martenson! You are a mental case!"

I appreciate Martenson because he doesn't try to minimize the nastiness of the virus. If anything, he's overly sensitive to bad news. Even in this video, he acknowledges that "herd immunity" requires that at least 20% of the population gets infected, if not more. Such massive case counts must inevitably lead to a substantial death toll. Possibly more importantly, many of the survivors are going to wind up with severe damage to the heart, brain and/or kidneys.

In spite of all of this, Martenson is now willing to argue that lockdowns are doing more harm than good. He's a bit late to the party: many others have been saying this for months, or since the beginning. But in my view it's a much more difficult judgment call if one acknowledges the seriousness of an infection with this virus. Martenson is changing his tune at this late date, because of the emerging evidence that some 60% to 80% of the population have some natural immunity, and also because experience is showing that the virus is virtually impossible to keep contained on a sustainable basis.

Balance is hard to achieve when both sides have negative features.

In the video, Martenson also discusses the possibility that good nutrition and supplements (D3, Zinc, etc.), early treatment with HCQ and Azithromycin, and late stage treatment with steroids, anticoagulants and other advanced protocols, have the potential to reduce the unavoidable toll of death and mayhem.

This is all fine and good, but what to do about the hysterical anti-HCQ campaign in the mass media? What about those who actually like the economic damage, because it helps mitigate global warming, or because it helps increase public support for Universal Basic Income?

I've read that many of the doctors on the video link from Suchender have been sacked for speaking out!

The bulk of COVID deaths are in the elderly, but to shut down the economy and toss young people into unemployment and manipulate them by 'normalizing' UBI (Universal Basic Income) is to kowtow to and to promote the financial elites' agenda. This is happening in Australia with enormous emphasis being placed on the death of the occasional young adult, distorting public perceptions along the lines that the elites prefer - i.e. a dumbed-down hysterical mob, preferably one divided along stupid political and religious-&-racial lines, while the elites preach anti-racism and 'equality'!

Yours faithfully
Claude

 

[Claude Badley]

Coolest July and August in eastern Australia too...

It must be working because here this is the coolest July and August I can ever remember. Tomorrow will be in the high 80's instead of 100+ typical.

...with -14 degrees C in Tasmania and snow on the Flinders Ranges in South Australia.

Yours faithfully
Claude

 

[Claude Badley]

I agree with your wanting to distance from Bill Gates.

I don't want to offer any general defense of Bill Gates. But in this particular video presentation, it seems clear that he is hoping that vaccinations and other humanitarian measures will lead to improved conditions for women, who will then choose to have smaller families. This is standard sociology.

Not so for the highlighted section! It is not clear to me at all.

I would only accept that claim if there had NEVER been the contaminated vaccine scandal associated with e.g. Andrew Wakefield. Surely someone told Bill Gates about that - and put out a clarification! Nothing that I'm aware of however, since such clarification is desperately required. IOW Gates should have specified humanitarian health measures and placed vaccines in a clear positive context as leading "to improved conditions for women." Gates makes no such claim and I'm not aware of clarification of his at best ambiguous words.

You read his words optimistically - to give him the benefit of the doubt by providing a preferred interpretation!

I cannot cover over his sentences - as I once did when a member of a Marxist party serving up ambiguous phrases - so I can only conclude that he intends to damage people physically and psychologically through nefarious substances contained in the varied vaccines. So why give this guy the benefit of the doubt??????

Yours faithfully
Claude

 

[Jerry Russell]

I've read that many of the doctors on the video link from Suchender have been sacked for speaking out!

The only one I can find who was fired specifically for the video, is Simone Gold. Others might have been fired earlier, I'm not sure.

The situation with Gold is murky, in that at least one of the hospitals that she purportedly worked for says she hasn't been there for some time. But she appeared on Fox News with Tucker Carlson, and then on Sebastian Gorka's podcast (posted below), stating clearly that she's been dismissed from two hospitals as a direct retaliation for appearing in the press conference video. On Fox News, she announced that she's hired the famous attorney Lin Wood to represent her. And she also has a JD in her own right. So those hospitals and everybody else who has given her grief over the last few days, had better be lawyering up.

While the viral press conference video has been pulled by YouTube and the other tech giants, numerous other videos covering the topic are still available. One has to wonder, why did that particular video go viral with 17 million views, anyhow? And why was it the one taken down? It's the one that featured Stella Immanuel, the black African immigrant and homophobic fundamentalist Christian. She's an easy target for ridicule (that is, if you are somehow immune from being seen as a disgusting racist for attacking a black woman's religious views.) Why do the videos showing Dr. Gold making the same points with Tucker Carlson and Sebastian Gorka malinger with about 10,000 views?

In Gorka's podcast, Gold makes the very important point that if HCQ became a recognized treatment for covid-19, it would become impossible to obtain Emergency Use Authorization for poorly tested vaccines. Any vaccine would need to go through the complete FDA testing process before it could be sold. So, HCQ is diametrically opposed to the interests of all vaccine manufacturers and pushers. Qui bono, Gorka asks.

I'm not aware of clarification of his at best ambiguous words.

See, for example, this 2012 video.

 

[Claude Badley]

Finding the gold standard for assessing Gold is difficult, but this is not the case with "pathological vaccinator" Bill Gates.

See, for example, this 2012 video. [above]

I had asked for clarification: i.e. "I'm not aware of clarification of his [Gates's] at best ambiguous words." However the clip you supplied me just deals with 'motherhood' commonplaces about poorer countries and so only by naive presumption involves solely the beneficial effect of useful vaccines. Hence the criticism of Bill Gates still stands, since you are merely making the naive optimistic presumption here that Gates is innocent. I.e. you are becoming complicit with the Judaeo-Christian elites (only unwittingly as far as I can tell here) by not critically assessing the evidence!

Yours faithfully
Claude

 

[Jerry Russell]

I had asked for clarification: i.e. "I'm not aware of clarification of his [Gates's] at best ambiguous words."

What sort of clarification would satisfy you? You mean you want him to say "Look, some nut cases on the Internet have been misinterpreting my 2010 TED talk"? It's not good enough that he's said (actually many times) that by improving childhood health, he hopes that mothers will voluntarily cut their fertility?

You are becoming complicit with the Judaeo-Christian elites...

[My reply became the beginning of a massive off-topic digression, which has been moved to a more appropriate thread.]

As I said:

I don't want to offer any general defense of Bill Gates.

But, a "critical assessment of the evidence" starts with what he actually says, not some crazy out-of-context misinterpretation of a 2010 TED talk.

 

[Claude Badley]

I asked for clarification of what Gates meant in the TED talk when he spoke of vaccinations being used as part of population reduction.

What sort of clarification would satisfy you? You mean you want him to say "Look, some nut cases on the Internet have been misinterpreting my 2010 TED talk"? It's not good enough that he's said (actually many times) that by improving childhood health, he hopes that mothers will voluntarily cut their fertility?

No! It is not good enough! Because he is hoping that you will fall for the common interpretation that that is what he meant! He has not, repeat not, repudiated the clear implication of his statement about vaccines in population reduction, i.e. that vaccines also contain substances to suppress human reproduction. You don't seem to know that Australia pioneered much of this antibody work suppressing reproduction - this done legitimately in an attempt to reduce fox and cat numbers in the bush. However, it would be very easy to smuggle such a program into human reproduction too - and Gates becomes complicit here, because he has NOT explicitly repudiated the clear implication of his words in that TED talk!

But, a "critical assessment of the evidence" starts with what he actually says, not some crazy out-of-context misinterpretation of a 2010 TED talk.

I.e. closing in cosily with Gates after the vaccine-horse has bolted onto global propaganda!

The critical assessment of the evidence is clear from the famous internationally broadcast TED talk, which is "what he actually says", a situation where he had to prepare and choose his words correctly. This TED talk is not an interview of someone being careless and then quoted out of context. Hence your claim of "crazy out-of-context misinterpretation" has no factual basis whatsoever - like Einstein's claims for time dilation and length contraction. I.e. you only see what you want to see, by inserting your own interpretation of Gates by interposing the desired missing words for Gates in your own mind.

Rather: Vaccination, as Gates says explicitly and clearly, has become or is to become part of population reduction, since the proper official use of vaccination is quite the contrary - to increase the survival of children and others against otherwise fatal diseases. Gates & Co. have NOT issued a clarification of his words on the TED talk, therefore I can only conclude that he is involved in covering up illicit tainting of vaccines, only able to survive this exposure because he is not himself a doctor or biological research scientist. The listeners read it as they will - but only the naive (or the perverse) could read it as you do, given Gates's clear membership among the financial elites.

Yours faithfully
Claude

 

[Jerry Russell]

the clear implication of his words in that TED talk!

I don't know why I even bother.... but, there is no such clear implication of his words in that TED talk. As you yourself admitted, his statement was ambiguous. His exact words were: "The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent." He's grouping vaccines together with health care and reproductive services, which would include birth control.

Now, it's less than perfectly clear in this statement, how improved health care is going to reduce the population. But, he's explained that elsewhere, and it's a well understood principle that he's referring to.

It's the height of perversity to claim that by "great job on vaccines and health care" he means to murderously increase the death rate. You and many other Internet conspiracy researchers only make yourself look like NUT CASES by making this the centerpiece of your case against Gates.

Now, it's completely possible that Gates is lying, and that he really is intending to poison the vaccines. But you can't prove that with his TED talk.

 

[Claude Badley]

To use vaccines for population reduction is "the clear implication of his words in that TED talk" because vaccines should normally be used to preserve population. But with antibody stimulation thru vaccines to cause infertility is another matter - but one understood by people when the Rh factor mystery was explained! I.e. an Rh- negative woman only ever has one child to an Rh+ man because after the first child the Rh factor induces antibodies in her - this known for decades and obviously a starting point for vaccine-induced sterilization.

I don't know why I even bother.... but, there is no such clear implication of his words in that TED talk. As you yourself admitted, his statement was ambiguous. His exact words were: "The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent." He's grouping vaccines together with health care and reproductive services, which would include birth control.

One is not supposed to LOWER population thru vaccines - unlike what he is claiming there. Vaccines should be increasing the population thru increased survival. Had he intended to say this he should have made a later clarification. Why? Because the anti-vaccination movement was in full swing in 2010/2012 when he made that claim. So you'd think his own people - presuming them honest (or is that too much to ask? ) - would want him to clarify what he meant there in order to neutralize anti-vaxxer criticism (indeed even if I myself had been some naive doctor working for the Bill-&-Melinda Gates Foundation* I would have specifically asked him to clarify the issue on a video in order to silence the anti-vaxxer critics effectively since it would make my job so much easier, a fact that I would have thought hardly required to be stated!!!!!!). In fact the 10-15% figure in his TED talk could easily refer to Rh+ factor inserted into vaccines to induce antibodies to sterilize Rh- negative people, given the incidence of Rh- in the community.

https://www.bing.com/search?q=propo...s=n&sk=&cvid=573b81abbc7d4126bad23958f117ffd5

Now, it's less than perfectly clear in this statement, how improved health care is going to reduce the population. But, he's explained that elsewhere, and it's a well understood principle that he's referring to.

But he has ignored the anti-vaccination lobby, in fact positively invited them to interpret his words in the direct way i.e. that vaccines are being used to sterilize people directly, not help them survive to make a choice about reproduction. You are evading the obvious, not admitting that his words can be and are taken either way depending on who is listening. The dumb goyim believing that vaccines promote human survival, the elites knowing that sterilizing materials have been included.

It's the height of perversity to claim that by "great job on vaccines and health care" he means to murderously increase the death rate.

He had muddied the waters here, linking nefarious and good activity together, the health care officials innocently offering tainted vaccines to naive people - like small-pox-tainted blankets were offered to native Americans in the Old West. The point is: the New West is no different.

You and many other Internet conspiracy researchers only make yourself look like NUT CASES by making this the centerpiece of your case against Gates.

Now, it's completely possible that Gates is lying, and that he really is intending to poison the vaccines. But you can't prove that with his TED talk.

Yes I can because no official clarification has been made to his ambiguous words, since if it were, he would later be caught out for lying and, more important, confuse the elites to whom he is really pandering.

Yours faithfully
Claude

 

[Richard Stanley]

Rather than directly intended to kill, or maim, humanity, perhaps the real goal is to provide all humans with an implanted digital ID, essentially the Mark of the Beast. The pandemic is already making the use of 'dirty' cash less attractive, further evidenced as making change is getting difficult for many 'cash' businesses. Such has already been well along in progress in places such as ... Sweden, prior to the pandemic. OMG!!!, perhaps Sweden has done so well ... because they don't use cash for very much. It's now more expensive to use cash than digital money, for consumers and businesses.

Once such a system is in place, rogue humans can be shut off from the economy by a few keystrokes on a computer.

In May 2016, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, the inaugural ID2020 summit brought together over 400 people to discuss how to provide digital identity to all, a defined Sustainable Development Goal including to 1.5bn people living without any form of recognized identification.[1] Experts in blockchain and other cryptographic technology joined with representatives of technical standards bodies to identify how technology and other private sector expertise could achieve the goal.[2][3]​

​

In 2019, ID2020 started a new digital identity program in collaboration with the government of Bangladesh and Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization.[4]​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ID2020​

Here's what Corbett is saying about the Gates family, their eugenics and family hygiene (including Planned Parenthood), which Claude Badley obviously doesn't endorse as a 'good' Nazi, as opposed to the more typical 'bad' Nazi:

Perhaps helping to connect the dots is the unfolding networked relationship between Gates and Epstein, which then links to such as Trump and the Clintons.

 

[Jerry Russell]

One is not supposed to LOWER population thru vaccines - unlike what he is claiming there. Vaccines should be increasing the population thru increased survival.

Why are we still addressing such a basic issue in the TENTH post about Gates in this thread? Sociologists say that people plan their families so as to be guaranteed to have some kids survive to adulthood. If they need to enter ten kids in the survival lottery, that's what they do.

If women feel confident that their small family will survive and prosper, they don't want a huge family. Gates explains this in the 2012 video and he's explained it many other times.

In fact the 10-15% figure in his TED talk could easily refer to Rh+ factor inserted into vaccines to induce antibodies to sterilize Rh- negative people, given the incidence of Rh- in the community.

If you think that Gates is deliberately inserting Rh+ factor into vaccines, then where's your proof? Without some sort of evidence, this is just malicious defamation, and a waste of time.

[Note: a massive off-topic digression has been moved to a more appropriate thread.]

 

[Richard Stanley]

I forgot to add that Gates and Microsoft are connected to ID2020, as is a vaccine organization.

ID2020 is a New York City-based nonprofit formed in 2016 that has drawn international partners interested in promoting access to digital forms of identification. "For the one in seven people globally who lacks a means to prove their identity, digital ID offers access to vital social services and enables them to exercise their rights as citizens and voters and participate in the modern economy," the organization says. ​

​

Among the founding partners are Microsoft, the company Bill Gates co-founded; and Gavi, which helps provide vaccines to developing countries and gets funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. ​

​

ID2020 is partnering with GAVI and the government of Bangladesh to provide children in Bangladesh with a biometrically-linked (using a fingerprint or iris scan, for example) digital health ID at the time of birth or first immunization. ...​

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...mp-has-not-canceled-id2020-digital-id-progra/​

 

[Richard Stanley]

So this be real. If it works on the 1 billion that currently have no access to a medical system that keeps their health data, then it can certainly be scaled to the rest of us. It would certainly be an efficiency improvement over the haphazard system in the USA, for medical records. But at what costs beyond the monetary?

It would certainly be a financial boon for Gates and Microsoft.

...​

The 64 year old tech mogul and currently the second richest person in the world, revealed this yesterday during a Reddit ‘Ask Me Anything’ session while answering questions on the COVID-19 Coronavirus Pandemic. ​

​

Gates was responding to a question on how businesses will be able to operate while maintaining social distancing, and said that, “Eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered or been tested recently or when we have a vaccine who has received it.”​

​

The ‘digital certificates’ Gates was referring to are human-implantable ‘QUANTUM-DOT TATTOOS’ that researchers at MIT and Rice University are working on as a way to hold vaccination records. It was last year in December when scientists from the two universities revealed that they were working on these quantum-dot tattoos after Bill Gates approached them about solving the problem of identifying those who have not been vaccinated. ...​

https://biohackinfo.com/news-bill-gates-id2020-vaccine-implant-covid-19-digital-certificates/​

The quantum-dot tattoos involve applying dissolvable sugar-based microneedles that contain a vaccine and fluorescent copper-based ‘quantum dots’ embedded inside biocompatible, micron-scale capsules. After the microneedes dissolve under the skin, they leave the encapsulated quantum dots whose patterns can be read to identify the vaccine that was administered.


The below from: https://stm.sciencemag.org/content/11/523/eaay7162

On the record​

Vaccines prevent disease and save lives; however, lack of standardized immunization recordkeeping makes it challenging to track vaccine coverage across the world. McHugh et al. developed dissolvable microneedles that deliver patterns of near-infrared light-emitting microparticles to the skin. Particle patterns are invisible to the eye but can be imaged using modified smartphones. By codelivering a vaccine, the pattern of particles in the skin could serve as an on-person vaccination record. Patterns were detected 9 months after intradermal delivery of microparticles in rats, and codelivery of inactivated poliovirus led to protective antibody production. Discrete microneedle-delivered microparticle patterns in porcine and pigmented human skin were identifiable using semiautomated machine learning. These results demonstrate proof of concept for intradermal on-person vaccination recordkeeping.​

Abstract​

Accurate medical recordkeeping is a major challenge in many low-resource settings where well-maintained centralized databases do not exist, contributing to 1.5 million vaccine-preventable deaths annually. Here, we present an approach to encode medical history on a patient using the spatial distribution of biocompatible, near-infrared quantum dots (NIR QDs) in the dermis. QDs are invisible to the naked eye yet detectable when exposed to NIR light. QDs with a copper indium selenide core and aluminum-doped zinc sulfide shell were tuned to emit in the NIR spectrum by controlling stoichiometry and shelling time. The formulation showing the greatest resistance to photobleaching after simulated sunlight exposure (5-year equivalence) through pigmented human skin was encapsulated in microparticles for use in vivo. In parallel, microneedle geometry was optimized in silico and validated ex vivo using porcine and synthetic human skin. QD-containing microparticles were then embedded in dissolvable microneedles and administered to rats with or without a vaccine. Longitudinal in vivo imaging using a smartphone adapted to detect NIR light demonstrated that microneedle-delivered QD patterns remained bright and could be accurately identified using a machine learning algorithm 9 months after application. In addition, codelivery with inactivated poliovirus vaccine produced neutralizing antibody titers above the threshold considered protective. These findings suggest that intradermal QDs can be used to reliably encode information and can be delivered with a vaccine, which may be particularly valuable in the developing world and open up new avenues for decentralized data storage and biosensing.​

 

[Richard Stanley]

Here's someone intimately connected to ID2020, quitting and expressing concerns over it:

Harvard lawyer Elizabeth Renieris has resigned from the Technical Advisory Committee of the ID2020 ‘digital identity’ initiative. ​

​

Renieris, an advocate of the concept of ‘self-sovereign identity’ and a former Harvard classmate of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, resigned due to ID2020’s direction on digital immunity certificates and COVID-19. She also cited Microsoft’s influence on the project, while expressing concern over how corporations will influence the development of digital immunity certificates resulting in the erosion of civil liberties.​

​

“I cannot be part of an organization overly influenced by commercial interests that only pays lip service to human rights,” wrote Renieris in a resignation letter that she also sent to digital currency news site Coindesk.​

​

Renieris also expressed doubts and uncertainty about ID2020’s actual objectives, stating, “At this stage, I can no longer even describe what ID2020’s mission is with any confidence. All I can perceive is a desire to promote decentralized identity solutions at all costs.” ...​

https://biohackinfo.com/news-elizabeth-renieris-id2020-coronavirus-bill-gates-digital-certificate/​

From the same article, discussed is that Gates accidentally(?) spilled the beans on his previously quiet efforts, and subsequently started a disinfo campaign against Biohack:

...​

A key component of the disinformation by the Bill Gates-funded “fact checkers” and now sadly the Nature scientific journal – which has accused us of starting a conspiracy theory against Bill Gates, is falsely claiming that we said Gates would use microchip implants to track people. Anyone that has actually read our Bill Gates microchipping article in its entirety can tell you this is a lie. No currently available human-implantable microchip is capable of functioning as a tracker. We as biohackers, know this and have been saying this to many people who think microchip implants can be used for tracking. ​

​

In said article, we clearly explain that microchip implants will serve the same purpose all current microchip implants mostly serve; which is as identity tags.​

​

Our Bill Gates microchipping article is clearly about the most feasible way of implementing digital certificates. Microchip implants as identity tags are a good way of holding digital records, including immunization records that would be contained in the digital certificates being promoted by Bill Gates. So based on Gates’ history of funding implantable technology like a birth control microchip implant and MIT’s quantum dot capsules, deducing that he could adopt microchip implants as digital certificates is NOT a conspiracy theory.​

​

What’s funny is, despite Bill Gates openly funding microchipping projects and his Foundation’s website listing some of these projects, he recently told the media that he knows nothing about microchip implants! ​

​

“I’ve never been involved in any sort of microchip type thing!” said Gates in a call with Business Insider, acting oblivious. ​

​

This is pathological lying is very strange and should be cause for concern. Gates is blatantly lying about never having any involvement with something he openly funds. The fact that the COVID-19 Pandemic has resulted in Gates being positioned by politicians and mainstream media as some sort of messiah figure – while being handed total monopoly over global health, even though he has no medical qualifications, should raise more alarm in light of this blatant lie. ​

​

Why are American politicians like Republican Senator Lindsey Graham not only defending Gates in this blatant lie, but also demanding that Gates be made the head of the World Health Organization? Why is Bill Gates lying? What is Bill Gates, a known associate of Jeffrey Epstein, hiding? ...​

When one combines the massive financial interest of Gates and Microsoft, and allies, with that Bill was so prescient about the world being hit by a pandemic like this, and the year specified in ID2020, one just has to wonder about coincidences ... yet again. It's like the PNAC's new Pearl Harbor.

Make sure to watch the cartoon at the bottom of that link.

 

[Jerry Russell]

This is pathological lying is very strange and should be cause for concern. Gates is blatantly lying about never having any involvement with something he openly funds.

"Lying" implies that the liar has full knowledge of the facts, and an intent to deceive. "Pathological lying" is a psychological diagnosis of a chronic behavior of compulsive or habitual lying, possibly involving "self aggrandizing personal roles."

Is this an accurate diagnosis for Bill Gates? Lloyd Lefthouse makes the case regarding his involvement in public education, in a review of a book: "The Educator and the Oligarch" by Anthony Cody:

https://crazynormaltheclassroomexpo...he-educator-and-the-oligarch-by-anthony-cody/

Bill Gates is not the man he wants people like our daughter to think he is, and Anthony Cody in “The Educator and the Oligarch” proves repeatedly in almost every chapter that what Bill Gates says he wants to do to improve public education in the United States isn’t what he’s doing. Instead, Gates is spending billions to influence (through bribes that are called grants) state and national leaders to do what he wants.​

​

For instance, in Chapter 2, Anthony Cody mentions that in 2011, NBC held the Teacher Town Hall program, and Bill Gates was introduced as the top funder of education in the world … spending half a billion dollars to devise a way to figure out what makes a great teacher, what makes them most effective, and Melinda Gates acknowledged that good teaching cannot be reduced to a test score—but that’s exactly what her husband is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to do: to judge teachers by test scores.​

​

Then in Chapter 3, Cody quotes an Op-Ed piece that Bill Gates wrote for the New York Times: Gates said, “Student test scores alone aren’t a sensitive enough measure to gauge effective teaching, nor are they diagnostic enough to identify areas of improvement.”​

​

But regardless of what Melinda and Bill Gates say, the Gates Foundation has spent and is still spending hundreds of millions of dollars to influence the federal and state governments to use the results of the Common Core student standardized tests to judge and then rank and yank (fire) teachers with an ultimate goal to close public schools and replace them with corporate Charter schools—that several Stanford studies funded by the Gates Foundation have already proven are mostly worse or the same as the public schools they are replacing.​

​

To achieve these goals, Bill Gates is spending $5 – $7 billion dollars, and when he ran into opposition from democratically elected school boards, what did Bill Gates do—he started spending hundreds of millions of dollars to get rid of the democratically elected school boards that run public school districts and replace them with the corporate CEOs of charter schools who will do what Bill Gates wants.​

​

Cody’s book has 27 chapters and they are loaded with more examples than the few I have shared in this review.​

​

Going back further in time, Gates's early business partner Paul Allen discusses how Gates tried to dilute his equity in Microsoft after he was diagnosed with lymphoma and no longer able to work 80 hours a week:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2011/05/paul-allen-201105

One evening in late December 1982, I heard Bill and Steve speaking heatedly in Bill’s office and paused outside to listen in. It was easy to get the gist of the conversation. They were bemoaning my recent lack of production and discussing how they might dilute my Microsoft equity by issuing options to themselves and other shareholders. It was clear that they’d been thinking about this for some time.​

​

Unable to stand it any longer, I burst in on them and shouted, “This is unbelievable! It shows your true character, once and for all.” I was speaking to both of them, but staring straight at Bill. Caught red-handed, they were struck dumb. Before they could respond, I turned on my heel and left.​

​

I replayed their dialogue in my mind while driving home, and it felt more and more heinous to me. I helped start the company and was still an active member of management, though limited by my illness, and now my partner and my colleague were scheming to rip me off. It was mercenary opportunism, plain and simple. ​

​

Mercenary opportunism, yes, but also lying; that is, in the sense that repudiating an agreement makes an earlier promise into a lie.

Of course there is much more to say about Gates's career at Microsoft (including his famous testimony at a congressional anti-trust hearing), but it's too much for this post.

Fast forward to the implantable microchip, quantum dot tattoo and ID2020 situation. It certainly seems that Gates is again guilty of pathological lying. As explained above, Biohackinfo published at least two articles carrying completely accurate, factual accounts of Gates-funded research in implantable microchips and quantum dot tattoos. Rather than simply acknowledging the facts, Gates-funded fact checkers misread the articles and "debunked" claims that Biohackinfo never made.

The fact checkers exploited confusion over the meaning of "tracking". This is a technical term implying the ability to follow a target over long distances using radio communications, such as remote GPS radio-location of a cell phone. Implantable microchips are an old technology that can be used for a variety of purposes, including scheduled release of contraceptives or other medications "over months or years in a single implant" (which was the application funded by Gates). They can also be used for identification purposes. However, they require close proximity to a detector, and convey limited amounts of data.

The advantage of the quantum dot tattoo method seems to be that these implants are less intrusive and carry more data at less cost. However, like RFID implants, they cannot be used for long-distance remote tracking.

After the "fact-checkers" weighed in with their "debunk", Gates then piled in with an interview, given to (Gates-funded) Business Insider, in which he issued the blanket denial "I've never been involved any sort of microchip type thing".

At this point, there could be no possible defense based on ignorance or lack of intent, because there had been plenty of time for Gates to investigate what had been going on within his foundation and business empire. Bill Gates, caught in another bald-faced lie.

As one more piece of evidence for the "pathological liar" diagnosis, let's look to another Business Insider article. This documents that in Sept. 2019, Gates gave a blanket denial of any relationship with Epstein to the Wall Street Journal. But, an investigation by the New York Times showed that Gates met with Epstein on multiple occasions. Gates was forced to apologize, and also implicitly to admit that he had been lying.

 

[Jerry Russell]

Make sure to watch the cartoon at the bottom of that link.

It's very good. And for some reason, it hasn't been pulled down from YouTube yet, so I can paste it here.

But, this is a joke! A caricature! He didn't really say these things. It's a waste of time to look for true statements about Bill Gates's intentions, in his old TED talks. Of course he's going to try to make himself sound good.