Friends,
- N.B. The ludicrous idea of using a naturally occurring cold virus to spread vaccines is just the type of idiot idea idiot scientists would come up with. Michael Crichton wrote Jurassic Park on this principle that scientists are so keen on doing X, Y, or Z, so keen on making it happen, that they never regard what might occur once they actually create when they bring their crazy idea to life. (Unlike in the movie, where the scientist escapes, in the original book, a Utah raptor dinosaur eats him.)
- Dr. David Martin founded M·CAM® in 1998 and has served as its CEO and Chairman since that time, M·CAM® has been an international intangible asset underwriter and analyst firm spanning work in innovation finance, trade, and intangible asset finance.
- ( https://www.m-cam.com/about-us/ )
- ... not "novel"... no pandemic.. no variants... campaign of coercion & terror to address a stated objective. Dr David Martin, who can tell us what the Vaxxed can do about this synthetic recombinant chimera protein? "There was no novel Coronavirus. Check of gene sequence vs all patent records showed it is not "novel" since 1999! There are 120 patented pieces of evidence showing the total fallacy of claim 'novel'!
- A manufactured illusion. Dr David Martin with Reiner Fuellmich 9/7/21
(45:00 mins in: Reiner Fuellmich) This is a tool (Coronavirus) in creating a biological weapon, and this is a tool for everything else that latches on to this, including population control, for example.(45:16; David Martin) Well, listen, this – we have to stop the mainstream narrative even in our own line of questioning, because the fact of the matter is, this was seen as a highly malleable bio-weapon. There's no question that by 2005, it was unquestionably a weapon of choice. And the illusion that we continue to unfortunately see very well-meaning people get trapped in, these conversations about whether we're having a vaccine for a virus – the fact of the matter is, we're not. We're injecting a spike protein mRNA sequence which is a computer simulation – it is not derived from nature – it is a computer simulation of a sequence that has been known and patented for years, and what we know is that sequence as reported, is reported across things like the very reliable phone conversations that took place between Moderna and the Vaccine Research Center by self-report. Where, I don't know, if you were on a phone call and you heard (sequence of letters) is there any chance you might get a letter dropped here or there. The ludicrous nature of the story that this is somehow prophylactic or preventative, flies in the face of 100% of the evidence because the evidence (i.e. long, long history of various patents Dr. Martin details previous to this section) makes it abundantly clear, that there has been no effort by any pharmaceutical company to combat the virus. This is about getting people injected with the known-to-be-harmful S-1 spike protein. So the cover story is if you get an expression of the spike protein, you're going to have some sort of a general symptomatic relief. But the fact of the matter is, there has never been an intent to vaccinate a population as defined by vaccination universe. (time 47:37)And it is important, let's review for the record, what Anthony Fauci tried desperately to get some of his quote "synthetic RNA" vaccines published, he had his own patents rejected by the patent office. And I want to read what the patent office told him, when NIAID's own Anthony Fauci told him when he thought he could get an mRNA vaccine patented as a vaccine. And here's the quote: (48:00) "These arguments are persuasive to the extent that an antigenic peptide stimulates an immune response that may produce antibodies that bind to a specific peptide or protein. But it is not persuasive in regards to a vaccine." Ok? This is the patent office. This is not some sort of public health agency. This is the patent office. "The immune response produced by the vaccine must be more than merely some immune response, but must also be protective. As noted in the previous office action, (the art?) recognizes the term vaccine to be a compound which prevents infection. Applicant (Fauci) has not demonstrated that the instantly claimed vaccine meets even the lower standard set for the specification, let alone the standard definition for being operative in regards. Therefore claims 5, 7, and 9, are not operative (as the anti-HIV vaccine which was what Fauci was working on) is not patentable utility.So Anthony Fauci himself was told by the patent office themselves, that what he was proposing as a vaccine does not meet the patentable standard, the legal standard, or the clinical standard. (49:39)(49:39 RF) I know a lot of our viewers are really shocked, David. I can see that from the responses. Our PCR specialist, Professor Kemala, she can believe what's going on here.(49:56 DM) The sad and sober irony is that I raised these issues beginning in 2002, after the Anthrax scare, and the tragedy is, we're now sitting in a world were we have 100s of millions of people who are being injected with a pathogen stimulating computer sequence which is being sold under what the Patent Office, what the Medical profession, and what the FDA under its own clinical standards, would not suggest is a vaccine. But by using the term, we are now subjecting 100s of millions of people to what was known to be, by 2005, a biological weapon. (50:54)