Highlighting the Absurd Fauci/Daszak/Wuhan Connection.
In a short video clip on YouTube, Paul Watson of Infowars fame and now Summit News has done some leg work for us regarding the Latest Fauci e-mails released due to a Freedom of Information Act request. Watson admits that if he read some of the e-mails out loud, his video would likely get removed by the thought controllers.
Thus, instead of reading e-mails that would put his YouTube account in jeopardy, Paul goes onto skillfully highlight a damning section of correspondence between Peter Daszak and Anthony Fauci. He shows where Peter thanks Anthony for stating that: "the scientific evidence supports a natural origin for COVID-19 from a bat-to-human spillover, not a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology."
He further goes on in his letter to say: "From my perspective, your comments are brave, and coming from your trusted voice, will help dispel the myths.." getting "..spun around the virus' origins." Daszak heads up EcoHealth Alliance, and that organization has connections to Wuhan lab and some of their various gain of function research, this to the tune of 600k in funding.
Watson contrasts the e-mail with some of Peter's braggadocious public comments in an interview where he speaks to his gain of function research. More specifically, as it pertains to artificial insertions of spike proteins into bat coronaviruses. Of course, this is what we're allegedly facing with the current COVID-19 virus. According to one pulled study, the spike protein bears a resemblance to the one in HIV.
At this point, Watson seems chuffed to bits by the irony of the news he's reporting, and he shows a famous clip when Jose Mourinho declined to speak on shady refereeing that occurred in a football game out of fear that he might get in trouble. Compare that with something serious like bragging about creating bioweapons, and it shows that Jose is the smarter of the two. Either that or Peter is dangerously stupid. Granted, it could be both.
Paul further highlights how Daszak got tapped to investigate the Wuhan theory. And if you ask me, that's akin to hiring a fox to figure out if the missing hens from the henhouse were taken and killed by a fox. Peter also got employed by Zuckerberg and co. as an "expert fact-checker" so he could shoot down and remove virus claims on Mark's weak-ass social media platform. Intentionally or not, MZ is now an integral part of the conspiracy.
In summary, Watson asks the viewer whether or not this absurd administration will change course based on the information revealed in these e-mails and begin backpedaling away from any of their official lies. I think if we asked the Magic 8-ball, the "Outlook (is) not so good." Paul closed his video, tongue-in-cheek style, by encouraging people (NOT:) "to wear your mask, take your vaccine, and trust the medical experts."
What is a @logiczombie?
What is @frankbacon?
Did you eat my Cheerios?
WHAT is A Logic Zombie?
Perhaps, logiczombie nose.
Everyone wants their own space.
He knows.
a logiczombie is anyone who blindly follows logic, even when it leads to ridiculous conclusions, like "personal sovereignty" or "indeterminism" or "tribalism" or even "anarchy"
That's a front left lobe issue mostly...
can knock it out, temporarally out with the right...
Tools
great point.
at that point you'd become a type 0 logiczombie.
anyone who does whatever they currently believe is in their own personal self-interest.
I always understood the concept. Glad you elucidated though...
I would also explore passive, muscle memory as a phenomena.
somatic release exercises...
nice hammer
https://odysee.com/@ShakingMyHead2:8/problem,-reaction,-solution-agenda-2030:3
What happened @cryptographic?
maybe this,
https://peakd.com/hive-167922/@cryptographic/qpt06f
MAN!
He was great for this place (Canadian or not)
And his name was a BIG DEAL to me.
Funkin Ridiculous!
it's hard to stay engaged when you feel nobody cares
Oh shit! That's easy to fix...
No One cares!
Annnnd we move on 😎🥓👍
Stay Frosty Zombie ✌😷
∴
These people have no shame, they will back up the lying rethoric of each other because that is the only way they can remain in power.
But once that first domino falls, nothing is going to stop that donimo effect from wiping out the entire box.
They have taken conspiracy facts to a whole new level and the more that they open their mouths the more bullshit dribbles down their chins.
The truth will set you free, should be changed to the truth is going to send you to death, especially in fauci's case.
When lying is all you have you better be damned good at it, which these fools are not, hopefully we might see some integrity from law enforcement, but I wouldnt hold my breath, integrity is in short supply were bribery is concerned
Fortunately for Fauci, the bioweapons terrorism act of 1989 that Francis Boyle penned doesn't incorporate the death penalty as punishment. And that's because Francis Boyle is against the death penalty in his personal beliefs. It should suffice to say that so long as he stays stateside, he'll probably be safe from execution. That's not to say he won't face life imprisonment for the crimes against humanity committed. I guess we'll see how it plays out. Part of me thinks he's too big to fail. Even if he does end up being the designated fall guy, his punishment may strictly be for theatrics. Thanks for weighing in with your opinion on the matter, @jaxonmurph!
Very true, I believe he will be protected, too many powerful people wiping each others asses clean Lol
But I guess we can hope, even a serious sentence woyld be a positive step, but like you said these people are to big to fail, even when it is blatantly obvious what they have done.
At least Melinda Gates seems to be sensible enough to get the hell outta doge before the shitshow arrives.
I wonder will she spill any beans or will her settlement include her keeping silent
well if Mark is also gunning down anyone trying to make their dubious intention public, then, my respect for him is dwindling
I know his robots restricts a lot of things, but it is inhumane to restrict the information that is supposed to save lives
Unless he is one of them, and he is hiding behind the mask of his social media platform
What can I say? If I don't like it, I should create my personal social media platform and allow any contents of my choice....lol
IMO, he's either intentionally or unintentionally made himself part of the conspiracy. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, @edystringz!
Yeah
that is the way I see it too. But it is playing the game of hide and seek. trying to make sure you are not able to pinpoint whose side he is on
you are under house arrest for the crime of not proving your medical purity (guilty until proven innocent)
Oh it's all coming down, their lies are no longer sustainable.
Not many I trust anymore. Everything is as us "conspiracy theorists" said early on. Anyone going to apologize to us? Any of our posts on mainstream social media going to get reposted with a "fact check"? I hope one of these guys gets what they deserve. They are going to sacrifice someone to appease the masses.
If I were a pharmaceutical giant, the bio-weapons virus thing would suit me just fine. It would fit in well with my strategy that people believe in the omnipotence of bioweapons panhandling. After all, if they believe in artificially produced viruses, then they also believe in "natural" ones, and that is how I am and remain in business. It is far cheaper than producing real weapons that make much more noise, take up much more space, flatten lots of buildings, landscape and people. But something you can't see, smell, taste or touch is an excellent weapon, because if no one can really be sure whether it really exists or not, I can keep people in a state of uncertainty. Ingenious, I would think. Using the insecure state, coupled with people thinking of themselves as stupid and others as experts who write in awe-inspiring grammar, assures me that no one will be able to claim that they really know what is going on in their own bodies. The code is always superior to, isn't it?
So, if I were an aesthete who didn't have it with managing drones, tanks, aircraft carriers and other heavy equipment, plus all the soldiers, pharma is just the business. It's quiet, clean and basically still usable through penetrating grammar even in the greatest contradiction.
Such a pawn would be well worth it. I wouldn't lift a finger to help the person being sacrificed in this way, because in fact everyone knows that people like to have guilty ones.
Thankfully, I am not a pharma giant. Not even someone, who takes pills at all.
I don't know that I would completely dispel the notion of viruses. Perhaps we do have a few that got overblown in their alleged effects, and they might be the biggest cash cows of them all. I'm not sure who gave me this, but I found it eye-opening. I'm not too dogmatic on the topic one way or the other lately. I got sick frequently when young, whether it was a cold or flu virus, bacterial infections, chickenpox, etc. You believed what the witch doctor in the white coat says, and it didn't make the chickenpox more real or the sore throats less. Perhaps it all stemmed from a poisoned food or water supply. Who knows? Programming from so early on can be hard to reverse. For example, some people will see one false flag, and then after that, they'll project fakeness onto every disturbing event they see after. Perhaps there is a mixture of things, I can't say for sure. Mostly anything outside of early generations of antibiotics, I don't trust. And even them, nowadays, I'd scrutinize a lot more.
For me, it was needed to completely dispel the notion of the virus, in order to be able to start fresh. If I wouldn't have had dispelled it, I wouldn't have been able to make significant progress in that matter.
The sharp questioning of basic assumptions can happen when, over time, the openness of basic assumptions to questioning or criticism does not happen on its own.
In my view, it is a necessary development in each of us when we do not dogmatically consider or defend the premises we have grown up with.
I personally don't see dogmatism where a thesis is put into doubt, because doubting is not dogmatic by nature. It is where the thesis is defended as truth, fixed in space and time. Doubt is the helper in a process within which it depends on the people themselves who leave room for doubt and are aware that there can be no definite end and no definite certainty. Authentic science lives from doubt (in progress), not from proof, right?
People like to confuse terms because they are not interested and educated enough in their origin, derivation and distinction from each other.
The problem with dogmatism is that it is very vocal and self-righteous in its external communication and corrupted at its core (by money or belief). The dogmatist is someone who does not allow himself any doubt, and that is the whole difference from someone who uses his reason and always allows doubt to apply, precisely as a possibility of being wrong.
I see the problem in external communication: if you stand on public stages and speak with conviction about something that you have identified as a problem and at the same time promote a general solution to this problem, doubt would be the immediate killer of such a general solution.
The non-dogmatist has a problem making himself heard if only because he is too inconspicuous in the general habitual lust for sensational news. He has to make it his nature, as it were, to present his view in an equally convincing and purposeful manner. That becomes truly difficult if you are not a person who likes to do that. In a way, one has to become like the other, use the same power and speech in order to not lose ground.
What I experience in my personal communication encounters is, that I must become a bit like a dogmatist in order to be heard and taken seriously by the dogmatists. Whereas basically I am not that character. In my family I always take over the strong communication role when the others maintain indifference. It's an attempt to balance things out. And so it happens vice versa.
Thanks for that video. It's really an eye opener. Parts of it I already saw in other snippets and I am happy, they circulate.
Good morning from here :)
Good morning to you, @erh.germany!
I'm very open in my catma. Save for when
I espouse dogma that I confuse with the truth.
Well said, I thoroughly enjoyed your insights!
Thank you :) - by the way, I thought of you as a woman and only yesterday, or so, realized that you are male. LOL. Must be your avatar.
Hey, no problemo, identify me however you like! Truth of the matter is, I don't care what gender people are; If they're interesting, I'm interested to hear/listen/read whatever they have to say on any given topic. Unless of couse, the topic is superiorly boring. In that case, it's whatever.
On the subject of microbes: I think something has happened here too, the way I look at the matter in the meantime: the word "bacterium" has been split by the intake of the word "virus", while at the same time, however, the human mind cannot distinguish these two things at all, because it has only developed an idea for one of the two terms (bacterium), but not for the other (virus).
I remember well when a friend of mine who was training in dental hygiene brought back from class books that had impressive illustrations of the microbes that live on our skin, for example. The images, enlarged many times, could have come straight out of a horror sci-fi flick. One saw all kinds of curious shapes and forms: huge globular creatures with fur-like coatings, scrawny ones with antennae, others with gigantic mouth-grinding tools sticking out of their mouths like wedges, and so on.
She presented me with these pictures full of disgust. I was also impressed by these pictures, but not in the same way as it seems in retrospect. Sure, I too was shaped to be disgusted by insects, but I have been able to overcome it quite well over the years as I gained a better understanding.
The association with insects was there immediately, is what I'm saying.
Seeing such creatures magnified, I think, awakens a primal human fear: that of being devoured. Perhaps deep within us is the common memory of a primate life where the little monkeys saved themselves from hunters by climbing trees. I don't know, but it seems to me to be one of many plausible explanations.
I therefore suspect that the mental conception of a "virus" that has lasted over many decades or centuries is not essentially different. The presence of microbes in the scene that a person so shaped as a researcher observes may lead him to confuse causality with correlation. However, the fact that the microbes present could just as well act like a rubbish disposal, merely taking care of the removal of dead cells and their remains, is always rather unlikely when the primal fear in the researcher is greater than his open-ended curiosity.
I hold my convictions in such a way that I represent them as "decisive for me". I am more inclined to take a positive view than a fear-promoting one.
Does this make sense to you?
"Does this make sense to you?"It sure does, save for the part where you distinguish bacteria from virus. I always just believe whatever they said it was, and did not dig deeper otherwise. I know that's wrong now, but that mindset hasn't had influence over me for quite some time now. Getting tipsy now, don't know how much sense I will make from here on out.