Conspiracy (in law: The crime of conspiracy consists in the agreement of two or more persons to do an illegal act, or to do a lawful act by unlawful means.)
For conspiracy to exist (as it does everywhere in the world and has done since man inhabited this planet) it doesn’t require the widespread cooperation of thousands of people sworn to secrecy, as has been conjectured in argument against anyone who might question an official narrative, it only requires for a handful of well-placed people who exert sufficient influence over policy, to concoct a plot and then set it in motion.
It’s the way hierarchies work and have done since time immemorial - the policy-makers occupy the narrow pinnacle at the peak of the pyramid, devise a plan and an ultimate endgame, rough this out and then issue instructions to the next echelon of the hierarchy (with the salient details withheld), which in turn devolves downward in ever diminishing detail through the ranks until the workers at the base of the pyramid structure carry out the actual deeds to move the plan along.
Do they have any clue as to the ultimate outcome desired by the upper handful? No, of course not but on analysis they are all working for this common goal and if one were to take a simplistic view of the organisation, one might by led to conclude that everyone was in on it - they’re not and this obtains in most organisational structures where businesses are concerned.
Let’s expand this example into the current situation.
Now let’s be clear here - there is a tiny fraction of people who control businesses across the planet, executives who sit on the boards of banks and industrial corporations and indeed, health and pharmaceutical corporations not least of which are the WHO and so-called regulatory bodies like the CDC. These organisations are not the sterile non-profit public interest bodies one might imagine they should be - far from it. They actually exist in a very profit-driven paradigm and derive a huge percentage of their income from medical patents, royalties and the sale of medicine and in particular, vaccines. This is readily accessible information.
But back to the Pyramid Corporation for a second where we have the most influential board members, owners and/or sponsors of governments (yep, they pretty much own the purportedly “elected” officials) financial, industrial and pharmaceutical, corporations as well as mainstream and social media platforms and who, without question, use (faux) philanthropy as another means to garner further profit from an already captive mass audience.
Let’s assume for a moment that this handful of execs formulate a plan to generate massive profits and at the same time perhaps further another, more sinister end...
For example, the most powerful and influential tools at their disposal are those of media and public health. They have driven natural healing and medicine underground in favour of a purely science (sic) based allopathic model which creates an absolute dependence on their chemical creations (drugs) and in a repeat business version that ensures annuity income for each citizen’s life cycle and, as they own the governments and their systems of taxation, the death business too.
This model is unassailably devious and clever - they own the research facilities - in fact, fund them so get to say who researches what and what the outcomes of that research should be. When anyone deviates from the program or diverts down a pathway that challenges the desired outcome, that person is usually shut down pretty quickly - people like Peter Duesberg, Kary Mullis and Judy Mikovits are but 3 immediately recognisable examples. People who were employed by these corporations, at the top of their game in their respective fields yet when, driven by the results of their research, called the official narrative into question , suddenly had their funding pulled, were character-assassinated by the very people who once held them in such high esteem and new charges were found to replace them. People like Anthony Fauci feature prominently in this narrative, on the wrong side of the chasm, of course.
So if one controls the direction of medical research (which they do), they can manipulate the outcome of that research (which they do). All pharmaceutical corporations who supply drugs to the citizens of the US, for example, are convicted felons who have been responsible for scientific fraud, medical malpractice and have wittingly killed hundreds of thousands of Americans if not millions. They have actuarial personnel and departments tasked with running the numbers for medicines where the likely side-effects will result in a certain number of deaths, which will translate into lawsuits and possibly settlement payouts - these are weighed up against the profits that will be made and if the financial offset is sufficiently negligible, the drug (dangers fully known) will be launched on the public anyway. In a nutshell - the profits far outweigh the potential liability.
These are the people who make the policy and they make the drugs, including the vaccines. And these are the people who indirectly supply the science that drives the WHO and who have stakes in the profits of that organisation to boot. They are unscrupulously deceitful from the get-go (their legal track record demonstrates that) and by dint of the fact that they hold the lion’s shareholding of the the global media (both mainstream and social) they broadcast a false narrative around the products they create and sell and particularly around the safety of those products. These profit driven felons seem to hold the trust of the public unswervingly. It is astonishing.
Okay, so you have the drugs, you own the science and the published results, you have the media and the WHO in your pocket - all that is left to do is broadcast that there is likely - no hang on - definitely going to be a viral pandemic very soon, which will comprise a new coronavirus (something on which you unsurprisingly already hold patents) and the world will require to behave exactly as we are about to outline in this narrative that we called Event 201.
While we are at it, the same group of influencers (during the 1980’s) launched the era of viral detection by means of antibody testing (more on that in a second) which basically meant that they could bamboozle the world in one fell swoop by using a new testing methodology (for which the same influencers would own the test kit royalties) to say that someone had tested positive for HIV... We must pause again here for a second and reread that statement: “Tested positive for HIV” now that sounds definitive right? Problem is - it absolutely is not. Not even close.
In the first instance - the test did not test for viral particles in blood. It had to be the case as nobody had then or has since, ever isolated HIV (not even the illustrious Judy Mikovits, certainly not to Koch’s or Rivers’ standards) so they had to come up with this new fangled technique which went something like this:
A) We don’t have a benchmark for the virus as it has never been isolated so we cannot find it in blood
B) Let us assume that certain antibodies that are present in immunocompromised individuals (fullblown AIDS patients, of which there were a few in the 1980’s) are specific to the virus as they are present in all of these AIDS patients
C) Let us say that if you have x amount of these antibodies (proteins) in your test sample, that you are HIV positive - in other words, if the antibodies are there, the virus must be there too right - otherwise why would these people be dying of AIDS?
D) Just to be safe and because we believe in the science being empirical (which it isn’t) let us run a second antibody test and if that is positive too, we will run a third confirmatory test using another antibody type protocol and then and only then if the third test is positive then the patient will be deemed to be HIV positive. If any one test through the series returns a negative result then the patient is HIV negative.
Flawless right?
Well, no actually, very flawed indeed. First up (certainly in Africa) they stopped doing the second test very early on - I mean who could afford it and why bother if the poor old black dude tested positive in the first place - I mean he was just a poor African and we all know that black lives, especially African ones, are far less valuable than white ones...
In the second place, a raft of common conditions (again, especially in Africa) lit up the test with false-positives so there was no definitive way to say with any scientific certainty that anyone actually had the virus. Pregnancy, malaria, cholera, hepatitis, flu, and around another 65 or so ailments completely unrelated to AIDS all rendered false-positives on the test. This was a way to rapidly build a very flawed infection database if these factors were being ignored (which they were). What it suggested, if anyone had bothered to do the math, was that when the immune system was under stress, certain exosomic responses occurred naturally and these regularly read as positives on the antibody test.
Just to paint a detail in this picture demonstrating just how ridiculous this situation was - an antibody test result indicating a certain reading could be determined as being HIV positive in a Lab in Africa (it gets worse) but when that same test reading was (or is) sent to Australia or the US, it may very well be read as HIV negative. In other words, the test (sic) was totally interpretive, some in the real world might say, fickle or some others may tell the truth and say it was total bullshit.
Later in rural Africa, diagnosis of HIV infection was done without any testing whatsoever - merely through examination and observation and if a patient exhibited certain symptoms and weight loss over a prescribed timeframe, he/she was diagnosed as being HIV positive. This, people, is not science - this is utter nonsense. Sadly, we bought it - well most of us and those who didn’t and spoke out about it - were shut down.
And so a pandemic was declared on the basis of this fatally flawed testing methodology when it was likely that as much as 80% of the people tested had no virus in them at all, much less HIV. But that didn’t stop the medical establishment saying they had AIDS and ultimately forcing treatment on them.
So phase 1 of convincing the world there was an infection problem was achieved. Done through a press conference announcement in 1984 not through any scientifically peer-reviewed published study but hey, why not. Their media made sure that went out on all the right wires and any dissent was rapidly crushed. People were too scared to question the science - I mean this was all new which is why they needed a new test too right?
Phase 2 was establishing an infection database, which was done very successfully using the fatally flawed testing method described above, and a very hefty profit was made on the sale and distribution of these test kits globally. The money was really starting to roll in now.
Phase 3 - let’s get them some drugs. We have to announce that there is no cure for AIDS (let’s be honest - you can’t cure a virus you haven’t found yet) but everyone everywhere is working on a cure - more research (ramp up the interest - forget cancer, that’s old news) everyone was looking for a cure for AIDS - their media coverage was awesome - more sales, more profit, money rolling in - the AIDS industry was a goldmine. We have drugs, we have many drugs - these things called antivirals but as we called HIV a retrovirus, these will now be renamed antiretrovirals (sounds so grand and expensive and technical) and we shall un-mothball some chemotherapy (failed) cancer meds too and repackage these and give them to all of these dirty infected gay men everywhere. Enter the era of ARV’s and the introduction of AZT which killed tens of thousands of gay men across the planet. Watch the fatality curve when this is introduced - it goes off the charts - but wait, I hear you say, those men died of AIDS didn’t they? Well, that’s certainly what they wrote on their death certificates. But if you examine the real cause of death, they were systematically poisoned by AZT and usually died of liver failure such was the horrendous toxicity of the drug, even by its creator, Jerome P Horwitz’s own admission - he had shelved the drug for that very reason. No problem for gays and poor Africans though. The mainstream to this day ascribe enormous success to AZT as being the first “effective” drug for HIV treatment. If by killing gay men in droves is the measure of success then - hey, fair enough.
And let’s be very honest here - the profits from the drugs were truly off the charts, now real money was rolling in. Billions of dollars annually.
And if you were to ask the owners of those drug empires if they regretted losing a few million gay men and some worthless Africans - they’d say, not at all, if they were totally honest. I mean, these are the guys that run the profitability numbers on deaths versus litigation payouts and the numbers were very good indeed - especially if you controlled the narrative. Which they did and continue to do.
What could have happened in any random scenario in LA or in Africa, however, was that if someone with, say hepatitis or malaria had tested positive (sic) on an Elisa antibody test (the so-called HIV test) then instead of screaming “HIV POSITIVE!” these people could simply have been treated for the ailment which lit up the test in the first place, placed on immune-boosting food, supplements and/or vitamins and instructed where possible to alter their lifestyle, which, in the case of the original AIDS victims - fast-track homosexuals primarily on the west coast of the US - could’ve been readily achieved. Not so simple though if you’re a crushingly poor African villager living in squalor with no decent potable water, no waterborne sewage systems and the effects of poverty, poor diet and disease all around you. These conditions lead very rapidly to immunocompromisation and we all know the immune responses were instrumental in causing many false positives on these ridiculous tests. And so the train of iatrogenicide ran on relentlessly.
And if you check the worldwide death for AIDS stats (which are spurious in the extreme, of course) you will find that statistically heterosexuals do not get AIDS, not even sex workers and white heterosexual women are the unlikeliest of all, which is pretty selective for a randomly sexually-transmitted virus wouldn’t you say. Not so, for poor African women though - they were statistically more likely to return a positive reading - gee, I wonder why?
And so the AIDS train ran on...
Pause - so far it would only take the few in the know at the upper echelons of the base corporation to steer their pet scientists and the media in one direction. The medical establishment per-se (no disrespect) is merely the retail outlet for the already “established science” when, in fact the real statement here should be: the dictates of the “scientific establishment” as the science in the case of HIV has never been established no matter what that mainstream may deign to tell you.
And once the momentum has been gained, it’s usually just routine to trot out the old rebuttal chestnuts when real journalists and scientists point out the flaws in the HIV=AIDS paradigm, like: “the science is settled” “conspiracy theorists” “tin-foil hat wearing idiots” etc. Hunt them in packs, through the media, deaths threats, ruin their careers, ridicule and ostracise them - very easy to do when you own the media and the the politicians who masquerade as policy-makers.
But when people like Kary Mullis (remember him from a few paragraphs back?) win a Nobel Prize for his invention, Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) analysis then it should demonstrate that he’s no fool regardless of his leisure activities (the mainstream elect to use his eccentric lifestyle and openly admitted recreational drug use as a means to try and disingenuously discredit him). Mullis tried unsuccessfully for several decades, up until his death in 2019, to locate the paper or any study that empirically demonstrated that HIV was “the probable cause of AIDS” - he never found that document though it wasn’t for lack of trying. An additional crucial piece of information about Mullis and PCR - he said on more than one occasion that it should NOT be used for diagnostical determination of viruses nor for measuring viral load. He said that.
So now that that picture has been painted - it amply demonstrates how over a relatively short period of time, a scenario can be established utilising flawed science and media control to determine a spectacularly high repeat profitability year on year.
What is even more concerning is that this slipped largely unnoticed under the general public’s radar. And why not? The public has an innate trust of authoritarian assertions particularly when public health is concerned so if people are indeed dying and these happen to be mostly gay men and impoverished Africans, it stands to reason that what has been said regarding sexual transmission of a virus (which nobody has ever proved) and eventual death by opportunistic infection when the immune system shuts down is exactly what’s happening - then why question it? Why question the drugs? Why question their motives?
Well, I would draw the reader to the opening gambit where it has been unarguably established that the pharmaceutical companies making these drugs (all of them) are convicted felons who hold much more regard for profit (particularly repeat profit) than they ever will for public health or curatives - the latter being totally counterintuitive to their very raison-d’être - sickness management and repeat business.
Fast forward to 2020 and we find that there is a demonstrably superior model for this year - no longer will the target audience be restricted to gays and poor Africans - that model was certainly viable but how would one target the entire population without killing too many of them and still retain the repeat business with a few sweeteners thrown in?
What better way than some form of the common cold?
Enter SARS-COV-2 and here we are. This could prove to be the ultimate conspiracy for conspiracy it most certainly is.
The HIV scam was the proof-of-concept experiment that paved the way for a lead-in to Event 201 which set the tone for the chaos that was to ensue. Very specifically organised chaos, it must be said.
With the public trust in the authoritarian medical science that had been established with AIDS and antibody testing which had become an accepted modality for testing for virus (even though it never has), the world was poised for the new grand scale social engineering event.
You do not need a particularly virulent virus at all for there to be widespread impact, not when you own the narrative and have already warned people this is coming. And knowing human nature the way we do, so many people thrive on the drama and fear the worst. Remember, they had a testing methodology that was demonstrably inaccurate and could be shown to be lit up by naturally occurring immune-responses and flu, colds etc. so even if the public questioned the figures when they cottoned on to the falsely attributed deaths (the WHO came up with a doozie to cover that one), the more people that were tested, the more false-positives that would occur so there again was the perfect model to assert a second wave of infection when nobody was actually sick and the whole planet had attained natural herd immunity months before.
I don’t know how else to paint this picture to demonstrate how simple it actually is to create a pandemic, ramp up fear, control the population and garner obscene profits into the bargain - while setting everyone up for the coup-de-grâce - the global vaccine that isn’t and never has been necessary but is being dangled as the sword of Damocles - you won’t be allowed to live a normal life unless you are vaccinated. This pertaining to a supposed virus with a better than 99.8% recovery rate. They simply cannot manipulate the numbers any longer - it’s all falling apart so they have to resort to the trickery of ramping up numbers with the tests to say - “see, it hasn’t gone away - we still need a vaccine!”
We really don’t and it HAS gone away - it went away a long time ago - was done and dusted within a couple of months even at its supposed epicentre at Wuhan and Sweden as well as Japan (no lockdowns) flattened their curve within the same timeframe despite scathing criticism through that Pharma-owned sock-puppet media.
Just because the word “conspiracy” gets unpacked every time a person (oftentimes a very educated person) questions an unarguably spurious narrative, even if it has been “accepted” by populist consensus, doesn’t make that person wrong and it would be extremely naive to think that conspiracy in the legal sense of the word - “plots by more than one person to act by unlawful means” doesn’t happen - it is a way of doing business - everywhere and no more so than by the felonious pharmaceutical industry whose love of profit is self evident.
If, however, as Robert F Kennedy Jr says, they are prepared to kill thousands of Americans and ride the lawsuits to turn a buck then why would we think when it comes to vaccines (where they don’t even have to safety test) they have suddenly found Jesus and wouldn’t lie to us about them?
Come on, folks - do the math.
Have a look round at the people who haven’t succumbed to any virus this flu season despite the establishment’s best efforts and ask yourself if this is such a bad disease then how come you have to go for a test to find it when people aren’t even sick?
I don’t think there is anything much else to say about this situation other than it’s about time we took our lives and our planet back.
I’m not really into the whole Q-Anon phenomenon but that’s certainly what it is - what I will predict, however, is that when Trump regains the presidency in November, I think there’s a very strong possibility that COVID-19 will rapidly die soon thereafter.
Let’s wait and see, shall we...
Maybe Trump is an alien...
