Videos dealing with Corona Virus

[ArMaP]

OK, some questions:

1 - Why would the so called elites want to kill people in the richer countries? You know, those basic questions they ask in detective stories: who, what, where, when, why. We supposedly know the "who" (more or less, as "the elite" is not really known), the "what", the "where" and the "when", but we don't know the most important, the "why", the reason behind it all.

2 - If they want to kill people, why use 5G, that is almost not in use today, to kill people?

3 - If they are using 60 GHz radio from satellites, why are they using a frequency that has a huge atmospheric attenuation?

4 - If they are using 60 GHz radio, that only affects the superficial layer of the skin, how does that affect the whole body?

[kevin]

This is for ArMap.
I hope it makes You laugh as much as it did Me.

Don't feed the beast.


https://sharechecklist.gov.uk/

Kevin

[astr0144]

I appreciate your reply and thoughts E113..

I was aware that you took some initial interest and was researching further into this.

I will try to look into further things on it. that I am still curious about...

but its good to get members initial thoughts if they took some time to look into it in some detail.

It is however appearing quite a complex topic that I think needs some researchers who either have a fair interest or some past / prior knowledge of certain aspects of it.

I believe there is an agenda of some sort being taken advantage of, maybe not so much planned from the start. I still do not believe this has anything to do with 5G... HOWEVER I do think 5G will certainly be used for nefarious purposes and that they do pose a health risk to some people but I don't believe it has anything to do with this virus. From what I have been reading 5G can cause much different symptoms than what we are seeing from the virus. There is definitely some coincidental symptoms that seem to be enough of a convincing factor to some people. Still waiting for the proof.

[astr0144]

Nice find ArMaP.

To me at the moment this is one of the most serious issues we all need to consider & really try to check details indepth on all this ?


This is what I said originally incase you read it  see brackets below but not sure its still valid..

since I initally posted I have since managed to find Bill Gates clip... its in the 1st two minutes..
starts around the 1 min  (56 secs ) mark to about 2 mins mark.

seems he was being interviewed on some news program...
(I wonder which one....  FTs wrote on the screen ..Financial  Times maybe )

need to pick out the bones out of this maybe that I managed to find ...

Done recently on April 9th .2020 ...

On a Quick browse.. I cannot see any ref in the transcript to what we see on AJs video ?

   Transcript: Bill Gates speaks to the FT about the global fight against coronavirus
Microsoft founder says there is a 'humanitarian and a self-interested' case for rich countries to help developing world


April 9 2020
Print this page
26

Be the first to know about every new Coronavirus story

This is the lightly edited transcript of a conversation between Bill Gates, co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the FT's Vanessa Kortekaas, which took place on April 2, via Skype.

FINANCIAL TIMES: So I want to start by going back in time to five years ago. As many people know, you warned that the greatest risk of global catastrophe wasn't a war, but a highly infectious virus. Why didn't anybody listen? And if some people did, what was done to prepare for the pandemic that exists now?

BILL GATES: Well, not enough was done. A system wasn't built. We didn't really do the number of simulations to try and figure out, OK, how are we going to connect up the diagnostics? How are we going to get the vaccine going? There were some investments. For example, our foundation, Wellcome Trust and a number of governments created Cepi (the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation), which is about making vaccine platforms that are ready when we get surprised to manufacture a new vaccine faster than has been done in the past.

So some work was done but, in retrospect, the saddest thing is to be able to say yes, that was right. But the whole point of the speech was to drive the research and the planning and the simulation which would have allowed us to stop this at a very early stage.

FT: And in terms of the global response now, many countries, including the UK and the US, have been criticised for not doing enough testing and not doing it fast enough. What is your assessment of the global response so far and, specifically, of President Trump's response to this crisis in the US?

BG: Well, I'm sure there'll be plenty of time, once we're on top of this, to look at before the epidemic hit, what more could have been done, when the epidemic hit. I don't think any country has a perfect record. Taiwan comes close.

They really were talking about it, and it's unfortunate they weren't part of the WHO (World Health Organization) to really get those warnings paid attention to. Most countries didn't see it as [becoming] as big a problem as it's ended up being. And of course, when you have exponential growth, that means if you miss, you know, three doubling times, it's eight times as big and much, much harder to get under control.

So a few countries, particularly those that have the experience of dealing with Mers or Sars, they were the fastest to respond. South Korea is an example of that. China, which had a lot of cases, now is in a very different state where they are able to get most people going back to school and back to work. And so there's lessons about, what did they do to drop the numbers? And what are they doing to avoid a rebound? Because until we get a vaccine that we've given to a high percentage of the global population, we will be at risk of rebound.

FT: And what would you say is the single most important thing that needs to happen now? The World Health Organization has said test, test, test. Is testing the key here? Or what about, for example, the role of technology? We've seen some Asian countries use technology to spread information so quickly, which has helped them fight the virus. What do you think is the single most important thing that has to happen right now?

BG: Well, testing is what guides you to see, do you need to do more social isolation, or have you gotten to a point where you can start to open up a bit? It can't just be numbers of tests though. You have to have the results coming back in less than 24 hours, and you have to prioritise who gets tested. The demand for tests exceeds supply in every country. And some countries really stepped in, like South Korea, and made sure the right people were being tested. They have a unified system that could look at the individual cases and weigh the criteria.

The US does not have that. We have so many different companies, labs. And most of tests go in without any criterion. And so now we have these backlogs that really devalue what can be done with those tests. So the fact that the numbers have gone up doesn't mean that we're doing this well at all.

That is still ahead of us to get organised on prioritising properly. So your contacts, if you test positive here, before they become infectious, that they need to isolate. The PCR test is sensitive enough to catch it even before you'll have symptoms. And that's the ideal case — where you don't go on to infect anyone else, which is the key to bringing those numbers down.

So today, the appropriate testing and isolation are the primary tactics. In the mid-term, getting some drugs that will reduce the hospitalisation and death rate, that will be very important. And the ultimate solution is a highly effective, safe vaccine. But getting billions of doses is hard. And our foundation works in all of those areas.

We're providing funding even now in parallel to scale up the manufacturing of the most promising vaccines — way more than we will end up picking. Because even though that's a few billion dollars of manufacturing capacity, the fact that it will be ready because we do it in parallel, that anything that cuts a month off of the time until we vaccinate is worth literally hundreds of billions, if not trillions.

FT: And can you just briefly expand more on that investment. So as you say, your foundation has announced $100m investment to go towards this global response. Can you just outline some of the areas where that's going to?

BG: Yeah, a lot of that's going to help the capacity in the developing worlds step up. Some actually helped China with the early response. Some is now helping in Europe and the US. We think a lot about the developing countries. And they have the biggest challenge because the social isolation is much harder for them. Just getting the food supply to work reliably — the distance, when you live in [an] urban slum area, you're not going to be able to be quite as separated as would be ideal there.

So those countries, even though their numbers are quite small today, sadly, it's very likely that many of those countries won't be able to contain it unlike, say China, which is at point 0.01 per cent, or some of the other countries. A lot of the rich countries should be able to keep it to a few per cent infected. These countries, many of them will experience a widespread epidemic so that, over time, the majority of their people are infected. And that will lead to hospital overloading, deaths from other conditions, and very substantial burden for those countries.

FT: And let's talk more about that big picture then for the developing world. We're at this point, it seems like quite a scary point, where, as you say, the virus is just starting to spread in developing countries. We know it's already spread throughout Africa, but hasn't quite taken off yet. How big of an impact do you think it will have in terms of deaths and the number of infections? And how worried are you about the ability of developing countries to fight this?

BG: We could get lucky, and there could be something about [the] weather that means that some countries have lower force of infection — we don't know that. Our assumption has to be, because we are seeing in some southern hemisphere places like Australia, quite a bit of infection, that it's not dramatically seasonal and that it's just gotten started slower in Africa. I hope something shows up that changes that.

It's very easy to say this disease has about a 1 per cent case fatality rate. And when you overload your hospitals you can get up to 2-3 per cent rate. Now, then again, Africa has a younger population, so that brings your numbers down. But the comorbidities in terms of smoke inhalation, both indoor and outdoor, TB, HIV, malnutrition, those are much higher there. And so you'd have quite a bit of uncertainty. But it's not impossible that you'd see [a] 2 per cent overall death rate, which is a horrific situation, potentially, even worse, as you have panic and other healthcare is very disrupted.

FT: You mentioned the difficulty of self-isolation. Is the whole lockdown approach that we see in developed countries, is that doomed to fail in developing countries because for some people it's just not practical? If they have to go outside to collect food or sell goods for their livelihood or, as you say, if they live in cramped conditions or slums, how can that possibly work?

BG: It's a super good question. Many of the developing countries are going to do their best on this. So India is doing it. Now, it's early days. They have to figure out — do food delivery people, are they allowed to still do their jobs or not? So these things are tricky to put into place the exact, you know, what is essential? Can you go out and walk your dog, or which businesses should be there? And the US didn't do much practice thinking about this. So we're figuring it out.

For the developing countries, I'd say it's definitely worth trying to flatten the curve. But the likelihood that you'll be successful and only have a few per cent infected — somewhere as you go down level of income, particularly in those urban slum areas — I worry that it will not be effective. But even if it delays and spreads things out, the number of health workers who get infected, the overload of the medical system, there is value to it in terms of the speed of which the infection gets into the broad population.

FT: You've said you're an optimist. And the world could use some good news or at least some hope. Is there reason to be optimistic about the ability of these poorer countries to fight this crisis, to fight the virus? Where are the pockets of hope?

BG: Well, the rural areas, the force of infection should be reduced particularly if people understand about the mixing. Although, right now, you have people leaving urban areas going back to the rural areas, so it won't be zero. We will get a vaccine. And the role of our foundation is to make sure that medicines like this are available to the entire world. We have partners like Gavi who will help us with that distribution. I'm sure governments will step up on this.
Editor's note

The Financial Times is making key coronavirus coverage free to read to help everyone stay informed. Find the latest here.

And so over the next couple of years, hopefully in 18 months, we'll get that vaccine, and things can be so you're not completely changing the economy because of coronavirus. And economies can come back. As painful as this is, as unprecedented as it is, the deaths, those you can't reverse. And so right now, people are scared. People are doing less economically.

Governments are trying to make sure that's a lot of people, so that the case infection rate goes to below 1 [per cent]. But yes, eventually, these tools — hopefully one of the platforms we've been investing in, actually for a decade, like the RNA vaccines — those are the most flexible and easiest to ramp up. So we're hoping that that's the way we get to the vaccine that gets us out of this terrible problem.

FT: And I want to talk more about the vaccine in a minute. But in terms of the obligation that rich countries have to help poor countries — rich countries are struggling to support their own citizens through this crisis. So what is the obligation that rich countries have to help the developing world?

BG: Well, that's always a question. There are countries that spend more than 0.7 per cent of GDP in regular times helping the poorest get things like measles vaccines and greatly uplift their countries so that they're stable and participating in the world economy. The UK is a generous donor, Sweden, Norway. Germany has become a lot more generous.

And so you can see that ranking there. I do think, despite the fact that you've got huge domestic problems and huge economic problems, you know that idea that you can keep that 0.7 per cent or even go up as much as a factor or two above that — because the impact of those dollars on helping things not completely deteriorate, helping hold things together, helping accelerate that vaccine manufacturer — I think the case on that will be compelling. But everybody's dealing with an immense number of priorities.

Then, again, they've decided to not operate under the normal fiscal constraints. And so the idea of, say, tens of billions helping buy those vaccines and get that manufacturing — it used to be in the aid game, that was a very, very big number. Now, when you're talking about making it easier to not have infection coming back into your country, you can make both a humanitarian and a self-interested argument that even a few per cent [of GDP] going against that for the rich countries would be a wise investment.

FT: Do you think this is the most concerted global effort ever to find a vaccine? And could we see one before 18 months' time?

BG: If everything went perfectly with the RNA vaccines — the Moderna is already in a human trial. You could do a little better than that. But remember, we're talking about making billions of doses. And even just to have the glass vials, the pill, finish the distribution, 18 months would be . . . a lot has to go well — not everything — to hit that. There are many constructs being worked on.

The experienced vaccine companies bring a lot to this because understanding safety and efficacy and how you go through the trials — so we need some new ones, which, for the people we're backing are RNA/DNA. And then there's four others that are more conventional, sure to work but [with] slightly longer schedules. And we have to fund the science, the testing, and the manufacturing capacity of all of those over at least seven or eight. We need to be ready to go once you have safety and efficacy.

FT: And what responsibility do you think national governments, philanthropies, and the private sector have to co-operate in order to find these solutions? And where do tech companies fit in this picture?

BG: Well, the deep expertise of making vaccines is some at the academic level, government research level, but a lot, particularly in safety and manufacturing, is in the private sector. And the government's not used to figuring out, OK, who's good at what, and what's the right way to do that? Our foundation plays a role there because we're funding the invention of vaccines and the scale-up and low-cost vaccines. That's what we're doing all the time to reduce deaths in the poor countries.

And so [the] private sector is very important. But the overall template has to come from government. And government here, where it doesn't know who can make ventilators or how testing gets overly backlogged, that is a big challenge. We don't have . . . we didn't practise at all for what we're going through here. And even, you know, who's responsible, and is that somebody who actually has the right domain knowledge? That's not totally clear as we try to move through this.

There are people like Dr [Anthony] Fauci, who brings a scientific, data-driven view to these things. And so it's great that he's in a strong position. He and I have talked a lot about how we get all the different actors, including the US government, our foundation partners, like IHME and Gavi and various of the companies that will be key to this, bring them together.

The tech companies don't make vaccines. But they can do a lot to let people still connect together. They can do a lot to let us look at the data and have deep insights into that. All these articles are being published. And so Microsoft and many others are letting you navigate that information in a very rich way. And so they'll step up. Believe me, anything I'm calling a private company [for] that's clear, well-defined, and they know, if I'm calling, it's likely to really make a difference.

They all say yes to these things. This is so top-of-mind. We've got the entire economy shut down. So everybody's trying to pitch in. Co-ordinating that when a lot of people don't understand, OK, which tests are the most important, or which information is, it's a bit difficult. And so key people at the foundation are working night and day to try and pull these resources together. But when we have asks for these people, they are dying to help out.

FT: And what about that trade-off? You just mentioned, obviously, the economic pain. What do you think the right balance is between the trade-off of protecting people's lives and the economic hit? Do you see a situation where the global economy could be virtually at a standstill for a year or even more?

BG: Well, it won't go to zero, but it will shrink. Global GDP is going to take probably the biggest hit ever. Maybe the Depression was worse or 1873, I don't know. But in my lifetime this will be the greatest economic hit. But you don't have a choice. People act like you have a choice. People don't feel like going to the stadium when they might get infected. You know, it's not the government who's saying OK, just ignore this disease, and people are deeply affected by seeing these deaths, by knowing they could be part of the transmission chain, and old people, their parents, their grandparents could be affected by this.

And so you don't get to say, ignore what's going on here. There will be the ability, particularly in rich countries, to open up if things are done well over the next few months. But for the world at large, normalcy only returns when we've largely vaccinated the entire global population. And so although there's a lot of work on testing, a lot of work on drugs that we're involved with, trying to achieve that ambitious goal, which has never been done for the vaccine, that rises to the top of the list.

FT: Once this pandemic, once we find solutions to this, looking far ahead into the future, do you think that people will just return to a sort of a short-termism view where we're too focused on economic gain to invest properly and prepare properly for another once-in-a-century pandemic? And what is your message right now to world leaders and global policymakers to avoid the world being caught off guard again?

BG: Well, there's no doubt, having paid many trillions of dollars more than we might have had to if we'd been properly ready, people will, this time, because it affected the rich countries. This is the biggest event that people will experience in their entire lives. We will have standby diagnostics. We will have deep antiviral libraries. We will have antibodies scale up. We will have vaccine platforms. We will have early warning systems. We will do germ games.

The cost of doing all those things well is very small compared to what we're going through here. And so now people realise, OK, there really is a meaningful probability every 20 years or so with lots of world travel that one of these [viruses] will come along. And so the citizens expect the government to make it a priority. It won't cost as much as the defence budget, say, but it will be a meaningful investment. Some of those investments will help medical work in other areas. A vaccine platform, cheap, fast diagnostics — these are not things that are only valuable for an epidemic.

FT: So you're confident then that lessons will be learned from this experience and that the pain, both in terms of the loss of life and the economic hit, will be bad enough to make people prepare for next time?

BG: Yes, but it shouldn't have required a many trillions of dollars loss to get there. I remember when I put up this slide in that [TED] talk. And I showed that it was trillions of dollars. I felt like, wow, that is so gigantic. Why are people saying $10, $20, $30 billion, which, in a government budget sense, is almost nothing — but yes, this time, we've been whacked on the head here at home, people we know. The science is there. Countries will step forward.

FT: Bill Gates, thank you for your time.

BG: Thank you.


Get alerts on Bill Gates when a new story is published
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2020. All rights reserved.
Late

https://www.ft.com/content/13ddacc4-0ae4-4be1-95c5-1a32ab15956a


in the final seconds...around  1 min 50sec)

  GATES appears to be saying... people think that they have a choice... and they DO NOT !

and that people think its the Govt telling them...(A . Jones Chips in and says "Oh Really" ! )  1 min 13 secs

and he says  things may get back to normal  when we have largly vaccinated the World population..

NOW that does not seem edited to me ...

If you think it is... in what way would you suggest ?

A.J chips in as hes speaking at one point admittedly edited..
but is Gates content actually edited ? I dont thnk so...

IF not I still do NOT see reason to Question Alex Jones on him making such an issue with this..
Unless what Gates is saying is as genuine as he makes out..and his vaccines will be the good for us.

But How can we know that until we are given them ?  Would we want to risk it ? Would you ?

If its Not edited..


I still find that VERY VERY concerning !!!       

Gates makes ref to trying to take certain precautions and the elderly etc... that can be seen as reasonable advice..
which we are now aware about ..

but he still seem to be someone of authority as his BUSINESS in Vaccinations , ploying to vaccinate a large majorty of us ?

we know hes the Bill and Milinda Gates foundation do we not ?

Would you still not Agree ?

At the moment I still think Alex Jones is right on what hes saying..

The question for me is also... What real evidence has A.J got that Gates has in some ways been killing people with
his vaccines.. other than maybe those from the 3rd World..

Has he got evidence of 1st world deaths on a reasonable scale ? in which we can agree with him with more certainty.

(Astr0)   Then my initial thoughts on it was Gates comments did seem quite threatening to us all.
    and he was seeming to be acting like Big brother and dictating to us what we can and cannot do.or what may be..

ArMaP

It's easy to edit a video to make it look like what we want it to, that's why I prefer to look at the original sources.

(For some reason when the videos were on A.Js recent banned channel (that was taken down) I was not able to watch it
on my Laptop. that usually has worked ok for other website onlin vids on the browsers I have (FF / GC)

but I was able to watch it on a Mobile phone.

In ref to the bitchute one you posted..I still cant get it to play on FF.. butI can just about get it to play on GC...but I cannot seem to easily get it to play when I move or slide the play bar below to try to scan for the area I am looking for..

So at the moment I cannot seem to find the Bill Gates part that I thought was in the 1st 5 mins..and I think I have gone thru parts of the 1st 5 mins..

so I wondering if I made a mistake and it was on another video that was on AJs pre banned channel.

Ill try and work on it as I need to analyse it a bit more and also look at some other Bill Gates vids that Kev posted.

Id not really thought that the vids maybe false edited ....and Id be doubtful myself that they are at this stage..
although I do accept it could be...)

ArMaP

PS: see if this is the missing video
https://www.bitchute.com/video/CqCnABV38omI/

Unfortunately I dont think the part I posted was exactly the same one that the video referred to.. but I believe its somewhere on that website...

I need to try to clarify the details more. when I can

Ill try to answer other points later ...

I looked for the laws he was talking about and the only April amendment I found wasn't related to what he said. Unfortunately, I didn't kept the link, so I'll have a look to the one you posted.

[kevin]

OK, some questions:

1 - Why would the so called elites want to kill people in the richer countries? You know, those basic questions they ask in detective stories: who, what, where, when, why. We supposedly know the "who" (more or less, as "the elite" is not really known), the "what", the "where" and the "when", but we don't know the most important, the "why", the reason behind it all.

2 - If they want to kill people, why use 5G, that is almost not in use today, to kill people?

3 - If they are using 60 GHz radio from satellites, why are they using a frequency that has a huge atmospheric attenuation?

4 - If they are using 60 GHz radio, that only affects the superficial layer of the skin, how does that affect the whole body?

!, to gain the support and acceptance of the people for the desired agenda.
As an example ....demolish some towers, blame someone, the people demand You "Go get em"

CRS...cause reaction solution.

2 I have covered that with the trojan horse, it is to enable sufficient fear to implement your agenda.

3.Watch the weather, only use it when the sky is clear.

4 You are not researching correctly, the skin layer is affected by different frequencies that is utilised in crowd control.
60 ghz reacts with iron, and it is irons ability to enable oxygen absorption that is causing the CONDITION been blamed on the virus.


these are well thought out war stratergies with lots of distractions such as some cruise ships not been targeted and thus been used as an example to deflect attention from 60 ghz.

Don't feed the beast, only BELIEVE  what the state tells you.

Kevin

[ArMaP]

!, to gain the support and acceptance of the people for the desired agenda.
As an example ....demolish some towers, blame someone, the people demand You "Go get em"

CRS...cause reaction solution.

And that agenda is...

2 I have covered that with the trojan horse, it is to enable sufficient fear to implement your agenda.

That's not an answer to my question, I asked why use something that is almost not in use today, as most programmed 5G systems are still being built. Wouldn't it work better with something alread widespread?

3.Watch the weather, only use it when the sky is clear.

60 GHz radio is absorbed by O2 molecules in the air, even in clear, dry weather it has a higher attenuation than other frequencies.

However, it is maximum at a few specific absorption lines, mainly those of oxygen at 60 GHz and water vapor at 24 GHz and 184 GHz.

Source

4 You are not researching correctly, the skin layer is affected by different frequencies that is utilised in crowd control.

Your'e right, crowd control systems use 95 GHz, not 60 GHz.

60 ghz reacts with iron, and it is irons ability to enable oxygen absorption that is causing the CONDITION been blamed on the virus.

Proof, please.

these are well thought out war stratergies with lots of distractions such as some cruise ships not been targeted and thus been used as an example to deflect attention from 60 ghz.

Well, they look nothing like well thought out war strategies, as a well thought out strategy would be picked out by conspiracy theorists that would publish their theories on the Internet.
A well thought out strategy would have all the people on their side.

Don't feed the beast, only BELIEVE  what the state tells you.

You see, in a well thought out strategy they wouldn't need to tell people to believe only in the official version, people would ignore the alternative theories on their own.

[kevin]

ArMap,

Much respected one.

Only believe what the states tell You, don't listen to anything else.

Haemoglobin has four iron atoms.

Oxygen binds with these ( think in terms of magnetics, with polarities attracting or repelling)

60 ghz alters the spin of the orbital electrons of oxygen, thus it isn't absorbed by the haemoglobin.

This will result in a condition.....almost exactly that which is been called by a virus.


You will need to research into magnetic biology, or as I recommended Royal Raymond Rife.

But trust Your state, only listen to what they are telling You, all else is by crazy crackpots.


Kevin

[kevin]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-cracks-down-on-spread-of-false-coronavirus-information-online

Kevin

[kevin]

https://www.ucsfhealth.org/education/hemoglobin-and-functions-of-iron

Kevin

[kevin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fz5z126qliY&feature=emb_logo&fbclid=IwAR2kSKgtxIexvlLnbV-6jmgAbBd8toPWBa-NCXiWkEiy5ggeJa8-bqw8Xxg


Please remember to believe only what the states tell you.

That man is not suggesting that the Italian state have lied about the death figures ..is He??//


No the state never tells lies.


Kevin

[astr0144]

I have watched some more of the Alex Jones Video.

BILL GATES ANNOUNCES WORLD GOVERNMENT WILL FORCIBLY INOCULATE ENTIRE PLANET - FULL SHOW 5/6/20

https://www.bitchute.com/video/CqCnABV38omI/

There was some more of the Gates Interview/s.(3 off)..from about 25 mins mark onwards. / 30 min  and past 40 mins 56 secs..mark

At about the 38 min mark.... A.J shows Gates smiling when discussing the death rates, effect on economy etc..
unless it was fake edited as it shows two people (Interviewr and BG ) from seperate areas in two screens together..
which could be possible... unless someone else can prove it is for real...which if so is further concerning...

but no doubt A.J could just be making an issue of it and maybe Gates is smiling for some other point of his view or thought process at the time...if he disagreed or believed things were not being said as he considers things...

but Around the 2hr 15 min mark

He says that Gates under the control of  the Elites,  Rothchilds,  those attend Bilderberg etc
Have planned this to destroy Donald Trump leading up to the  US Election ...

I would not disagree with this !  and suspect it could be the major issues behind it...
May not need to say too much on th subject if this is the case as it explains a lot..
even thou thinking about it now it may seem more obvious ..

I surpose their could be others reasons that are nothing to do with whos in Power..
and we never really know for sure if its all put on  or if Trump be involved..
But I would be doubtful that he is !   I think Trump seemed quite legit and more trust worthy... other than
if it turns out he slipped up on be too slow to act on Cv 19 issue if it does tunr out to be a case situation.

Then Unfortunately many will see that as his main failing..

On the video it talks about how Sweden did NOT lock down and the death rates have not been any where near the predictions .... even thou its population differs... proportionally it suggests its not the real threat that they are making out..

see 1 hr 38 mark  PJ Watson

Coronavirus (COVID-19) statistics
Sweden cases
Updated 10 May at 13:58 local
Confirmed
26,322
+401
Deaths
3,225
+5
Recovered
4,971

The demography of Sweden is monitored by Statistics Sweden (SCB). As of August 2018, the population of Sweden was estimated to be 10.2 million people, making it the 90th most populous country in the world.

This article makes an issue of it ...which maybe valid because the Uk has about a population about 6 times higher
about 66 million and recently past the 31,000 Covid 19 deaths..

Coronavirus (COVID-19) statistics
United Kingdom cases
Updated 10 May at 14:18 local
Confirmed
215,260
+3,896
Deaths
31,587
+346
Recovered
1,918

So Maybe A.J has got his facts mixed up on that...

but maybe we have to ask if 26,000 deaths for 10 Mill population if they did not have a lock down..is anything
to really be concerned about in comparision as to whats going on or occurred so far ?

https://www.newsweek.com/sweden-coronavirus-deaths-children-lockdown-1502548

Why Sweden is not in Lockdown.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1262325/sweden-coronavirus-strategy-why-is-sweden-not-in-lockdown

It seems Bill Gates has the LARGEST Private foundation in the World...

But is that Bigger than any Heath Authority organisation... or World heath Organisation that Alex Jones /Paul J Watson refers to as having made a LOT of mistakes which seemed diliberate in ref to this virus.

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), previously the William H. Gates Foundation, is an American private foundation founded by Bill and Melinda Gates. Based in Seattle, Washington, it was launched in 2000 and is reported to be the largest private foundation in the world,[4] holding $46.8 billion in assets.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundation


Paul J Watson says he does not believe in the 5 G theory and takes the mic out of it.. about the 1 hr 21 min mark.

but have had any suggested experts discuss it on their show .. I dont know. as they usually interview experts of some sort...

[astr0144]

In the AJ video I referred to in my prior post.

At around the 2 hr 13 mark onwards. it shows what maybe some hoaxs in this Covid 19 topic.


At 2 hrs 16.53   
One of A.Js guest John Rappoport (Nomorefakenews.com )goes on to speak how the whole death rates from Covid 19 could easily have been faked...and that those who believed that they had it and went to hospital were told that they had the virus.. when it may not really exist...

BUT that were then helped to die thru some various things (and other means ) that we believe we are seeing in a discreet way in order to make us believe they died of the virus.

If so .. who were the so called Doctors and Staff...involved...
and are some of them Murderers on instruction from whoever has designed this

In such a case ... some how they would have had to have what seemed like leading Drs.. (who are in on the hoax)
who in turn does the killings and controls those around him and manages to cover up as to how they kill off the patients.

That would seem very hard to believe..BUT Id  would wonder if its possible ?

John says that the World heath Organisation that you would think is either Govt control or funded by public taxes etc
that its also funded by Gates..where a Professor Neil Furguson a scientist computer modeller creates the plan.
whos the Prof Lockdown who has been sacked for being found visiting his Girl friend.. or has he ??
are we just led to believe this..

would you sack some main Professor for such a thing in reality surely Not !
He had suggested that 100 000 or million could die this year

Hes been involved in some past similar predictions , huge cattle deaths with mad cow disease,  bird flue ,swine flue etc
that I think John suggests was also a hoax..and that he a poor track record and yet he was in charge of such past  MAJOR concerns...and what ever that says... no one can dispute it ...

Professor Neil Ferguson, and the idiot presidents and prime ministers who believe his computer predictions
May
4

Nothing is riding on this except the immediate future of the human race

Ferguson used old failed model to predict COVID deaths

by Jon Rappoport

May 4, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

Buying, for the moment, the official story about the "pandemic," there were two basic choices:

Let people go about their lives and develop, through contact, natural immunity to the disease; or imprison populations in their homes.

Why was the second choice made?

This is my second article about Neil Ferguson (first article, here), the UK professor whose computer model of COVID-19 changed the world and drove that second choice.

Ferguson's model predicted a worst-case estimate of 510,000 deaths in the UK, and 2.2 million deaths in the US.

At that point, anybody who was anybody stood up and saluted.

Both heads of government, Trump and Johnson, radically changed course. Instead of allowing people to go about their lives and develop natural immunity, they took the lockdown approach, devastating their economies.

Below, I'll reprint quotes from my first article, exposing Professor Ferguson's track record of abysmal and destructive failures in predicting the spread of diseases.

This record was available to anyone—including Trump, Fauci, Deborah Birx, Boris Johnson—but of course these important people have no time to read or think.

Apparently, a key White house conversation went something like this:

FAUCI: Mr. President, we have a new report from the UK. A computer model is predicting the spread of the epidemic. There could be 2 million deaths in the US, if we don't take drastic action. There must be heavy lockdowns. The state governors will have to carry that ball, but your position on this needs to be unequivocal.

TRUMP: Two million deaths. You're sure?

FAUCI: Yes, sir. Quite sure.

TRUMP: No way out? Except lockdowns?

FAUCI: That's right.

TRUMP: Well, then. Okay.

The sheer brilliance in the Oval Office that day must have been blinding.

So, first up, let's take a peek at a recent article from Nature, the venerable British medical journal. April 2, "Special report: The [computer] simulations driving the world's response to COVID-19":

"...it's natural to wonder how reliable any of the [computer] simulations are. Unfortunately, during a pandemic it is hard to get data — such as on infection rates — against which to judge a model's projections."

This is called a clue. Computer models predicting the spread of disease may be an interesting academic exercise, but in the real world, where lives and nations are on the line, THE DATA, on which the projections are based, are elusive. Without accurate data, what do you have? How about opinion, bias, and conjecture?

Nature: "'You can project [via computer models] forwards and then compare against what you get. But the problem is that our surveillance systems are pretty rubbish', says John Edmunds, who is a modeller at the LSHTM [London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine]. 'The total numbers of cases reported, is that accurate? No. Accurate anywhere? No'."

I see. Rubbish. Total number of cases—inaccurate everywhere. Bad data. No data. In other words, the computer models are sophisticated tripe.

Nature: "'Forecasts made during an outbreak are rarely investigated during or after the event for their accuracy, and only recently have forecasters begun to make results, code, models and data available for retrospective analysis,' Edmunds and his team noted last year in a paper that assessed the performance of forecasts made in a 2014–15 Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone. They found that it was possible to reliably predict the epidemic's course one or two weeks ahead of time, but no longer, because of the inherent uncertainty and lack of knowledge about the outbreak."

Computer predictions are rarely investigated for accuracy. Can't make accurate predictions for more than two weeks ahead. Do you suppose Fauci, who has served as a public health dictator since medieval times, is aware of this, but is ignoring it? That's a rhetorical question, Your Honor. I withdraw it. The answer is obvious.

Finally, Nature provides us with this startling factoid: "The 16 March simulations that the [Neil Ferguson] team ran to inform the UK government's COVID-19 response used an agent-based model built in 2005 to see what would happen in Thailand if H5N1 avian flu mutated to a version that could spread easily between people."

That's like saying, "This year, the driver in the Indianapolis 500 is sitting in a car built 15 years ago. He's dusted it off and hopes it works and doesn't crash into the wall."

You may think this is an unkind comparison, but we know something about that dusty Ferguson 2005 computer model of avian flu. Here is a quote from the Business insider, 4/25:

"...he [Ferguson] was accused of creating panic by overestimating the potential death toll during the 2005 Bird [avian] Flu outbreak. Ferguson estimated 200 million could die. The real number was in the low hundreds."

THIS is the basic model Ferguson has now used to project deaths from COVID-19.

Are your eyeballs popping? They should be.

Without further ado, here is the Business Insider, 4/25, reporting Neil Ferguson's other grotesque prediction failures:

"Michael Thrusfield, a professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, told the paper he had 'déjà vu' after reading the [Ferguson] Imperial paper [on COVID], saying Ferguson was responsible for excessive animal culling during the 2001 Foot and Mouth [actually, Mad Cow disease] outbreak."

"Ferguson warned the government that 150,000 people could die. Six million animals were slaughtered as a precaution, costing the country billions in farming revenue. In the end, 200 people died."

"In 2009, one of Ferguson's models predicted 65,000 people could die from the Swine Flu outbreak in the UK — the final figure was below 500."

Want more? The Business Insider raises the level of shock even higher.

"Ferguson co-founded the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, based at Imperial [College], in 2008. It is the leading body advising national governments on pathogen outbreaks."

"It gets tens of millions of dollars in annual funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and works with the UK National Health Service, the US Centres for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC), and is tasked with supplying the World Health Organization with 'rapid analysis of urgent infectious disease problems'."

Getting the picture?

Bill Gates wants a COVID vaccine before planetary lockdowns end. The lockdowns, of course, are already making a wreck of the Earth's economies.

Bill Gates' money goes to Ferguson.

Ferguson supplies, to the CDC and WHO, a vastly worthless but frightening computer projection of COVID deaths. Ferguson thus communicates a justification for the Gates global vaccine plan.

The CDC and WHO act, based on what Gates wants, as expressed by Ferguson.

National governments surrender to WHO and CDC. LOCKDOWNS.

What say you, Trump, Johnson, Merkel, Macron, et al? Are you merely clueless idiots, no brighter than some passerby on a street corner who's handed a sign for a protest, and joins the line, having zero idea what he's supporting? Are you that stupid, as you point to Ferguson's farce of a computer model, with eyes glazed?

Are you simply in fear of experts who, on their best day, should be consigned to modelling numbers of cockroaches in motel rooms?

Or are you hostile idiots, who intend to destroy countless lives as economics sink further into ruin, day by day?

P.S. Perhaps you're thinking, "These governments couldn't be THAT crazy and stupid and vicious. They couldn't have acted based on Neil Ferguson's computer model..."

Business Insider, 4/25: "Ferguson's team warned Boris Johnson that the quest for 'herd immunity' [letting people live their lives out in the open in the UK] could cost 510,000 lives, prompting an abrupt U-turn [massive national lockdown in the UK]...His [Ferguson's] simulations have been influential in other countries as well, cited by authorities in the US, Germany, and France."

"On March 23, the UK scrapped 'herd immunity' in favor of a suppression strategy, and the country made preparations for weeks of lockdown. Ferguson's study was responsible."

"Dr Deborah Birx, coronavirus response coordinator to the Trump administration, told journalists at a March 16 press briefing that the Imperial paper [Ferguson's computer projection] prompted the CDC's new advice to work from home and avoid gatherings of 10 or more."

TO READ ALL MY ARTICLES ON THE COVID LUNACY:

The above article was one from his website blog.. of which there are more Covid articles on it..
Im not sure if this is from one he shows from his video.


THIS IS WHAT CONCERNS ME AT THE MOMENT..

IF what John says is partially true for Prof N Furgusens past records which he shows news articles ref to them..
Then why has Boris Johnson (BoJo)or one of his associates if he was in Hospital as we were led to believe challenged it ?
or has that been an excuse for BO JO  to not have to makes comments on it...
Its suggested that Donald Trump is a Friend with BoJo..but can you trust Johnson ?

So what the hell is going on ?

IF Trump is to challenge Bill Gates and This UK Prof....and the UK Govt etc
How will he look at Bo JO and the UK Govt ? if this proves to be valid...

But having said all this, can we believe that all the other Scientist etc who we are led to believe are doing this or that
and investigating the virus etc or other companies who may be saying trying to design a vaccine...

can we really believe all these people would in on the hoax ?
or even just main few leaders who may be in charge..

How many would it take to pull this off...
and HOW do those who maybe at the top recruit such people to go along with it ?
That is a hard one to figure out !  and How can anyone prove  that even John Rap or A.J etc..

Another thought !

If we think the Virus is for real and that a vaccine could be our saviour is one view...
The Vaccine may protect us..
but is or do we know that the Vaccine is going be safe ?  or is it designed to badly effect or kill us.

If we think its all fake... and want to ignore it..
But if it is for real... we could catch it and die..
or We believe that we dont want to take any vaccine and eventual  become infected by the virus .


In the UK every Thursday....
Thur the TV media.. at 8 pm... they suggest everybody claps the NHS and carers and Doctors.
and people are doing this on a huge scale every week.

Maybe just my present view...but
To me this is total mind control over the top and thats why I dont go along with what is happening.

Paul Watson makes a ref to this ...as wel as how some staff are larking / dancing around and laughing while dressed in their PPE equipment ...

then you have all your neighbors snooping or observing and commenting who is at their doors each week..
and then they are trying to say get talking with your neighbors but social distance..

and then you later see huge groups close together less than 2 ms apart..
In ref to any Hospital Staff etc if this is the case..who are genuine..
No doubt they deserve praises but does it have to be in the way that the populace is being encouraged to go about it.

[kevin]

It is widely reported that in the USA the medi care system is paid $13000 for each covid patient they handle, and $39000 for each one that they put on ventilators
Oh vey , it is business.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/huge-mn-senator-doctor-hospitals-get-paid-list-patients-covid-19-three-times-much-patient-goes-ventilator-video/




Here in the Uk the death certificate is now been reported on symptom, not on an actual cause.

So if it looks like a covid, it is declared as such, even though they have not tested.

And that's where two almost identical conditions can be added together to ramp up the fear.

Most of the deaths they even admit openly are related to those with pre existing life threatening conditions.

But please keep believing the governments story, all else is crackpots, don't listen or debate, the EXPERTS KNOW BEST

You know like him caught with His pants down that demanded everyone to be put into lock down.

Kevin

[kevin]

https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/reptiles/reptiles17a.htm

Just suppose in a fantasy story manner that there are reptilian races running this planet.

Humans have iron based blood to enable oxygen absorption.
Reptiles have copper based blood oxygen absorption, bill gates would make a great candidate to play the part of king reptile in any film version imho.
.

So it would make a great story line if the humans who were unaware of the difference were wiped out by the reptiles with technology targeted at iron?

Reptiles are notorious for lack of empathy.

Of course this is just fiction , so keep believing the governments, only they care for you.

Kevin

[ArMaP]

Only believe what the states tell You, don't listen to anything else.

It's not a question of believe what the state tells, it's a question of believing reproducible data. Data about the virus has been confirmed by many countries, organisations and scientists working in the field. Their information are consistent to what was already know about other virus.

What you have been posting is lacking verifiable data, that's why I keep asking for sources.
Why should I believe in someone on the Internet with an idea instead of believing the state and all the people that confirm this is a virus close to the one behind SARS?

Haemoglobin has four iron atoms.

Oxygen binds with these ( think in terms of magnetics, with polarities attracting or repelling)

It's not a magnetic thing, it's a chemical thing, if it was magnetic people would come out of an MRI with lack of oxygen in the blood.

60 ghz alters the spin of the orbital electrons of oxygen, thus it isn't absorbed by the haemoglobin.

That's when I ask for proof. Show me studies proving that 60 GHz radio frequencies change the spin of the electrons in the oxygen molecules.

This will result in a condition.....almost exactly that which is been called by a virus.

The symptoms of lack of oxygen in the blood are not like the this virus' symptoms.

You will need to research into magnetic biology, or as I recommended Royal Raymond Rife.

If there's verifiable data, maybe.

But trust Your state, only listen to what they are telling You, all else is by crazy crackpots.

Keeping on repeating that makes it look like a child putting the fingers on his ears and speaking loud to avoid listening to things that he doesn't like.

If you have the data that supports what you are saying, post it, otherwise I don't have any reason to believe what you're saying.