BACK YARD GARDENS BANNED!?! Will You Comply?
OFF GRID with DOUG & STACY
today
8 min
Provoked Goat
@ProvokedGoat
đ Bill Gates on mRNA Vaccines: âWe just need to âmess aroundâ thereâs a lot of lipid nanoparticles that self assembleâ
Sounds promising đ
âBill Gates secured hundreds of millions of dollars in profits from his foundationâs impeccably timed investment in BioNTech â the Pfizer partner for its mRNA Covid shots â before dramatically reversing course and proceeding to openly cast doubt on the whole of mRNA technologyâ, Schachtel said.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation made 15 times its initial investment when the foundation sold its BioNTech shares at the height of their value in 2021.
When the foundation sold the shares â at an average sale price of $300 per share â it pocketed a profit of approximately $260 million, or more than 15 times its original investment.
The Gates Foundation sold an additional 2 million shares prior to the third quarter of 2021, and subsequently sold 1.4 million shares of CureVac, a German-based mRNA company, making another $50 million, Schachtel found.
#VaccineSideEffects #mRNA
8:41 AM ¡ Feb 5, 2024
https://twitter.com/ProvokedGoat/status/1754515586401399270
Chief Nerd
@TheChiefNerd
Another CDC claim unravelsâŚ
Quote
Zachary Stieber
@ZackStieber
¡
5h
CDC says no records supporting COVID statement that "high vaccination coverage in a population reduces the spread of the virus and helps prevent new variants from emerging."
2:37 PM ¡ Feb 6, 2024
¡
https://twitter.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1754967663426601380
Aaron Kheriaty
@AaronKheriatyMD
The number of obituaries with the word âsuddenlyâ or âunexpectedlyâ doubled in 2021-2023.
7:54 PM ¡ Feb 3, 2024
https://twitter.com/AaronKheriatyMD/status/1753960266277216609
https://factmission.substack.com/p/aids?hashtag=aids
Disturbing data from the CDC unravels the enigma of AIDS:
It takes 3 minutes to see why, if the health agency complies with disclosure laws, the origin of AIDS might finally be revealed in March, 2024.
Summary of the published data
As the Hepatitis-B virus could not be grown in a lab, vaccines were developed using the antigens in the blood of carriers. The first version was made by feeding chocolate milk laced with feces to mentally disabled children at the Willowbrook school[3.02]. However, the WHO and US scientists concluded the solution to getting sufficient blood plasma for mass production was to infect chimpanzees with human hepatitis, and use their antigens, described as âindistinguishableâ from humans, and providing cross-protection[3.13, 3.14]. The FDA and CDC harvested antigens from chimps to amass âplasma poolsâ, which were used to make various experimental vaccines, including one by the FDA[3.18,3.19]. Dr. Prince patented the process and extracted antigens in 1976 for Merck to make Lot 751, as explained in more detail below[3.28, 4.04]. The trials consisted of Lot 761 given to staff, apparently made from the blood of the Willowbrook children, and Lot 751, given to 2,405 young male homosexuals[3.29,4.02,4.05,4.08]. As HIV was unknown when Lot 751 was made, the âvirus inactivationâ consisted of adding 0.01%-0.025% formalin, which the CDC has confirmed does not kill the AIDS virus[4.32].
NOTE: Do not get confused by claims the vaccine was tested for HIV[4.22,4.20]. All those papers refer to testing the commercial version of Heptavax made from the human blood of the trial participants. This post refers to Lot 751 given to the trial participants and made from chimpanzee blood. Searching for âLot 751â on Google scholar will show an AIDS epidemic followed everywhere Lot 751 was used, and nobody ever claimed to have tested Lot 751 nor the source chimpanzee blood for infectious virus. Transmission of SIVcpz by the vaccine is reasonable given the source blood would have carried it, and the formalin would not have killed it, and Lot 751, unlike other lots, was not heat treated. Once AIDS was discovered, doctors immediately suspected the vaccine and rejected it[4.10], causing it to be quickly pulled from the market in 1986. However, it seems doctors fears were based on the commercial version being made from the gay men in the trial.
Transmission of the AIDS virus to the gay community that participated in the Lot 751 trials could be conclusively determined as it was a gold standard trial conducted by the CDC itself. Thus, the random participants who received placebo would have a lower rate of AIDS if the vaccine had transmitted the virus. When the AIDS virus was discovered at the end of the trial, 90% of participants let the CDC test their archived blood, taken throughout the trial[4.07,4.03]. None of the 20,000 men pre-screened had the virus before the first vaccinations in 19771. But by its conclusion, 42% of participants were infected.
Following is the published vaccination schedule:
1976-1977: 200 volunteers in New York were vaccinated, recruited using flyers in gay bars placed by the team of Wolf Szmuness, who ran the gay community outreach at the New York Blood Center[3.22,4.05].
1978-1979: During the formal New York trial 549 men were vaccinated while 534 received placebo[4.10].
1980-1981: During the CDC multi-city trial, 714 men were vaccinated while 688 received placebo. However, the CDC only published detailed results for those in San Francisco with 359 participants[4.07].
1980-1981: 277 of the New York placebo recipients were vaccinated[4.10].
1981-1982: The CDC vaccinated some of the placebo recipients. The exact number was not disclosed, but based on the New York acceptance rate, it appears roughly half of placebo recipients accepted. Thus approximately 344 placebo recipients were likely vaccinated.
p1
Per the CDC, within a year of the initial 1977 vaccinations of 200 volunteers, the first three contracted HIV. The infection rates skyrocketed during the main vaccination phase, then halved when vaccinating half the placebo group. And plummeted to rates typical of sexual spread once the trial ended. Analyzing the annual change in infection, the 3,700% increase coinciding with the onset of mass vaccination in 1978 far exceeds any recognized rate of sexual transmission[4.03].
At one point the CDC actually did begin disclosing infection rates broken down by doses versus placebo, necessary to prove transmission. They revealed the 42% HIV infection rate applied only to those who received three or more doses, compared to 9% among those who received only the placebo[4.15].
Amidst accusations, the CDC halted publishing the remaining results, claiming the manufacturing process would have killed the virus anyway, waving it off as a fluke that participants became infected with a chimpanzee virus at the precise moment they were injecting them with chimpanzee blood[4.22].
Yet, striking correlations appeared everywhere chimpanzee based vaccines were given. The HIV+ Blood Samples Tab lists all known human tissue and blood samples infected with the AIDS virus collected before the virus began to spread extensively in 1981.
No positive samples were ever collected before the 1958 vaccine, and no positive samples were collected outside Central Africa until lot 751 arrived.
This precisely maps every sample as of 1981. As the trial ended in 1982 the yet unknown virus was silently spreading while many more cases appeared at the trial sites.
That same year Lot 751 was briefly trialed in Eastern China, followed by an unexplained 10% infection rate[5.03,5.04].
In 1983 the virus was isolated, and the CDC began revealing the infection rates. Following these events, chimpanzee-based vaccines were never used except in black communities in Southern Africa, later hit hard by AIDS[6.08,6.24,6.12].
Freedom of Information Request
No legitimate scientists would deny that in a properly conducted trial like the one the CDC performed, an infection rate of 42% among vaccine recipients vs 9% among placebo is clear evidence of transmission. However, scientists refuse to consider the possibly on the grounds that the CDC only released partial results, clinging to the belief the remaining withheld results must provide a benign explanation. Yet, for 40 years, no scientist has requested the full results from the CDC.
Thus I filed Freedom of Information Request ID 24-00408 with the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for the release of the remaining Lot 751 trial results. Should the CDC comply, the âconspiracy theoryâ will be resolved in March 2024.
p2
Significant for todayâs polarized debate
If the AIDS origin âconspiracy theoryâ is proven true, it would profoundly impact todayâs debates on pandemics, censorship, and captured public agencies serving corporate interests.
The man accused of genocide in South Africa was recently acquitted in 2019. He is still practicing medicine to this day, to the outrage of alleged victims demanding prosecutors appeal. Yet prosecutors cite their lack of hard evidence, the quest for which is the sole topic of this video. Yet YouTube banned it and denied my appeal even after showing a human reviewer that it clearly does not even mention an approved vaccine, let alone one currently administered, only referring to an experimental chimpanzee-blood concoction, and the only information cited comes directly from government sources. YouTube claims it âposes a serious risk of egregious harm by spreading medical misinformation about currently administered vaccines that are approved and confirmed to be safe and effective by local health authorities and by the World Health Organization (WHO)â.
The allegation of genocide through weaponized vaccines is grave, and credible enough to warrant a formal trial. Yet even a respectful scientific inquiry of the evidence needed is censored, presumably over concerns it might offend pharma sponsors. Similarly, in the 1990âs, scientists eviscerated the censorship regime for blocking their attempts to express their fears a vaccine had been transmitting AIDS. And labs were unwilling to test vaccines for HIV contamination to the potential fallout from government and pharma.
If the remaining Lot 751 trial results prove transmission, It would mean US officials, the scientific community, mainstream media and big tech chose to censor the debate, preferring to facilitate racial purging than offend corporate benefactors. It would mean likely millions died as a result of captured government agencies and mainstream media helping a generous advertising sponsor conceal the use of their product for racial purging.
Today, the COVID pandemic polarized the public, creating a chasm between the âconspiracy theoristsâ who believe captured health officials exploited, if not created, the pandemic on behalf of profiteering corporate interests vs the âcredulistsâ who believe well-meaning health officials did their best to protect the public from an unexpected natural disaster. Sadly, this divide cannot be bridged as there remain many unknowns with COVID origins and Chinese officials will likely never release all the Wuhan lab data. Further, alleged COVID vaccine harms are difficult to measure as the vaccines were deployed during the pandemic, and the alleged 1 in 500-1,000 rate of adverse reactions is subtle.
By contrast, Lot 751 aids transmission is clear cut. If the government complies with the FOIA and reveals the infection rate among the full placebo group was significantly less than the vaccine recipients, the debate is indisputably resolved. âCredulistsâ would never again accuse âconspiracy theoristsâ of crazy talk about health agency corruption. And, if Lot 751 was transmitting the AIDS virus as part of the World Health Organizationâs vaccination program for black communities in Africa, it would doom their call for unprecedented authority over pandemic response.
Thus the full Lot 751 trial data is pivotal, and if the CDC defies its legal obligation to disclose it, we come together to support a whistleblower willing to come forward.
Why a vaccine from chimp blood?
For background, Merck vaccine inventor Dr. Paul Offit acknowledged the vaccine was made from blood that was heavily contaminated with HIV at a time before Merck could test whether the virus in the vaccine had been inactivated[7.11]. Since hepatitis b could be transmitted orally as well as sexually, the first experimental version was made by feeding mentally disabled children chocolate milk containing feces to stimulate the production of hepatitis antigens[3.02], the vaccineâs active ingredient. The WHO wrote of that approach.
It is currently not possible to collect and process sufficient quantities of plasma to conduct mass immunization campaigns[3.13, 3.14].
p3
In other words, itâd be too expensive to get enough people to drink number two to become a vaccine ingredient. However, they found a solution:
Human hepatitis virus has been successfully transmitted to chimpanzees. Their antigens are âindistinguishableâ from man.
The CDC and FDA both extracted antigens from chimpanzees to amass plasma pools for vaccine experiments[3.18,3.19]. Dozens of experimental vaccines were made. The FDA expressly stated its vaccine âwas obtained from the plasma of a chimpanzeeâ. In 1975 Merck's vaccine head wrote they were âsafe and suitable for clinical trials in manâ[3.31]. A few months later, Dr. Prince, working out of the nation's largest chimpanzee facility, prepared the chimpanzee antigens his patent describes as the first example of a human vaccine made from chimpanzee blood[3.28, 4.04]. Take note the chimpanzeesâ antigens were subtype adw, whereas those from the childrenâs blood were ayw.
The WHO published guidelines for trials using âsimilar preparationsâ for medical staff and young male homosexuals. Per the trial documents:
Two lots of the Merck vaccine⌠are being used. Subtype adw Lot 751 in the homosexual trial and subtype ayw Lot 761 in the medical staff trial.[4.05]
Thus, heterosexuals dodged a bullet getting injected with the blood from children forced to eat feces while homosexuals weren't so lucky, getting injected with chimpanzee blood HIV[4.06, 4.08].
Thus if the manufacturing process did not perfectly inactivate this virus they didn't even know was in there, Lot 751 would have mass introduced new strains into the gay community in New York and California when clinical trials began in 1978. The scientific papers that purportedly exonerate the vaccine, indeed show 8 new HIV strains appeared out of nowhere in the gay community in New York and California in 1978, with no HIV in the Americas prior[7.21].
On March 12,1983 officials confirmed AIDS had emerged during the trials and that infected participants had received vaccine, not placebo[4.10]. But just six months prior the New York Times reported the vaccine was a success, with scientists praising it as:
A truly remarkable achievement, a way the chimps pay their dues to a society that is saving them from extinction.
The journalist concurred:
Given the prevalence of hepatitis B it is difficult to say that chimps should not have been used in the development of a vaccine. [4.26]
Scientists absurd defense
The proof of a coverup is evident in the scientific papers that officials assert vindicate the vaccine[7.21, 7.22]. Michael Worobey, the lead author and the scientist who âprovedâ that the Coronavirus didn't originate from the Wuhan lab, offers this scientific explanation for the appearance of those 8 new HIV variants precisely when and where mass vaccination began:
The extensive genetic diversity in New York in 1978 can be explained, ONLY, by several years of circulation of the virus before. The virus likely moved from Africa to Haiti in or around 1966 and then spread there for some years. Our results suggest that HIV-1 circulated, CRYPTICALLY, in the United States for 12 years before the recognition of AIDS in 1981.
p4
That's the only explanation? The explosive emergence in 1978 among gay men in New York and California cannot also be explained by his colleagues injecting those same men, that same year, in those same cities with chimpanzee blood precisely at the moment they became infected with that chimpanzee virus? Like so many scientific papers, Worobey began with the conclusion he needed to reach, then worked backward to construct an absurd scenario he knew couldnât possibly be correct.
The CDC already said the earliest possible infection was 1977. Besides, during the 1960s and 1970s Haiti was a major blood donor to the U.S., donating the equivalent of a swimming pool each year[7.23]. Yet not one of the tens of millions of Americans who received blood transfusions every year contracted the virus before the vaccine trial. He bases his claim that the virus came from Haiti solely on the discovery in the 1980âs that among tens of thousands of infected Americans they found five who had immigrated from Haiti the prior decade. Scientists have the audacity to say my argument is âcoincidenceâ and this is âdirect empirical evidenceâ. The paper itself calls this conjecture âcryptic' because it is contradicted by every piece of empirical evidence.
If the papers were intellectually honest, they would have compared the 8 new HIV-1 strains found in 1978 to whatever strains were in Lot 751 and in the source blood used to make it. After all, the CDC confirmed formalin at 0.1% cannot kill the AIDS virus[4.32], therefore, itâs reasonable Lot 751 may have had the virus in it since Merck only used 1/10th the concentration to kill any unknown viruses. However, the scientists only compared HIV-1 to the virus in wild chimpanzees in Africa, and determined HIV-1 in humans was sufficiently different from its closest relative in chimpanzees (SIVcpzptt) that it must have evolved for some years. An honest evaluation would analyze the virus in Lot 751 and the chimpanzee blood used to make it, since itâs possible the virus had evolved in the chimpanzees as well, and the chimpanzees at LEMSIP may have carried a variant of SIVcpz even more closely related to the 8 new HIV-1 strains found among the men who received Lot 751. The papers pretend like Lot 751 didnât exist and never mention it, yet these same papers are credited with exonerating Lot 751.
This would settle the 1958 OPV transmission theory
These same papers are also used to debunk accusations that HIVâs first appearance arose from a 1958 oral polio vaccine used in Kinshasa, Congo. It is public record that Wistar manufactured an oral polio vaccine made by growing the virus on monkey kidneys. The vaccine was tested on hundreds of chimpanzees at Camp Lindi, near their laboratory in Kisangani, Congo. A detailed schedule of doses and vaccination sites was published in the British Medical Journal. Notably, all official vaccination sites with the monkey-based vaccine were in Eastern Congo, with no mention of administering a vaccine in Western Congo, which became the epicenter for the AIDS outbreak, with all early HIV positive samples originating in Kinshasa.
The documentary âThe Origin of AIDSâ interviewed the local staff who confirmed that after they had finished testing the US-made vaccine on the chimpanzees at Camp Lindi, when it came time to euthanize them, they extracted the chimpanzee kidneys to produce local batches of vaccine. The locally-produced version made of chimpanzee kidneys appears to be what was administered in Kinshasa.
p5
As always, the strongest evidence comes from the scientists armed with the knowledge and resources to definitively refute the theory who instead had to resort to strawman arguments, circular logic and smoke and mirrors.
First, the scientists involved were caught red handed mutilating a freshly deceased AIDS patient to pass off blood and tissue samples as the ancient remains of David Carr[7.05]. DNA testing exposed the switcheroo.
Second, Dr. Bill Hamilton arranged an expedition to Kisingani, Congo to retrieve the ancient tissue samples from the lab in January, 2000. He was accompanied by Michael Worobey. In March, 2000 Dr. Hamilton arranged a conference at the Royal Society to present his findings. He was found dead a couple weeks prior. Days later, Dr. Anthony Fauci told the New York Times he would take over the investigation, conceding if the samples were made from chimpanzees it was âan open and shut caseâ that AIDS originated from the vaccine[7.14]. However, the samples Dr. Fauci submitted for testing were not the ones Drs. Hamilton and Worobey had just retrieved from the Congo, but rather samples of the original version made in the US from Rhesus monkeys[2.16]. In later interviews Dr. Worobey gave cryptic answers to questions about what he found in the lab basement, claiming he wasnât looking for any polio vaccine samples[7.13,7.17]. This is demonstrably absurd as the point of the trip was to prove whether the polio vaccine transmitted the virus, and the only definitive evidence would be testing the ancient vaccine samples.
Instead, Dr. Worobey produced a paper in Nature magazine that falsely paraphrased the AIDS OPV theory Dr. Hamilton proposed as that the PTS sub-species of chimpanzee was used to make the vaccine[7.18]. Dr. Worobey points out HIV-1 originated from the PTT sub-species found on the other side of the Congo River Basin. This was an egregious strawman argument as the citations Dr. Worobey purportedly refutes clearly stated that vaccine was made using kidneys of chimpanzees collected from all over the Congo, including the PTT.
Later, Dr. Worobey produced papers using the molecular clock argument. Itâs a matter of record all early HIV positive blood samples were collected in and around Kinshasa, Congo for a decade, with no significant spread outside the area until Lot 751 arrived in the US[7.19]. Yet, Dr. Worobeyâs papers assert the only explanation for the explosive appearance of HIV following the 1958 polio vaccine and 1976 hepatitis vaccine is that it had been spreading and evolving.
Thus, proving the 1976 vaccine indeed introduced HIV to the US gay community will resolve the 1958 OPV theory as well, showing that the arguments advanced by Worobey et al are meritless.
Continued use of Lot 751 in Africa post AIDS discovery
If Lot 751 inadvertently transmitted AIDS to Americaâs gay community, the events of 1983 mark the most sinister turn because officials werenât just covering up a past accident, but helping Merck sell the remaining Lot 751 to South Africaâs apartheid regime after AIDS transmission had been proven. Following the gay trials, the CDC confirmed:
Many individuals have been reluctant to be immunized for fear of contracting AIDS. [4.22]
The CDC provided assurances the commercial vaccine sold under the brand name Heptavax was derived from human blood and screened for HIV, concluding:
These observations clearly demonstrate that vaccination with the currently available hepatitis B vaccine poses no demonstrable risk for acquiring AIDS.
However, after these events white apartheid-era scientists in South Africa expressly sought, just for black subjects, not the commercial version, but âMerck Heptavax lot 751â[6.08,6.24]. Calling it âHeptavaxâ was a lie as that was the brand name of the FDA-approved version made from human blood that everybody who was NOT a black subject in Africa had already been getting for years.
p6
The scientific papers state:
The Merck vaccine has not been tested in, BLACK, infants in rural African areas, where it is most needed.[6.24]
No motive is stated for expressly seeking the experimental chimpanzee-blood version given to gay men the prior decade. Notably a colleague of the scientists at the Pretoria University Hospital was Dr. Wout
The South African trials began among the Swazi. Pre-vaccination blood samples were collected, all HIV negative. However, post-vaccination, 40% of the Swazi ultimately tested HIV positive[6.12]. The rollout of Lot 751 continued across the region. Nearly a decade after AIDS outbreaks kept following, the WHO still commended the 'highly motivated' apartheid regime for their 'enthusiastic support' in initiating yet another vaccination campaign with this same vaccine in Venda, yet another exclusively black community[6.23]. Prior to this, Venda had been the least affected by HIV, but following the arrival of the white savior[6.22], Vendaâs luck had run out.[6.21]
South Africa reported its first case only in 1982, brought by a gay man who had visited the U.S.[6.26] For the first five years, the virus spread solely within South Africa's gay community, not affecting the heterosexual black population until they received mass vaccinations with Lot 751[6.07]. In the Congo, where HIV first emerged decades earlier I find no mention of Lot 751, nor was there ever a surge in infections[6.27]. HIV barely spread to the north, where I also find no mention of Lot 751. Instead, its spread was only pronounced to the south, where the only lot I find mentioned until the 1990âs was 751.
I have challenged scientists to find one instance after 1983 that the experimental chimpanzee blood version was ever tested for HIV or administered anywhere BUT exclusively black communities in Sub-Saharan Africa. Or find one time that Lot 751 was given to a large group that did not suffer a massive AIDS outbreak later. During the gay trials it was also trialed briefly on villages in Eastern China in 1982. They have nothing in common other than receiving lot 751 and a few years later they too suffered an unexplainable AIDS outbreak that left scientists baffled[5.03,5.04].
Whistleblowers dismissed
Whistleblowers who admitted to working in apartheid-funded clinics, intentionally administering HIV-contaminated vaccines, were labeled conspiracy theorists, as if they had some reason to falsely confess to murder[8.03]. In the 1990s, doctors reported cases where babies born HIV-negative tested positive by age two, with vaccination as their only medical intervention. However, institutions refused to consider anything but sexual transmission[6.16]. Anomalies in laboratory tests of newly infected Africans concluded[6.18]:
Blood-borne transmission likely accounts for a large majority of HIV infections in Africa.
Despite these concerns, no laboratory was willing to test vaccines for HIV contamination according to Oxford Professor Bill Hamilton[7.24]. He wrote that laboratories feared losing government and pharmaceutical funding if they found HIV in a vaccine. He also mentioned his inability to persuade scientific journals to publish his findings linking vaccines to HIV:
Is there a possibility scientists simply don't want to know, donât want to accept perhaps, at least the moral if not the legal liability for what has been done, for the AIDS virus?
I feel that this is so and it is one of the most worrying aspects of the case. I feel it is not only the origin of AIDS that is in question. It is the conduct of science. There seems to be a great reluctance to publish anything about it, or to test any of the evidence that could be tested. To have to admit that this even might have happened, let alone that it actually did happen.
Dr. Hamilton said that while scientists privately acknowledged he might be right, nobody would dare say it out loud:
The scientific world has dealt with this hypothesis with personal attack, with refusal to discuss or publish, with libel suits and threats. But almost never with science.
A fair analysis of other pandemic âconspiracy theoriesâ
Five pandemics are blamed on science gone awry. All are dismissed by the scientific community as âconspiracy theoriesâ without a fair analysis. However, if the greatest of all conspiracy theories is proven, hopefully the others can be evaluated with an open mind.
p7
Spanish Flu differed from other influenza epidemics in that it killed largely soldiers, and affected less young and old civilians. While that is blamed on the conditions soldiers endured, its curious that the first Spanish Flu case was in Fort Riley, Kansas, where soldiersânot in soldiers living in horrific trenches overseas. Fort Riley was the base where the US military was testing various horse serum vaccines to protect against bacterial infections. So, âconspiracy theoristsâ suspected a connection, which grew stronger decades later when preserved remains were tested and scientists confirmed a bacterial infection likely caused the death more than the influenza virus. Therefore, thereâs speculation that the experimental vaccines tested at Fort Riley and likely deployed to allied troops worldwide may have introduced some type of bacterial co-infection that caused the influenza to especially deadly in soldiers. Of the 5 theories, this is the most speculative, with no clear evidence.
The 1977 Russian Flu was widely considered a lab leak by many scientists. The WHO claims that was not a possibility, however, the WHO said the same of the Wuhan Coronavirus Lab Leak without visiting the lab and letting the man accused of causing it lead the investigation into his own actions.2
AIDS is well documented here
The âproximal originsâ authors who exonerated the Wuhan Lab, Kristian Andersen and Robert Gerry, also exonerated their own lab in Sierra Leone, Africa, claiming the worst Ebola outbreak was caused by a young boy playing in a bat-infested tree. However, the boyâs father said he died at 18 months, had never visited the tree, which tree officials tested and found no trace of Ebola. Therefore, many argue âPatient zeroâ was actually someone living next to the Andersen/Gerry lab where they did risky Ebola experiments using only gloves and masks for protection.34 This was also the subject of another Substack post, which covers both Ebola and the first SARS outbreak.
COVID, of course, was blamed from the very beginning on a mishap at the Wuhan lab, and is the subject of my substack post "Lab Leaks for Dummies".
Call to action
The most important action now is to raise awareness so the CDC cannot get away with responding to the Freedom of Information Request with âno matching recordsâ, and sweep it under the rug. Clearly they have the full trial results, and scientists have confirmed it.
If the CDC refuses to comply, then we need to consider either legal action to compel the CDC to honor disclosure laws, and/or sufficiently incentivize a whistleblower to come forward, perhaps with a legal defense fund, and/or relocation costs to start a new life in exile given the scandal such a disclosure would cause. Remember, the US Government intercepted the Ecuadorian presidentâs plane to search for Edward Snowdenâand that related to his leak about the NSA getting our phone records. Itâs reasonable potential whistleblowers would fear significant blowback for leaking something of this magnitude.
If you are a potential whistleblower, or willing to support the cause, please email: info@factmission.org Fact Mission is non-profit, and the only mission is getting the truth.
1
Samples from 13,000 men were collected by Wolf Szmuness in New York starting in 1974, appear to have been entirely collected before the first vaccinations, and in an interview with June Goodfield confirmed the blood had been kept archived. Additionally, ~7,000 menâs samples were collected in San Francisco for pre-screening. The year of collection was not provided, and some may have been collected after the 200 New York volunteers were vaccinated in 1977. However, the papers report testing of many of the samples, and the earliest confirmed HIV+ sample in the gay community was collected in 1978, and per the CDC Rutherford paper, the earliest seroconversion was estimated to be in 1977. Thus at least 13,000 samples were likely collected before the first vaccination, later tested, and no HIV+ samples were found to have been collected prior to the first vaccination.
2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_Russian_flu
3
https://usrtk.org/ebola/ebola-outbreak-origins/
4
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/did-west-africas-ebola-outbreak-2014-have-lab-origin-latham-phd?trk=public_profile_article_view
8 of 8
Disturbing data from the CDC: the origin of AIDS might finally be revealed in March, 2024. BUN
well known and highly trafficked site. These are not death toll numbers but obituary numbers. not everyone gets an obituary, anon's mom as exampleâŚ