PEOPLE WHO TOOK mRNA QUACKCINES ARE GENETICALLY ALTERED ORGANISMS
Today's story is short, but it is a whopper doozie, and I simply have to blog about it because of its implications. Many regular readers who have followed this website for a number of years will know that one of my "pet peeves" is the whole genetically modified organism and food claims put forward by what I like to call I.G. Farbensanto, my nickname for "Big Argiculture" and its claims for GMO foods and seeds, the chief offender on most people's radar being, of course, the Mon(ster)santo firm. You'll recall it was bought out a few years ago by the even bigger German Big agriculture firm of Bayer, which of course was one of the "component" companies of the even bigger, gargantuan German chemicals cartel of I.G. Farben, which included other "smaller" companies like BASF (Bayrische Analin und Sodafabrik).
One of the things that other researchers into the GMO phenomenon quickly discovered was that the whole thing was a scam, a scam designed around patents, and a scam enabled by an all-too-bought-and-paid-for federal bureacracy called the Food and Drug Administration, the regulatory agency that supposedly is to oversee the nations drug and food supply, and certify its safety. These researchers quickly discovered the fact that the personnel of the Food and Drug Administration often came from, and returned to, the very chemical and agricultural companies they were supposed to oversee (no conflict of interest there)! As a result, when the time came to approve the new GMO seeds, seeds that had been genetically altered to survive the most potent pesticides (like Mon[ster]santo's "Roundup" and pesticides contained glyphosate) and which supposedly increased yields, but which would not reproduce - yes, you read that correctly - the GMO were approved as fit for human consumption under the corporately-sponsored and elaborated doctrine of "substantial equivalence," and this in spite of the fact that the seeds and their environmental and human health impacts had never undergone multigenerational testing.
The doctrine of substantial equivalence held that, for purposes of human (and animal) nutrition and health, such genetically modified crops were equivalent in substance to the non-genetically altered equivalent: GMO corn or wheat or oats or whatever was "just the same" as non-GMO corn or wheat or oats: it was :"equivalent nutritionally" and thus "substantially." The only point at which they were not equivalent was in law, for the GMO foods were patented, since they could not naturally occur in nature. And this meant that they were property, and that to produce them, you had to buy them from the seed companies selling them, and woe to you if a bird should drop such a seed on your fields, and it grow on your field, without the license from the company selling it to do so. Mon(ster)santo bacame infamous for literally sending out spies to "catch" farmers in the act of growing such seeds, and suing them. And the nifty thing about the GMO seeds was, they did not reproduce: a farmer could not store a certain amount of his harvested crops for replanting the following year, as they could with ordinal natural, or "heirloom" seeds. They always had to return to the seller of the patented seeds.
This this juncture in the story a new development occurred, one directly relevant to today's story and its accompanying high octane speculation. As the concerns about genetically modified food grew, and corporations asserted their ownership of the genetic modifications, some people began to advance a theory: what if eating the genetically modified foods started causing genetic modifications in the people and animals consuming them? "Nonsense!" was the initial answer from various quarters of scientism; one doesn't turn into a pig or a tomato by consuming bacon and tomato sandwiches. The argument seemed dead and forgotten until a few rarely mentioned studies were done that did indicate small genetic modifications were resulting in populations constantly consuming GMOs.
Now this is where it gets interesting, because part of the concerns at that time were whether or not such modifications, the result of consuming patented products, meant that the modification in the consumer also "belonged" to the corporation owning the patent. Long after this issue hit the GMO world (about a decade, actually), we had the covid planscamdemic, and the mRNA quackcines, which some (including this author) refused to take for fear that the potion would create unknown or unanticipated genetic developments in those receiving it: with the potential of a similar sort of "patent lien" being exercised against the individual should modifications show up that would not otherwise naturally occur without the mediation and intervention of man. That principle lies at the core of patent law.
Well, according to this study from Slovakia shared by V.T., that is exactly what is showing up:
Note carefully and closely what the transcript states:
"My primary task is to uphold the Constitution, and as a doctor, I have the duty and the right to protect the health of Slovak citizens. Yesterday, I also informed the U.S. Minister of Health and Human Services by letter, Mr. Robert Kennedy Jr., who confirmed receipt.
Furthermore, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Kash Patel and Pamela Bondi, the U.S. Attorney General, were also informed.
"34 batches from Pfizer and Moderna have been analyzed so far, which were stored according to the proper cold chain and only those that were used for the Slovak population during the COVID-19 epidemic. Today, I will present the most significant result of the analysis. "
" The results of the analysis of all, I repeat, all analyzed batches proved that in every single vial, there is an extremely high amount of DNA, a vector that encodes the cassette for the synthesis of the S-protein, if not other proteins as well. Almost in the same amount as mRNA, DNA is also present there. In three cases, the DNA content is even higher than the mRNA.
This can no longer even be considered an mRNA vaccine.
This genetic code for the synthesis of the S-protein, this information stored in this DNA, is stable compared to mRNA, can integrate into human nuclear DNA, and subsequently, such a human organism becomes—I’m not afraid to say officially— a genetically modified organism."
And there you have it: the mRNA potions alter the genetic composition of the individual - dare we say, the victim? - receiving it. All of those speculations first voiced regarding GMO crops and foods are now recurring with even greater force as a result of the covid planscamdemic and the related injections (I refuse to call them "vaccines" because you'll recall they even had to modify the dictionary definition of the word to get the injections "accepted" as "vaccines." In other words, they lied.)
At this point, a number of disconcerting questions occur: (1) did the companies producing or manufacturing the mRNA potions know that such modifications would result? (2) were all the batches everywhere entirely the same recipe? or were differing amounts, or even differing ingredients, used in specific batches, and if so, for what purpose? (3) if such modifications were known or suspected results, then were those results deliberately sought? If so, what was the purpose of the modifications?
And most importantly: were the same purposes ultimately behind both the injections of the covid potions, and the development of GMOs? If so, then is there any personnel overlap in the development of both?
Obviously I do not know the answer to these questions. But it is the questions themselves that need to be asked, and I see few people asking them. After all, the best way to avoid answers to questions is by not asking the question in the first place.
And as of this writing, notably, not one person has been sued, or gone to jail, over the many horrific results of the potion injections. Not one. Why? Because the potion developers have more immunity (legally) than anything their potions provided.
See you on the flip side...
(If you enjoyed today's blog, please share it with your friends.)
No comments:
Post a Comment