by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News:
Continuing my “greatest COVID hits” articles. To read my introduction to this ongoing series, go here. To support my work and get value for value, order My Matrix Collections here and subscribe to my substack here.
February 26, 2020
“When gigantic mega-corporations steal land from Third World people and then poison these people with horrific pollution, why isn’t it called murder? Is that too stark? Does it offend delicate sensibilities? Would you say that a drug gang who shoots up a bar and kills ten innocent bystanders is just carrying out ‘typical business practices in their field of endeavor’, and should therefore never be prosecuted in a court of law on a charge of homicide?” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
—This article assembles facts contained in my ongoing series on the “China epidemic.” To get the details, I recommend going back and reading all those articles (archive here).
If a group wants to stage a fake and frightening epidemic, how would they do it?
First of all, what reasons would they have to launch such an audacious plan?
On one level, they want to cover up human harm that is already occurring. They want to explain this harm with a false story. For example, suppose a combination of deadly corporate air and water and 5G* electronic pollution is making people sick and killing them. The parties responsible are surely not going to admit their crimes. No. Instead, they’re going to claim a new virus is causing this harm in the form of, say, lung disease. The virus just “emerged.” “It showed up out of nowhere. It crossed species from animals to humans.”
So…the first thing needed is a cluster of cases in one locale. A small group of people who have the same symptoms. This is easy to find. How about ordinary flu symptoms? Fever, fatigue, weakness, with an emphasis on lung complications [from the forms of pollution]. A few of these people are very ill. Two of them die. Now, the publicity/news machine swings into gear.
It’s called an “outbreak.” It isn’t, but that’s the story. “They were all ‘exposed to something’” at, say, a riverfront dock restaurant.
The news—shoveled directly into mainstream outlets—comes from elite public health agencies like the CDC and the World Health Organization (WHO).
It’s an OUTBREAK.
To use a technical term, this is all BULLSHIT. Understand? People in the locale of the “new case cluster” are falling ill and dying as a result of the actual pollution-causes I listed above. But the news takes a different slant: “Researchers from WHO and CDC state that a ‘mystery illness’ has emerged in City X, and they are working to discover the virus…”
Who said it was a virus? Who made that unwarranted assumption? WHO and CDC. They always say it’s a virus.
At this point, suddenly, it’s news all over the planet, and most of the population is roped in, right from the get-go. Virus. Yes. I see. Which virus?
And shortly and miraculously, the answer comes: it’s VX-20. A new virus, never seen before, “which probably emerged from fish and crossed over into humans. One fisherman has already died.”
Voila. We have a new disease. VX-20.
Next question: did researchers actually find this virus? Did they?
Follow the next piece closely. There is sleight-of-hand involved.
One scenario: Researchers used what are called “indirect markers” to INFER that a new virus was there, in samples of tissue taken from several people in the original “cluster” of riverfront victims.
The researchers didn’t actually use basic procedures to purify the tissue sample from even one patient, and they didn’t see MANY identical viruses in an electron microscope photograph of the purified sample—if they took such a photograph at all. They certainly didn’t perform this complete test on several hundred emerging patients—they should have, but they didn’t. And most certainly, other researchers, including INDEPENDENT analysts, didn’t perform the necessary electron microscope test on hundreds of so-called “epidemic patients.”
So…the CDC and WHO researchers came up with a notion, an idea, an inference about a virus, through these indirect markers. And via a process of continuing inferences, they characterized the virus they never saw.
Scenario two: Let’s be generous and assume the researchers did bother to look at electron microscope photos, derived from only a few patients, not hundreds of patients, as they should have. What did they actually see in the photos? Maybe they saw a few particles that looked similar to each other, BUT quite possibly these virus-like particles were just passengers that ordinarily live in the body and cause no harm. However, the researchers jump up and down and say, THIS IS IT. THIS IS THE NEW KILLING VIRUS. AND WE WILL NOW ASSEMBLE ITS GENETIC SEQUENCE.
AND THEY DO.
So what? These researchers don’t bother to make the distinction between viruses that might do harm and those that do nothing. Why? Because they’re determined to find something. Anything. That’s their basic mission.
In both scenarios, they’ve fallen woefully short of proving that a new virus is responsible for making people ill.
But never mind—news outlets and governments are already on the march. THIS IS IT. A new epidemic. VX-20. A whole city is already locked down. Screeners are waving wands at passengers getting off planes. Some US talking head is saying there is now a rush to develop a vaccine. New cases of VX-20 are showing up in other cities and other countries. Boom.
Let’s examine that last part, about new cases and “spreading”— because this is where people REALLY fall for the con. They say: “Well, here is a city where there is no air or water or 5G pollution, and they’re discovering new cases, so how do you explain that?”
The new cases and the spread are based entirely on DIAGNOSTIC TESTS. Those test-results determine whether there is an “epidemic case” or a “spread.”
There are two main tests: antibody and PCR. In a nutshell, neither test is adequate to say HERE IS A NEW CASE. Both tests are unreliable and worthless. It’s more of the con. Both tests will claim to show “new cases” when they DON’T. They might show some antibodies or a few tiny fragments of what might possibly be a virus, but they show NOTHING that directly points to human illness. Relying on those tests would be on the order of laying down a bet on a game that isn’t even scheduled. It’s a farce.
