8 Comments

What a pic to end it on: Jonestown? Brilliant, sir!

Expand full comment

Charles, your article prompted me to listen once again to David Martin's Corona Investigative Committee testimony from July 9, 2001. His presentation is a potent labyrinth of scientific and patent data that is a challenge in and of itself to fully untangle and comprehend. Revisiting his complete testimony after a couple of years of being mired in and saturated with all the COVID-19 muck allowed me to listen with "fresh ears" and better appreciate the alarming and practically incomprehensible nuances he exposes. It's left me to conclude "the virus," "the vaccine" and the coronavirus bioweapon are all just one in the same. Martin says what we have is "millions of people being injected with a pathogen-stimulating computer sequence which is being sold under what the patent office, medical profession and FDA, in its own clinical standards, would not be considered a vaccine…we are now subjecting hundreds of millions of people to what was known to be, by 2005, a bioweapon."

Dr. Martin presents exhaustive evidence contained in patents, patent applications, federal grants, procurement records, e-government records, etc., that shines a light on the CDC's criminal conspiracy and racketeering activities from 4/28/2003. He repeatedly shows how patent timelines of supposed treatments for a pathogen either precede the alleged discovery of the pathogen itself, or as in the case of Sequoia Pharmaceuticals, them filing a patent for antiviral agents for the treatment and control of infections by coronavirus a mere three days after the CDC filed a patent for all things associated with the coronavirus pathogen as well as the RTPCR method for its detection. He asks, "How do you have a patent for a treatment for something invented three days earlier?"

Dr. Martin says the "RICO pattern established 4/28/2003 for the first coronavirus was played out to exactly the same schedule where we see SARS-CoV-2 show up when we have Moderna getting spike protein sequences by phone from the Vaccine Research Center at NIAID prior to the definition of the [supposed] novel subclade. How do you treat a thing before you actually have the thing?" He goes on to say, "It's clear Moderna knew it was going to be placed in the front of the line with respect to the development of a vaccine in March 2019, because in March 2019, Moderna suddenly amended a series of patent filings (a bizarre behavior) to specifically make references to an intentional or accidental release, or 'deliberate release ' to use their terminology, of coronavirus."

Dr. Martin states he'll always refer to the COVID-19 pandemic as an "alleged outbreak," because "Coronavirus as a circulating pathogen inside the viral model we have is not new to the human condition for the last two decades. It's been part of a sequence of proteins circulating for a long time…"

Martin says from "2016 to 2019 at every one of the NIAID Advisory Council board meetings Fauci lamented the fact that they had been unable to get the public to accept a universal influenza vaccine" and how the Global Preparedness Board declared there must be a "coordinated global experience of a respiratory pathogen release [along with its associated vaccine] completed by September 2020." Peter Daszak of Eco Health Alliance furthered the proof of premeditation for intentional release with his public statement in 2015 about increasing the public's understanding for the need of medical countermeasures for a pan-coronavirus vaccine with a key driver being the media, how economics would follow the hype and the hype would be used to the advantage of investors who would respond if they saw profit.

In trying to synthesize the hour and nineteen minutes of Dr. Martin's testimony, all of which has been obtained from public records and never received a request for retraction or correction, I've become convinced the cover story for the alleged outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan, China, could have been initiated by either the administration of a toxic chemical such as Remdesivir to severely sicken and rapidly kill people, as you, Charles, theorize, or by the release of one of the "countless subtle modifications of [coronavirus'] gene sequences [made] over the past twenty years." I believe the Wuhan Institute of Virology, or any other such lab around the world worth its salt, could have duplicated any scourge pathogen computer code they wanted to and released it upon a population. To me, there was never a "virus" or a "vaccine," but just a longstanding coronavirus bioweapon chameleon dressed up to masquerade as a virus and/or a vaccine.

Thank you, Charles, for your unfailing ability to provoke and incite critical thought and discussion amongst your readers. God Bless!

https://ugetube.com/watch/david-e-martin-testifies-at-the-german-corona-inquiry-committee-july-9th-2021_StPPIUWeina1DCI.html

Expand full comment

Great article Charles, thanks! So much fun reading about CoV. <sarcasm emoji>

Chimeric spike is so bad that the virus isn't really needed to create VAIDS and then any wandering infection might take hold. The jab version of the chimeric spike seems even worse than the original infection version, symptom-wise, to me.

And if the mRNA can transfect cells, why not assume that the chimeric spike might also become added to other virus already present/endemic? or bacteriophage. "The vaccines create the virus." is not that far off from possible I think. We have Roundup Ready super weeds now. I fully expect the @#$%^*&&%%#@ chimeric spike to become part of other species - besides humans.

Expand full comment
Jul 3, 2023·edited Jul 3, 2023Liked by Charles Wright

Damn right. The fucking vaccine created the fucking epidemics.

Simple as that. I wouldn't go as far as saying the vaccines created the virus, but they changed it in ways that allowed it to cause epidemics.

I am onto this. This is what we need to prove.

It's ridiculous how nobody noticed this. Instead all the critics were led into their own delusion of there "being no virus" or the virus not causing disease.

Expand full comment
author

I've read a lot about the "recombinant" virus technology, and that's really what it looks like to me. When you splice 3 pieces of HIV into a cold virus, inject it into people, and they wind up getting it, you have to consider the obvious. I suppose something else could possibly be going on. I suppose I come from the anti-disinformation school of though. Thanks for reading.

Expand full comment

Feel free to point me towards articles.

Expand full comment
author

I wrote this on the Merck HIV trials. https://charleswright1.substack.com/p/was-mercks-hiv-producing-vaccine. It has several articles from that period. Most notably perhaps, from Jon Cohen.

Jon Cohen wrote: Did Merck's Failed HIV Vaccine Cause Harm?

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.318.5853.1048?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed

"AIDS researchers, who are still staggering from the unexpected failure in September of the most promising vaccine candidate in clinical trials, met here last week to explore an even more alarming finding: The vaccine, made by Merck and Co., may actually have increased the risk of HIV infection in some study participants."

Again, it's just how you look at it. If you jab me with HIV and I get HIV, I think the jab did it. Meaning you jabbed me with ingredients necessary to create the virus sequence. But they all use a "risk" analysis. I just think people need to use Occam's Razor, or common sense, or whatever. These complicated explanations are all disinformation. That's the art of disinformation, when you think about it. To not see the obvious.

Today, there is a gigantic increase in SARS2 as we're jabbing the hell out of ourselves? Risk? It's more like, Dear God people, pull your head out of your asses.

Expand full comment

Yeah, very true.

I'm not emotionally invested into any explanation, I just really want to understand this.

Expand full comment