Test for new Omicron variant? We don’t need no stinkin’ test

by Jon Rappoport

December 2, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

This is an article in three layers. I’ve already spelled out the first layer in my current series on the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 (archive: Omicron).

In a nutshell, there is no Omicron because there is no SARS-CoV-2. The “pandemic virus” doesn’t exist. A variation of nothing equals nothing.

However, I often make forays into the bubble-world where most people, including “the experts,” believe the virus is real. I do this to show that, within their world, the experts are constantly lying in their own terms and contradicting themselves.

Within their world, you would think the pros have an easily accessible test to identify the new Omicron variant in thousands or millions of people. Otherwise, how can they claim it’s here and spreading?

But you would be wrong.

And I have the evidence, based on the prior variant, the Delta. That’s level two. I take you there now, with an article I wrote months ago:

—Bombshell: PCR tests can’t identify Delta Variant; it’s all fiction—

Oooo. The Delta Variant. It’s everywhere. (archive: Delta)

Watch out. It’s under your rug. It’s in the clothes closet. It’s on your toothbrush.

And it’s The Unvaccinated who are spreading it. Those devils. We, who are pure, must be protected from the unvaxxed Unclean.

Fauci, god of soccer moms, rises every morning saying DELTA, goes on television saying DELTA, and goes to sleep praying to DELTA.

But read this from the Texas Department of State Health Services FAQ: “How can I tell if I have the Delta variant? Do labs report that to the state?” That information may not be readily available. The [PCR] viral tests that are used to determine if a person has COVID-19 are not designed to tell you what variant is causing the infection. Detecting the Delta variant, or other variants, requires a special type of testing called genomic sequencing. Due to the volume of COVID-19 cases, sequencing is not performed on all viral samples. However, because the Delta variant now accounts for the majority of COVID-19 cases in the United States, there is a strong likelihood that a positive test result indicates infection with the Delta variant.”

Boom.

I can assure you, the number of patients whose samples are genetically sequenced is tiny, contrasted against the number whose samples are simply run through the standard PCR.

So there is no way to know that the Delta variant now accounts for the majority of COVID cases in the US. And using the standard PCR, there is no way to know ANY specific patient has the Delta. It’s all fiction.

We have this from the American Lung Association: “Regular COVID-19 tests do not detect which variant is involved in a patient’s case—that information does not change the approach to care or therapy. The variant identification requires genomic sequencing, a process separate from regular virus tests and one that not all labs are able to do or do not do on a routine basis for patient care but are done more for public health monitoring.”

Let me break down how this game works. To be excessively generous, let’s say that 3 out of every 1000 positive PCR tests in America are sent to high-level labs, where genetic sequencing is done.

A certain percentage of THOSE sequencing tests come up positive for the Delta Variant. Based on these results, MODELS are constructed.

Now we’re REALLY into fake science. The models estimate what percentage of ALL positive PCR tests are really positive for Delta.

I’m sorry to break this newsflash, but modelers are notorious charlatans. Their dense calculations are as far from science as a Model-T Ford is from a spaceship.

But based on models, public health agencies—who desperately needed a new con, because COVID case numbers were declining—blasted through their media assets the new revelation: THE DELTA MONSTER IS LOOSE AMONG US.

But it gets even worse. Why? Because you can bet the farm that the current model pushing the omnipresence of the Delta Variant was never challenged. It was never handed to several groups of independent scientists who went over it with a fine-toothed comb. That’s called verification. That’s called the Scientific Method. You may have heard of it.

The most notorious modeler in the world, Neil Ferguson, of the London Imperial College, bankrolled by Bill Gates, made a prediction early in 2020: by that summer, there would 500,000 COVID deaths in the UK, and 2 million in the US.

It was this absurd prediction, swallowed whole by Boris Johnson, and swallowed whole by Donald Trump, on the urging of Tony Fauci, that led to the original mass lockdowns in US and the UK. And then other nations followed suit.

As my long-time readers know, all this is just the tip of a very large iceberg. For the past year, I’ve been proving the SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t exist, the tests and case numbers are meaningless, and the highly destructive vaccine is unnecessary.

But I make frequent forays into the fantasy world of official science, to illustrate that, even within that lunatic bubble, internal contradictions and outright lies abound.

Here is my original 2020 article on the most famous and celebrated modeler in the world, Neil Ferguson [this is level three]:

—Neil Ferguson: the ghost in the machine—

Why do governments salute when he predicts a pandemic and tells them to lock down their countries?

Does anyone care about his past?

Why does he still have a prestigious job?

Who is he connected to?

Neil Ferguson, through his institute at London’s Imperial College, can call the shots on a major percentage of the global population.

He’s Mr. Genius, when it comes to projecting computer models of epidemics.

Fellow experts puff up his reputation.

According to the Business Insider (4/25/20), “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 simulations have been influential in other countries as well, cited by authorities in the US, Germany, and France.”

Not only cited, not only influential, but swallowed whole.

Business insider continues: “On March 23 [2020], 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.”

There’s more. A lot more.

Same BI article: “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.”

Ferguson, instigator of LOCKDOWNS. Stripping away of basic liberties. Economic devastation.

So let’s look at Ferguson’s funding and track record, spelled out in the Business Insider piece:

“Ferguson co-founded the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, based at Imperial, 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?

Gates money goes to Ferguson.

Ferguson predicts dire threat from COVID, necessitating lockdowns—thus preparing people to accept a vaccine. The vaccine Gates wants.

Ferguson supplies a frightening computer projection of COVID deaths—to the CDC and WHO. Ferguson thus communicates a rationale for the Gates vaccine plan.

National governments surrender to WHO and CDC and order LOCKDOWNS.

Business Insider: “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 [mad cow] 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.”

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

“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.”

So you have to ask yourself, why would anyone believe what Ferguson has been predicting in this COVID hustle?

Are his fellow experts that stupid?

Are presidents and prime ministers that stupid?

And the answer is: This is a monumental covert op; some people are that stupid; some are caught up in the op and are afraid to say the emperor has no clothes; some are aware of what is going on, and they want to destroy national economies and lead us into, yes, a new world order.

Gates knows he has his man: Ferguson. As the recipient of tens of millions of dollars a year from the Gates Foundation, Ferguson isn’t about to issue a model that states: COVID is nothing to worry about, let people live their lives and we’ll be all right. The chance of that happening is on a par with researchers admitting they never actually discovered a new virus as the cause of illness in 2019, in Wuhan.

In order to justify injecting every man, woman, and child in the world with synthetic genes, Gates needs A STORY ABOUT A DEADLY VIRUS THAT NECESSITATES SHUTTING DOWN AND IMPRISONING THE PLANET, ACHIEVING A CAPTIVE AUDIENCE.

He’s got the story, all dressed up in a computer model, composed by a man with a past record of abject and devastating failures.

Neil Ferguson is the ghost in the machine. The machine is the World Health Organization and the CDC. The man behind the ghost is Bill Gates.

—Those are the three layers of this story. Fraud, fraud, and fraud. But don’t worry. Tony Fauci will smooth out the wrinkles and assure us all that we’re on the right track. We just have to destroy the village in order to save it. Piece of cake.


SOURCES:

https://www.dshs.state.tx.us/coronavirus/variant-faqs.aspx

https://www.lung.org/blog/covid-19-delta-variant

https://www.businessinsider.com/neil-ferguson-transformed-uk-covid-response-oxford-challenge-imperial-model-2020-4

Germany’s Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, in every practical sense, were made to make SARS-CoV-2 more infectious and transmissible

Coronaviruses are surrounded by a fatty membrane known as an envelope. In order to gain entry to the inside of the cell, enveloped viruses use spike proteins to fuse their own membrane to that of cells’ and take over the cell. “The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19.” the CDC

Germany’s Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccines give instructions for our cells to make “spike protein” – lots of them.  2nd vaccine forces cells to make more spike protein. The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine uses modified messenger RNA (mRNA).

Specifically, the vaccine contains the mRNA of spike protein, which is located on the surface of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and is what SARS-CoV-2 uses to invade host cells.

Carlos Malvestutto, MD, MPH, who specializes in infectious disease at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center

The WHO, CDC and other health authorities know and have repeatedly stated that the “novel coronavirus uses spike protein like a key to gain entry to our cells; once inside, the virus is free to replicate, making us sick. The spike protein binds to a protein on the surface of our cells called ACE2, triggering uptake of the virus particle and eventually membrane fusion.”

That means Germany’s COVID-19 vaccines were developed to make spike protein and give the SARS-CoV-2 virus the means to invade cells and cause millions of healthy people to become sick.

SARS-CoV-2 can’t invade cells and make us sick without spike (S) protein. Germany’s Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, in every practical sense, were made to make SARS-CoV-2 more infectious and transmissible.

The WHO, CDC, Health Canada  and Germany would have you believe that Germany’s vaccines instructing cells to make SARS-CoV-2’s spike protein is harmless yet they all know SARS-CoV-2 needs the spike protein to invade cells to replicate and make you sick. Furthermore,

mRNAs are created as an exact copy (a clone) of the segment of DNA found along the genome corresponding to a protein-coding gene.

UMass Medical School

“Specifically, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine. The lipid coating of the nanoparticles binds to the cell membrane, facilitating entry of the (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA (genetic material) segment into the cell.” AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE (ASRM).

#COVID-19 #mRNAvaccines #vaccines #WHO #Pfizer-BioNTech #BioNTech #Germany #bioweapons #biologicalwarfare #SARS-CoV-2

Media Stirs Up Omicron Hysteria, Points Finger at Unvaccinated

By Rob Verkerk, Ph.D.

Topline:

  • Lockstep political decision to roll out leaky “vaccines” occurred around the world immediately following the Omicron announcement.
  • Circumstances with a new, heavily mutated variant, vastly different population immunity and knowledge about “genetic vaccine” effectiveness, nothing like those 12 months ago when first generation COVID injections were rolled out globally.
  • Omicron may be more infective, is likely no more dangerous — but may be more likely to evade injection-induced immunity.
  • There is no conclusive evidence that Omicron originated in Africa — which happens to have the lowest injection rate and case rate of COVID-19.
  • Mass injection of first gen injections, followed by re-worked Omicron-specific jabs, could cause disastrous consequences, including accelerating development of further variants and antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of disease.
  • We consider some of the possible political and economic drivers behind the new unscientifically backed policy to up the ante on injections.

No sooner had the Omicron hysteria hit the headlines, politicians, aided by a compliant global lockstep media, started telling the world’s population to prepare to roll up their sleeves.

What’s more, three scapegoats have been identified: the unvaccinated, HIV patients and the least vaccinated continent on the planet: Africa.

One of many similar calls was made in the influential Scientific American magazine by Southampton University public health and vaccine hesitancy researcher, Michael Head Ph.D., not unsurprisingly a Gates Foundation funding recipient.BUY TODAY: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s New Book — ‘The Real Anthony Fauci’

For many in the industrialized world, there is a sense of déjà vu from this time last year — but with a twist.

Last year the population had been primed to expect almost impossibly high levels of protection from infection based on the results of phase 3 clinical trials. Only recently have these trials been brought into question.

Last year, the majority had also bought the line that these new generation “genetic vaccines” would stop transmission and yield herd immunity. The head of the Oxford Vaccine Group, Prof. Andrew Pollard, subsequently told the world that possibility is now “mythical.”

Knowing what they knew then, people flocked to the vaccination centers as the promise being offered was a return to normal life. Only time would tell how misplaced that view was.

This time around things are very different.

The COVID-19 injections have been shown to increasingly fail even with delta, hence the re-casting of the ‘vaccine effectiveness’ correlates from protection against infection now to protection against severe disease.

The indisputable reality is that the COVID-19 injections are “leaky.” The spike-targeting neutralizing IgG antibodies they so readily elicit just don’t neutralize (block) very well so they can’t stop infection or subsequent transmission.

What drives the creation of immune escape variants?

Perceptions among politicians, the public and even scientists as to the main drivers of mutations that can escape the effects of the immune system, whether from naturally-acquired infection or the response generated by injections, differ wildly.

Smack in the middle of this lack of consensus comes Omicron, and a high chance that policies based on one line of thinking will be viewed as counterproductive or even potentially disastrous and life threatening by others.

We’ve reported on the underlying science at length before, and supported the evolutionary arguments elaborated in the public domain by Belgian vaccinologist, Geert Vanden Bossche, VDM, Ph.D., David Lorimer, program director of the Scientific and Medical Network and I have, this week, released a short article that attempts to summarize in layperson’s language the central tenets of Vanden Bossche’s thesis.

The opposing arguments ignore entirely evolutionary pressure and focus on the unvaccinated and the immune compromised as the reservoirs that provide more opportunities to breed mutants.

The logic — at face value — seems reasonable. If the virus is able to replicate more often in people who suffer COVID-19 disease for longer, and people who can’t effectively neutralize the virus, the increased replication increases the probability of mutants emerging.

More rolls of the dice, if you like. The trouble is that this argument is fundamentally flawed for a number of reasons.

We’ve seen previous mutants by and large being generated under high vaccination pressures, with increases in cases being associated with expanding “vaccine” coverage.

Also, clear evidence that the vaccines are increasingly unable to neutralize the virus, especially more recently emerging variants, so being unable to stop transmission while also waning in effectiveness within a few months post-jab.

What’s more, they also interfere with innate immune training which is our primary defence against different variants of this (and other) pathogens and our only means of developing herd immunity given the “leakiness” of the current “genetic vaccines.”

Omicron focus

In a sea of immense uncertainty, one thing that is more or less certain, now that the initial errors in the claimed mutations were corrected, is the 32 spike protein mutations of Omicron.

But it’s not just the, comparatively speaking, high number of significant mutations in the spike protein (Table 1), it’s their potential impacts on both the virus and the human immune systems with which the virus interacts that are key.

It’s of course too early to know exactly what effects these mutations will have on the very diverse and varied populations of humans, and potentially other species if spill-over continues.

Swedish study shows death rate after second COVID injection is 20% higher than normal

According to a 34-page pre-publication on the vaccine’s effectiveness published in The Lancet, 3,939 out of 4.03 million Swedes who received the second dose of a COVID vaccine died in less than two weeks.

According to data from a large Swedish study, people still die weeks after the second dose of COVID vaccine at a rate 20% or more above the normal rate.

The numbers are included in a preprint paper on the vaccine’s effectiveness published last month. The main finding of the study was that protection against COVID, including severe cases, decreased after six months.

The researchers did not explicitly look at the deaths that have increased since the summer in many countries with highly vaccinated populations.

But on page 32 of the 34-page report, a graph shows that 3,939 out of 4.03 million Swedes who received the second dose died less than two weeks later.

Lancet preprint

Over a one-year period, this mortality rate would correspond to an annual mortality rate of about 2.5% – 1 in 40 people – almost three times the overall Swedish average. In a typical year, about 1 in 115 Swedes die.

Of course, this enormous difference does not take into account an important disruptive factor: younger people, who have a much lower risk of death, were vaccinated less frequently.

However, Sweden also provides detailed data on the total number of deaths in the country, allowing a rough comparison of the initial situation.

From this data, it appears that between 2015 and 2019, between April 1 and early August, the period when almost all of the 4 million Swedes in the study received their second dose, an average of about 1,650 Swedes died per week. Death rates hardly fluctuated during these years.

In other words, in spring and summer, there are usually about 3,300 deaths every two weeks in Sweden – not only among those vaccinated, but among all 10.6 million inhabitants.

So let’s assume an incredibly conservative assumption that speaks strongly in favour of the vaccines. (The next few paragraphs are a bit complicated, but I hope it’s worth taking the time to read and think through them).

Let’s assume that the group of vaccinated people is so much older and unhealthier than that of the unvaccinated that every single death in Sweden is due to them, regardless of whether they have been vaccinated or not. In other words, let’s assume that even if the vaccines hadn’t existed, all the people in Sweden who died would have belonged to this group of 4.03 million people observed by the researchers – while not a single other person would have died.

In this case, these 4.03 million people “should” have about 3,300 deaths every two weeks. You CAN’T HAVE MORE – because all of Sweden doesn’t have more.

But the vaccines do exist. These 4.03 million people have received it. And in the two weeks after receiving the second dose of vaccine, there were not about 3,300, but 3,939 deaths, according to the researchers.

And 3,939 deaths is about 20% more deaths than should have occurred in those two weeks after vaccination. Again, the figure of 20% is an understatement, since in reality some deaths will also occur among the 6.6 million unvaccinated, so the actual baseline number for the vaccinated group is not 3,300 deaths, but slightly less.

Unfortunately, the researchers have not provided detailed information on the deaths, so it is impossible to determine whether it is a disproportionate proportion of cardiovascular disease.

Nor can it be determined whether a particular vaccine has disproportionately led to deaths. (In Sweden, Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine was mainly used, as well as part of AstraZeneca’s DNA/AAV vaccine, which is not available in the U.S., and a small amount of Moderna’s mRNA vaccine.)

It is, of course, possible that the additional deaths are due to a coincidence.

Or that the handful of older Swedes who were vaccinated in February and March had a disproportionately high proportion of deaths after vaccination. (Since Swedish death rates per week are higher in winter, a large number of deaths after vaccination in those months would somewhat reduce the strength of the signal, although it would still be present).

However, apart from these caveats, the Swedish figures offer a very large real data set, which apparently shows a significant increase in overall mortality immediately after COVID vaccination.

They are further evidence of an increasingly worrying picture – alongside case and anecdotal reports, a well-known link with heart inflammation in young men, updated data from Pfizer’s clinical trial showing a numerical imbalance in deaths in vaccinated individuals, and most importantly, the overall increase in all-cause mortality in many countries.

And all of these warning signs apply to vaccines that, if the Swedish data is correct, can actually increase the risk of COVID infection after about eight months.

Yes, INCREASE.

See how the black line in the top chart falls below zero? This represents negative efficacy, which means that vaccinated individuals have a higher risk of becoming infected than unvaccinated ones.

And as the second chart shows, efficacy against severe COVID infections also tends to be close to zero.

Still, the Biden administration and governments across Europe continue to try to force more people to take these vaccines.

Why?

SOURCE: PEOPLE DIED AT RATES 20% HIGHER THAN NORMAL AFTER SECOND COVID SHOT, SWEDISH STUDY SHOWS

Belgian court rules COVID pass illegal in Wallonia

Region’s representatives did not appear in court to argue case due to public holidays

BRUSSELS 

A court in Belgium’s Wallonia region has ruled that use of a COVID pass is illegal and ordered the local government to pay a daily fine of €5,000 ($5,658) until they withdraw the measure, local media reported Wednesday. 

Namur city’s Court of First Instance ruled Tuesday that use of the COVID Safe Ticket (CST) was illegal in the Wallonia region.

According to the judgment, rules requiring everyone to show their CST before entering cafés, restaurants, gyms and cultural venues were curbing individual freedoms in a disproportionate way which does not serve the goal they pursue.

A non-profit organization called ‘Notre bon droit’ (Our good right) initiated the procedure challenging the Wallonia region’s decree on the COVID pass.

The Wallonia region announced that they would not repeal the regulation and appealed immediately against the judgment.

According to the Belgian daily Le Soir, representatives of the Wallonia government failed to appear at a court hearing on Nov. 16 because no one dealt with the file in the public administration for five days due to a combination of a weekend and public holidays.

The invitation letter was received on Nov. 10, but the day after was Armistice Day commemorating the end of World War I, a public holiday in Belgium. The holiday fell on a Thursday and was extended to a long weekend by most of the officials.

The following Monday – Nov. 15. – was King’s Day, which grants a holiday for the public administration.

As a consequence, nobody dealt with the file and the hearing took place in the absence of the Wallonia officials.

Use of the COVID Safe Pass is mandatory all over the country when entering restaurants, gyms and cultural venues. But officially, regional governments are responsible for imposing the restrictive measures under the federal-state system.

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/belgian-court-rules-covid-pass-illegal-in-wallonia/2436283