Our evil, fraudulent, 50 Billion in fraud fines & leader in cause of iatrogenic death/ Big pharma "medicine" should tell you all you need to know! If you like fraud & death, you should love our "Wages of sin." Big Pharma! Who are documented to have killed 12.5 to 40 million suckers in just the last 50 years! [Not counting their SARS 2 Co-V 19 money maker!] (If you believe the Johns Hopkins [low-ball] iatrogenic study, or the well-cited book Death by Medicine? by Dr. Null.) Remember,
“The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our lord.”
[Romans 6:23] Remember, they want you dead, & in Hell!
Humble thanks for You payment of appreciation in restacking this. Though I have no religion - was raised with lots of love and Ethics, but no religion - still the psychopaths in control (by virtue of money) do indeed want most of Us dead, and the remainder in 15 minute prisons, eating bugs and fake "food," with CBDC's and social credit scores, neuralinked like Borg, to be used as Their servants, slaves, sex toys and sacrifices.
And We might best do all We can to remove Their tool to power!
If you could consider that God-fearing Christians settled N. America, then established a Creator-inspired USA, with Christian-inspired universities promoting Church, Home & Family values! Then dumping all that for a Godless, Satan-inspired mass baby-killing, neo-Sodom Gomorra LGBTQIA+ promoting, bankrupt society! And how all that could bring the Hell we are now suffering, maybe that could help you understand the importance of God’s Christianity. Or not! God bless you!!! Steve
I surely grasp the lusts of the psychopaths in control... Desiring 100% control. And how money makes what They're doing now possible. (I also ponder the settlers pushing the native Peoples off Their land...)
Thus far I have not needed any religion to explain what I see.
But I do adhere to the three Laws of Ethics, which, if We ALL kept them, irrespective of religion, We would have virtually no Human-created problems. In fact, I do not judge Others by lineage, religion, or affiliation. I judge Each by whether They choose Their behavior Ethically - within the three Laws of Ethics:
The three Laws of Ethics (Natural Law expressed as the three things not to do):
1. Do not willfully and without fully informed consent hurt or kill the flesh of anOther
2. Do not willfully and without fully informed consent take or damage anything that does not belong to You alone
3. Do not willfully defraud anOther (which can only happen without fully informed consent)
You could also ponder [while playing god] my loving God drowning most everyone in the flood, fire-bombing Sodom Gomorra, allowing babies to die! Couldn't you? IF you had all the wisdom & knowledge of my God, (and the people who built this [once] Godley nation,) you would know, what's wrong! (It's ALL about dumbing God & religion!) Remember, "God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that whoever believes in him shall have everlasting life! Hell is full of good kind loving people! Jesus Christ went to Heaven with a convicted murdering repent criminal! This short life is only a test!
Well, Steve, I think We will have to agree to disagree. I was lucky to study many religions unbiasedly, and found gems of truth in mountains of dogma in them all. And what I see is that what matters is not what religion We have but whether We choose Our behavior Ethically, for it is with the behavior We choose that We co-create the Now.
That is quite conceivable. Who knows. Clearly, though, there are things Our bodies need from external supply to thrive on. I wonder what data We would have if profit was never a motive - but the profit in social currencies: respect for work well done, admiration for finding some truth, etc...
Not certain about vitamins, and ponder the ability of Our bodies to break down what We eat and construct what they need... May the truth be forthcoming in the near future.
In 2020, there was no change in anything but a mind virus. Deaths were running just under 2019 until mid-December when They rolled out the jabs, at which point, there was a spike.
Not to say that They are not using 5G and such, but They used the lockdowns to install that tech much more wisely. And yes, They’re using it now, and likely will up the game when They announce “Disease X” has come.
Question for you. In the video on ethical self defense you use pictures showing people attacking in person and with physical violence.
But what about these attacks on humans:
1. Social murder
2. Genocide e.g. Israel's Gaza Genocide
3. Death my mandates - facemasks that kill people, lockdowns, mandated bioweapon injections
4. Forms of terrorism that lead to the deaths and destruction of family and business? e.g. Fentanyl pandemic in the USA because the border is open? The crime wave created by illegals. The homelessness. etc.
I could go on but you get the point. When the elites are guilty of social murder through their failure to honor the constitution and their illegal acts these are acts of extreme violence. Even screaming out anti-white racism on CNN is extreme violence.
What does ethics say about defending oneself and ones family about this?
I grasp the concern, and agree that what the psychopaths in control are affecting with Their money is highly unEthical. But... To approach the Ones responsible, We must affect a witch hunt. None of this provides Individuals We can immediately point to and place specific blame.
For the most effective solution to these things, We would best stop accounting for the energy We each add into society, stripping Them of Their single tool to power. And this is accomplished by getting free energy tech out so that accounting for Our energy becomes pointless. A great deal of My work is on that.
As for the "constitution..." The original is no longer in effect. The "government" is a for-profit corporation using Us and abusing Us. There is nothing to honor. And a large number of things that are unEthical are legal...
Besides, irrespective of initial intents, ALL controlminds ("governments") WILL devolve. Any setup where Some are given power over Others will draw psychopaths like feces draw flies. They will finagle more and more control. Creating "problems," managing "reactions," and offering "solutions" that give Them more power...
To defend Ourselves, We withdraw consent from the whole legal/governmental mess. When enough of Us do, They will have no power. Yes, it must be in aggregate - One alone, like Me, affects little.
While Your statistics are impressive, I suspect We're just seeing the tip of the iceberg yet. Myocarditis seems to show a great rise, and though I did not see the weird blood clots listed, I ponder those, as well.
It may be for profit, but We might ponder the Deagel figures showing radical drops in population by 2025.
Thank you. Yes, it well may be that the effects of the jabs will be seen later, but there is no evidence of an increase in the death rate yet. I think we must be careful in making claims which aren't substantiated.
I believe there is going to be a drop in the global population. As GDP and education of women increases, fertility decreases. Many people are also chosing to be single or to not have children. Some people are getting very worked up about it and are trying to enncourage women to have more children to pay all our pensions. I don't think this is the way to go. We'll just have to adapt our systems. Less humans will also be much better for the planet and our ability to sustain ourselves on it
In fact, most of My work is aimed at freeing Humanity from the psychopaths in control who brought Us the planetary plannedemic. This would solve for paying for pensions...
Here's a recent post which has links to more info on how We can accomplish that:
I agree with the majority of this position, but I think the absolute dismissal of the existence of 'viruses' is oversimplified. I have found another more nuanced perspective that sheds light on both sides of this false dichotomy: viruses are not contagious. So one could argue that "viruses don't exist in the way we think of them," or that "viruses exist but are not what we think they are." However it's phrased, I think the key distinction is that there is some validity to the science of virology; observations can be repeated, but the conclusions made about them are misguided by the beliefs you've outlined here.
According to Jeff Green, whose website is https://virusesarenotcontagious.com/, viruses are produced by a body's own cells to eliminate material that normal measures are unable to remove. Effectively, viruses are like a 'soap' custom-made for a specific kind of 'dirt.' Sometimes, multiple rounds of this cleaning are necessary, with slight modifications to the 'soap' which are called 'mutations.'
There are many ways to look at the phenomenon most simply label "contagion," and many possible causes in each case, so I advocate not for completely disregarding or disbelieving it, but for looking at it in a new light, with skepticism and humility. We are social creatures, and our bodies are part of nature, exhibiting a vast intelligence that exceeds our intellects.
What I was writing about was "deadly, contagious viruses." Yes, Some call exosomes "viruses," and other miscellaneous bits and pieces found in the body.
This is not about things labeled, but the ideas pushed by the medical/p-HARM-aceulical industry with claims We need toxins jabbed into Our flesh to "protect" Us.
LOL! That scum. I kept asking for the papers showing His claims - nice and polite - but I kept getting the feeling He was controlled opposition. Finally, after My third request, He banned Me.
And yeah, there are particles someOne slapped a label of "viruses" on. But that does not address the point of Our stance: nothing is contagious, and there are no "deadly viruses" out there making People sick.
The point is that psychopaths created the lies of "deadly viruses" and "contagion," initially to sell toxins to jab into Our flesh, and more recently to convince Us to take a death jab.
Just because someOne decided to label some dead cell debris, or other stuff, "viruses" does not mean they are imbued thereby with the characteristics They claim of "viruses."
It seems both you and Jeff have arrived at bitter conclusions regarding one other, which from my perspective appear overly cynical. As I had tried to point out from the beginning, these two positions should not be in such opposition since where they intersect (the illusory nature of their contagion and pathogenic qualities) they are in harmony. Where they diverge is in the analysis of the observations of these particles. One position argues that they're meaningless and invalid observations, the other argues that the observations are scientifically valid but conclusions are off. To me, the first position looks like a dead end, especially given that its loudest advocates do not appear to have a strong grasp on the subject matter (see Christine Massey's interview where she admitted she doesn't know nor care how proteins are synthesized). Perhaps unlike Jeff, I don't doubt the sincerity of these proponents. I think they genuinely believe in what they're doing, but I also think their conclusions are misguided and take a sharp turn towards unsound arguments and extreme positions that will only serve to cement in skeptics' minds the unhinged 'science denialism' nature of these claims. This is why I advocate for Jeff's perspective; it is neither science denialism nor scientism, yet it arrives at a similar conclusion regarding the practical truth of viruses' contagion and pathogenic qualities. I'd expect to see those who value truth above 'being right' to shift toward perspectives that enable further understanding when presented with the option. Alas, human nature often gets in the way of this pursuit, just as much in the 'scientific community' as in the 'truth community.'
Well, see, just arbitrarily labeling particles "viruses" and then claiming the "No Virus" camp is wrong is just pathetic. The whole point of the "No Virus" camp is to point out that plannedemics are...planned. Bunk. Arguing about labels does nothing, but getting it out there that the "deadly viruses" and "contagion" claims are not just wrong, but deliberate lies for profit and control is what is important - it could save lives as People choose NOT to receive the death jabs.
These particles are not arbitrarily labeled though. This is an overly reductionist dismissal of decades of careful and repeated observation, which I'm guessing is the main thing that triggers Jeff regarding this perspective.
This is not an argument about labels per se, it's an argument about making sound and evidence-based arguments that further our understanding, and which can be accepted both by those who study this topic professionally, and those like you and I who are in curious pursuit of truth.
I agree that getting closer to truth can save lives, and that is why I persist in this conversation; I believe the "no-virus movement" is driven by good intentions but includes dangerous dismissals and blind spots that will prove detrimental to its growth and acceptance. The behavior of promoting a movement without regard to the accuracy of its fundamental claims is more typical of activists than truth seekers.
Thanks! I do not give high probability that there are such things as "pathogens." But I do not doubt that that water filter offers good detoxing. Just wish I had two nickles to rub together. No way I can afford that.
I appreciate and agree with the main point. I was just hoping to introduce some nuance into this discussion regarding the existence of viruses. I also think it is erroneous to conflate viruses and exosomes, though in some cases they appear similar.
I missed this comment. Humble apologies. I have seen zero evidence of any particle that can replicate and make People sick. I have seen dead cell debris - that looks like the "viruses" and can be obtained from both well People and sick People.
No One has isolated, purified, and then shown the purified isolate to cause illness, any of the bits of dead cell debris. Many FOI requests have been sent - hundreds of them - asking for the purified proof, and all have been returned with nothing.
Your statements are a mere repetition of 'No-Virus' talking points. The legitimacy of the Massey FOI requests has been repeatedly debunked and proven invalid. Additionally, your assertion that no one has ever isolated or purified a virus is entirely false, perpetuating yet another falsehood propagated by 'No-Virus'.
Furthermore, the notion that cell debris bears any resemblance to viruses is utterly false. Cell debris lacks a distinct structure, making it impossible for it to resemble viruses. This claim, originating from the 'No-Virus' ideology, is simply laughable.
I am not saying viruses make people sick, but they are produced within our own cells at whatever quantity is needed to eliminate toxins too caustic for bacteria or other living agents. They have been observed in petri dishes (an unnatural environment that deprives the cell of its usual defenses) where they often cause lysis after being produced and released in great quantity. They have also been extracted from animals and plants. They are different from exosomes and mere debris in their structure and function.
There is a group of scientists who have been making extreme but unfounded claims about virology, and your comment reflects some of their claims, but I encourage you to look deeper and challenge your own position because the truth always seems to be found somewhere in the middle, rather than at the extremes. Jeff Green has debated several members of what he calls the "no-virus group" and if nothing else, those conversations have revealed a shallow grasp of that which they boldly criticize. It is strange to me to witness these disagreements because their positions are not so different, and they would even be compatible if not so defensive and unwilling to consider other perspectives. To me, it seems it comes down to a disagreement in semantics. For example, the 'no-virus group' insists on sticking to a rigid definition of the word 'virus' whereas Green argues that the particles that exhibit a misinterpreted behavior and are called 'viruses' exist. Another example is around the word 'purified'; they argue using impossible standards of purity and a rigid, unrealistic version of the scientific method.
Here is one of Green's articles about the flaws in their arguments:
I looked over that piece by Jeff Green and see that there are particles, and someOne labeled them "viruses." But they don't make Us sick. Just because someOne called a particle They saw a "virus" does not mean that deadly viruses and contagion are real.
EDIT to add: He sure does like to ban People who disagree (courteously, even!). I only saw one commenter NOT banned. Yeah, honest People ban Others right and left who merely dispute the claims made. Sorry, I can't take People like that seriously.
My point is that there is some validity to virology, though their conclusions are generally misguided by the lens of 'germ theory.' This is in stark contrast to the position that the entire field is 'pseudoscience' and fraudulent, an extreme position that does not hold water and will likely never gain the respect of those who work in the field (or those adjacent).
Regarding the banning (and the combative tone these interactions exhibit), I agree it makes it difficult to take Green seriously, but at the same time, I understand why he responds as he does. He has had countless exchanges featuring the same arguments repeated by hundreds of different laypersons who seem to have been 'radicalized' by this group into strict adherence to this 'no-virus' dogma. He continues to make logical, evidence-based arguments that seem to find no purchase in these minds. I imagine it's quite frustrating for him. This is also after many exchanges directly with the primary proponents of the 'no-virus group' that revealed little depth or critical consideration on their part, though I suspect the level of mutual defensiveness played a significant role in this failure in communication. Nevertheless, if you can find and stomach these exchanges, they are quite informative and interesting.
I can also understand where these 'no-virus acolytes' are coming from, having spent a short time there myself. When we recognize hidden truth, it's easy to accept some level of inaccuracy or deception that comes with it. In my view, this is a consequence of reliance on gut or intuition in imbalance with intellect. I'm sure you'll agree that to continue this pursuit of truth, we must walk the razor's edge of balance between the two.
I also think it's important to understand what viruses actually are and the role they play in our health, not just to expose the idiocy around COVID and vaccines, but to improve our understanding of how our bodies work and how to live in harmony with nature.
So We're calling something that does not make Us sick (as all the "virus" stories out there claim viruses do) a "virus?" Am I getting that right?
Whether there's something labeled as "virus" or not, the point is there's nothing that makes You sick in the way They make claims that viruses do. No "SARS Cov2" killing People and We need jabs of toxins to protect from.
Seems a bit dogmatic to poo-poo efforts to point out that no deadly virus or contagion are real because someOne called some benign particle "virus."
I agree that the end result of both positions is more-or-less the same, but I think it's important to tread on solid ground to arrive there. I'm not sure I see how these efforts are dogmatic, though.
"He used this fear in 1918 to vast advantage. The “flu” then killed the jabbed, not the unjabbed (this is starting to sound familiar…)." But..but... there was no jab in 1918. It wasn't trialled till 1942...
"In a 2 June 1918 The Times of London dispatch titled, "The Spanish Epidemic," a correspondent in Madrid reported over 100,000 victims of, "The unknown disease…" Were the eponymous Spanish victims also subjected too the US military vaccine?
The Times of London reported on the Spanish extent of the flu epidemic, on civilians, before they could have imported the experimental military vaccine. In 1918. Can you explain why the reporter would be covering for the US Army, in that year, in that context?
Masks cannot create bacterial pneumonia. For one, every doctor on Earth would have bacterial pneumonia all year round. Do you have a study or can you articulate how masks produce such illness in any meaningful way?
In Spain? In 1918? Masks were not "creating" bacteria (bacteria aren't created by PPE), then or now. Vaccines weren't available in Spain if they were developed in US labs for the US military. Come on, think it through.
Understanding that good health is all about a strong immune system, how would you explain the explorers that infected and subsequently nearly wiped out the native Americans with "contagions" that they were never exposed to prior?
Well, first, I contend We do not have an "immune" system. We have a detox system.
Second, I ponder the truth in such stories as "infected blankets" and all. It is conceivable that some poison or toxin was introduced to drinking water, or other such nefarious act, and the "infected blankets" was a cover of sorts (no pun intended).
Truthfully, I view all "history" with suspicion, given that victors always write it...
Locking down one part of citizens in a country like restaurant owners and staff while sending others to work under the guise of protection, the gov did one thing unethical that is never allowed to happen: putting the value of one life above another.
There it shows clearly that the political side of a state has no moral, no ethic, no natural laws of both. And No real biological science to back up decisions.
All that under the assumption that viruses and contagion did exist, which both do not, the gov breaks natural ethical rules on which we the people could all easyly agree. My life is not worth more than another AND not less worth, either.
They priced the life of children against elderly and vulnerables (as if children were not), the life of essential workers against redundant workers (killing of self-employment), the life of useful iditiots and elites against "useless eaters".
If there were a real existing biological threat to everyone ("none is safe until everybody bla bla bla") all rational rules imposed over people went out of the window. A virus wouldn't be that clever to distinguish between useful iditiots and useless eaters. It would capture whoever it gets. But it didn't, oddly enough.
"Show me your papers please" was the state's parole.
so what about bacteria? Is that also not real? This article seems to go beyond the "no viruses" and into "no contagions." So I can stop washing my hands and just eat a bunch of poo right, as long as my terrain is all good? If I think viruses are real, does that mean that I cannot withdraw my consent from being ruled? I feel like I can still do that. And I also think terrain theory can still apply and viruses can exist at the same time. And I also think that there can be good viruses and bad viruses, and for that reason why would anyone be afraid of viruses, you can apply terrain theory and protect yourself from bad viruses.
Probabilities is another way to say, not sure but I will use math and that means that I am probably right.
Have you heard of this? "British doctor John Snow couldn't convince other doctors and scientists that cholera, a deadly disease, was spread when people drank contaminated water until a mother washed her baby's diaper in a town well in 1854 and touched off an epidemic that killed 616 people."
If you have to block me like Demi did, no worries, it's all good. But I do like how you end everything with Love Always. And I feel that you are being sincere. Thanks for that!
If I wanted to watch a video, I would look for a video to watch. If there are bacteria fungi and parasites to deal with dead tissues and toxins, why not viruses? Why is the possibility of viruses existing so threatening to terrain theory? I really don't get it, seriously. "They" can just turn around and frighten people with fungi, bacteria and parasites. Getting rid of viruses saves us from tyranny? Seems like a lot of arguing over nothing. Why not just talk about terrain theory (Which is what I believe in BTW) instead of trying to erase the idea of viruses? Sorry I find it very strange and also I find it suspicious.
We have seen bacteria, We have their genomes, directly from them. As I point out, We have never seen a virus. It's not that viruses threaten terrain theory but 1) they are said to be spread via contagion which no One has ever proven - EVER - and rather have all disproven - and contagion is NOT part of terrain theory. 2) The things They point to by killing cells can be found doing the same things to ANYONE, sick or not. 3) ALL "virus genomes" are created in a computer by stitching bits of genetic material together.
If that is not enough to make anyOne question whether they are real or not...
And if You don't want to learn from Dr. Sam... Do have a lovely life.
PROTOCOLS OF THE MEETINGS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION . . . Protocol X – Preparing for Power . . . (((SARS-CoV2)))
❝. . . utterly exhaust humanity with dissention, hatred, struggle, envy and even by the use of torture, by starvation, by the inoculation of diseases. by want, so that the “Goyim” see no other issue than to take refuge in our complete sovereignty in money and in all else.❞
The zionist vaccine. The psychopaths' vaccine. All 15+ million working class People of that group are NOT part of the problem. Just the zionists/psychopaths.
They have send over 200 FOI requests to various agencies around the globe. ALL of them returned a statement that They did not have an isolate. So far, no One has. Anywhere. Ever. Thanks for reading!
Yes I came across all of this stuff a while back myself. I consider it fortunate in fact that I had a relatively minor adverse reaction to a free 'flu' jab 5 or 6 years ago: hives all over my upper torso after never having had them before in my life - or any other reaction for that matter. The head 'immunologist' at a large teaching hospital here that I was referred to promised to find out the ingredients from the manufacturer to work out what it was I was 'allergic' to. Guess what? They refused to tell him! That's roughly when I became an ant-vaxxer, and later on anti-virus.
Maybe I sent you links from my home page which might be private and you just need to go to the publication itself and scroll down. There's not that many posts.
Wow. Blatant misreading. Many of My friends, including My best friend for 40 years, are "jewish." But the fact is that, of the Ones We see on the stage, most of the psychopaths at the top are "jewish" for the happenstance that the psychopaths who were in the right place at the right time in history to seize monetary control were from that group.
They inbred to retain the gene for psychopathy, and pass it and the wealth/power to psychopathic heirs.
The "jew" element is irrelevant, but the psychopaths in control use it to create divides.
You believe in freedom of expression, but get annoyed when someone illuminates the flaws in your writing. If you see this as pestering, that's also illuminating. The flu of 1918 killed civilians not exposed to any experimental vaccine. How do you explain that?
Our evil, fraudulent, 50 Billion in fraud fines & leader in cause of iatrogenic death/ Big pharma "medicine" should tell you all you need to know! If you like fraud & death, you should love our "Wages of sin." Big Pharma! Who are documented to have killed 12.5 to 40 million suckers in just the last 50 years! [Not counting their SARS 2 Co-V 19 money maker!] (If you believe the Johns Hopkins [low-ball] iatrogenic study, or the well-cited book Death by Medicine? by Dr. Null.) Remember,
“The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our lord.”
[Romans 6:23] Remember, they want you dead, & in Hell!
Humble thanks for You payment of appreciation in restacking this. Though I have no religion - was raised with lots of love and Ethics, but no religion - still the psychopaths in control (by virtue of money) do indeed want most of Us dead, and the remainder in 15 minute prisons, eating bugs and fake "food," with CBDC's and social credit scores, neuralinked like Borg, to be used as Their servants, slaves, sex toys and sacrifices.
And We might best do all We can to remove Their tool to power!
Solving for Psychopaths in Control (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/solving-for-psychopaths-in-control
If you could consider that God-fearing Christians settled N. America, then established a Creator-inspired USA, with Christian-inspired universities promoting Church, Home & Family values! Then dumping all that for a Godless, Satan-inspired mass baby-killing, neo-Sodom Gomorra LGBTQIA+ promoting, bankrupt society! And how all that could bring the Hell we are now suffering, maybe that could help you understand the importance of God’s Christianity. Or not! God bless you!!! Steve
I surely grasp the lusts of the psychopaths in control... Desiring 100% control. And how money makes what They're doing now possible. (I also ponder the settlers pushing the native Peoples off Their land...)
Thus far I have not needed any religion to explain what I see.
But I do adhere to the three Laws of Ethics, which, if We ALL kept them, irrespective of religion, We would have virtually no Human-created problems. In fact, I do not judge Others by lineage, religion, or affiliation. I judge Each by whether They choose Their behavior Ethically - within the three Laws of Ethics:
The three Laws of Ethics (Natural Law expressed as the three things not to do):
1. Do not willfully and without fully informed consent hurt or kill the flesh of anOther
2. Do not willfully and without fully informed consent take or damage anything that does not belong to You alone
3. Do not willfully defraud anOther (which can only happen without fully informed consent)
Love always!
You could also ponder [while playing god] my loving God drowning most everyone in the flood, fire-bombing Sodom Gomorra, allowing babies to die! Couldn't you? IF you had all the wisdom & knowledge of my God, (and the people who built this [once] Godley nation,) you would know, what's wrong! (It's ALL about dumbing God & religion!) Remember, "God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that whoever believes in him shall have everlasting life! Hell is full of good kind loving people! Jesus Christ went to Heaven with a convicted murdering repent criminal! This short life is only a test!
So live with it!
Well, Steve, I think We will have to agree to disagree. I was lucky to study many religions unbiasedly, and found gems of truth in mountains of dogma in them all. And what I see is that what matters is not what religion We have but whether We choose Our behavior Ethically, for it is with the behavior We choose that We co-create the Now.
Love always.
Have even vitamins been actually isolated or is this another invention by Pharma?
It seems to me that the chemical structures that are called "vitamins" are an invention of pharma.
This article pre-dates the recent furor over the synthetic chemicals we refer to as "vitamins" or "supplements". https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_industrybigpharma97.htm
That is quite conceivable. Who knows. Clearly, though, there are things Our bodies need from external supply to thrive on. I wonder what data We would have if profit was never a motive - but the profit in social currencies: respect for work well done, admiration for finding some truth, etc...
Greed is a Symptom of Energy Accounting (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/greed-is-a-symptom-of-energy-accounting
Not certain about vitamins, and ponder the ability of Our bodies to break down what We eat and construct what they need... May the truth be forthcoming in the near future.
There was no virus and there was no lab leak…
BUT there was a massive increase in electro-magnetic radiation which produced some pretty horrible symptoms in the elderly and weak.
I was expecting it because all progress in electrification has been accompanied by increases in illness.
Don’t believe me? Read this and take good notice of the final chart!
https://francesleader.substack.com/p/there-is-no-virus-there-is-no-lab?utm_source=publication-search
In 2020, there was no change in anything but a mind virus. Deaths were running just under 2019 until mid-December when They rolled out the jabs, at which point, there was a spike.
Not to say that They are not using 5G and such, but They used the lockdowns to install that tech much more wisely. And yes, They’re using it now, and likely will up the game when They announce “Disease X” has come.
What is the ethical response to the idea that natural laws say that if people are trying to kill us we have the right to strike back?
I have done a video on that:
Self Defense and Ethics (3 min): https://odysee.com/@amaterasusolar:8/self-defense-and-ethics:1?lid=eeff9e0c80138ce03e22d76bcd5f2f873ff46b72
Question for you. In the video on ethical self defense you use pictures showing people attacking in person and with physical violence.
But what about these attacks on humans:
1. Social murder
2. Genocide e.g. Israel's Gaza Genocide
3. Death my mandates - facemasks that kill people, lockdowns, mandated bioweapon injections
4. Forms of terrorism that lead to the deaths and destruction of family and business? e.g. Fentanyl pandemic in the USA because the border is open? The crime wave created by illegals. The homelessness. etc.
I could go on but you get the point. When the elites are guilty of social murder through their failure to honor the constitution and their illegal acts these are acts of extreme violence. Even screaming out anti-white racism on CNN is extreme violence.
What does ethics say about defending oneself and ones family about this?
I grasp the concern, and agree that what the psychopaths in control are affecting with Their money is highly unEthical. But... To approach the Ones responsible, We must affect a witch hunt. None of this provides Individuals We can immediately point to and place specific blame.
For the most effective solution to these things, We would best stop accounting for the energy We each add into society, stripping Them of Their single tool to power. And this is accomplished by getting free energy tech out so that accounting for Our energy becomes pointless. A great deal of My work is on that.
As for the "constitution..." The original is no longer in effect. The "government" is a for-profit corporation using Us and abusing Us. There is nothing to honor. And a large number of things that are unEthical are legal...
Besides, irrespective of initial intents, ALL controlminds ("governments") WILL devolve. Any setup where Some are given power over Others will draw psychopaths like feces draw flies. They will finagle more and more control. Creating "problems," managing "reactions," and offering "solutions" that give Them more power...
To defend Ourselves, We withdraw consent from the whole legal/governmental mess. When enough of Us do, They will have no power. Yes, it must be in aggregate - One alone, like Me, affects little.
You might want to investigate:
The Third Option: Anarcho-Abundancism (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/the-third-option-anarcho-abundancism
Dear AnyOne, I Am Not in Your Jurisdiction (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/dear-anyone-i-am-not-in-your-jurisdiction
Money Motivates the Most Marvelous Manifestations! (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/money-motivates-the-most-marvelous
If You’re Rooting for SomeOne to Rule You, You’re Part of the Problem (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/if-youre-rooting-for-someone-to-rule
The ONLY Winning Move is Not to Play (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/the-only-winning-move-is-not-to-play
Why Free Energy Technology Is Suppressed (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/why-free-energy-technology-is-suppressed
Why Does Money Promote Psychopaths? (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/why-does-money-promote-psychopaths
Why Free Energy Technology Is Suppressed (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/why-free-energy-technology-is-suppressed
Thanks for that, I'll take a look.
I think you can guess to my point of view
Very well argued apart from about the jabs causing depopulation, there is no evidence for this. https://jowaller.substack.com/p/excess-mortality-what-does-it-show And before you say excess deaths (being up when compared to the really low year of 2019) please read this https://jowaller.substack.com/p/deaths-england-and-wales-2020-2022
While Your statistics are impressive, I suspect We're just seeing the tip of the iceberg yet. Myocarditis seems to show a great rise, and though I did not see the weird blood clots listed, I ponder those, as well.
It may be for profit, but We might ponder the Deagel figures showing radical drops in population by 2025.
Time will tell.
Thank you. Yes, it well may be that the effects of the jabs will be seen later, but there is no evidence of an increase in the death rate yet. I think we must be careful in making claims which aren't substantiated.
I believe there is going to be a drop in the global population. As GDP and education of women increases, fertility decreases. Many people are also chosing to be single or to not have children. Some people are getting very worked up about it and are trying to enncourage women to have more children to pay all our pensions. I don't think this is the way to go. We'll just have to adapt our systems. Less humans will also be much better for the planet and our ability to sustain ourselves on it
In fact, most of My work is aimed at freeing Humanity from the psychopaths in control who brought Us the planetary plannedemic. This would solve for paying for pensions...
Here's a recent post which has links to more info on how We can accomplish that:
Money Motivates the Most Marvelous Manifestations! (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/money-motivates-the-most-marvelous
I agree with the majority of this position, but I think the absolute dismissal of the existence of 'viruses' is oversimplified. I have found another more nuanced perspective that sheds light on both sides of this false dichotomy: viruses are not contagious. So one could argue that "viruses don't exist in the way we think of them," or that "viruses exist but are not what we think they are." However it's phrased, I think the key distinction is that there is some validity to the science of virology; observations can be repeated, but the conclusions made about them are misguided by the beliefs you've outlined here.
According to Jeff Green, whose website is https://virusesarenotcontagious.com/, viruses are produced by a body's own cells to eliminate material that normal measures are unable to remove. Effectively, viruses are like a 'soap' custom-made for a specific kind of 'dirt.' Sometimes, multiple rounds of this cleaning are necessary, with slight modifications to the 'soap' which are called 'mutations.'
There are many ways to look at the phenomenon most simply label "contagion," and many possible causes in each case, so I advocate not for completely disregarding or disbelieving it, but for looking at it in a new light, with skepticism and humility. We are social creatures, and our bodies are part of nature, exhibiting a vast intelligence that exceeds our intellects.
What I was writing about was "deadly, contagious viruses." Yes, Some call exosomes "viruses," and other miscellaneous bits and pieces found in the body.
This is not about things labeled, but the ideas pushed by the medical/p-HARM-aceulical industry with claims We need toxins jabbed into Our flesh to "protect" Us.
This is the article I should have led with (wish I'd found it sooner). Perhaps it would have led to a more productive conversation.
https://jeffgreenhealth.substack.com/p/the-lack-of-balance
LOL! That scum. I kept asking for the papers showing His claims - nice and polite - but I kept getting the feeling He was controlled opposition. Finally, after My third request, He banned Me.
And yeah, there are particles someOne slapped a label of "viruses" on. But that does not address the point of Our stance: nothing is contagious, and there are no "deadly viruses" out there making People sick.
The point is that psychopaths created the lies of "deadly viruses" and "contagion," initially to sell toxins to jab into Our flesh, and more recently to convince Us to take a death jab.
Just because someOne decided to label some dead cell debris, or other stuff, "viruses" does not mean they are imbued thereby with the characteristics They claim of "viruses."
It's a diversionary tactic.
It seems both you and Jeff have arrived at bitter conclusions regarding one other, which from my perspective appear overly cynical. As I had tried to point out from the beginning, these two positions should not be in such opposition since where they intersect (the illusory nature of their contagion and pathogenic qualities) they are in harmony. Where they diverge is in the analysis of the observations of these particles. One position argues that they're meaningless and invalid observations, the other argues that the observations are scientifically valid but conclusions are off. To me, the first position looks like a dead end, especially given that its loudest advocates do not appear to have a strong grasp on the subject matter (see Christine Massey's interview where she admitted she doesn't know nor care how proteins are synthesized). Perhaps unlike Jeff, I don't doubt the sincerity of these proponents. I think they genuinely believe in what they're doing, but I also think their conclusions are misguided and take a sharp turn towards unsound arguments and extreme positions that will only serve to cement in skeptics' minds the unhinged 'science denialism' nature of these claims. This is why I advocate for Jeff's perspective; it is neither science denialism nor scientism, yet it arrives at a similar conclusion regarding the practical truth of viruses' contagion and pathogenic qualities. I'd expect to see those who value truth above 'being right' to shift toward perspectives that enable further understanding when presented with the option. Alas, human nature often gets in the way of this pursuit, just as much in the 'scientific community' as in the 'truth community.'
Well, see, just arbitrarily labeling particles "viruses" and then claiming the "No Virus" camp is wrong is just pathetic. The whole point of the "No Virus" camp is to point out that plannedemics are...planned. Bunk. Arguing about labels does nothing, but getting it out there that the "deadly viruses" and "contagion" claims are not just wrong, but deliberate lies for profit and control is what is important - it could save lives as People choose NOT to receive the death jabs.
These particles are not arbitrarily labeled though. This is an overly reductionist dismissal of decades of careful and repeated observation, which I'm guessing is the main thing that triggers Jeff regarding this perspective.
This is not an argument about labels per se, it's an argument about making sound and evidence-based arguments that further our understanding, and which can be accepted both by those who study this topic professionally, and those like you and I who are in curious pursuit of truth.
I agree that getting closer to truth can save lives, and that is why I persist in this conversation; I believe the "no-virus movement" is driven by good intentions but includes dangerous dismissals and blind spots that will prove detrimental to its growth and acceptance. The behavior of promoting a movement without regard to the accuracy of its fundamental claims is more typical of activists than truth seekers.
I don't worry about illnesses any more.
I use a nanopartical silver solution that keeps my system cleaned up of any foreign matter.
Apex-water.com
I've been consuming this daily for over 15 years and feel better than when I was in my forties!
Just sharing.
Thanks! I do not give high probability that there are such things as "pathogens." But I do not doubt that that water filter offers good detoxing. Just wish I had two nickles to rub together. No way I can afford that.
I appreciate and agree with the main point. I was just hoping to introduce some nuance into this discussion regarding the existence of viruses. I also think it is erroneous to conflate viruses and exosomes, though in some cases they appear similar.
I missed this comment. Humble apologies. I have seen zero evidence of any particle that can replicate and make People sick. I have seen dead cell debris - that looks like the "viruses" and can be obtained from both well People and sick People.
No One has isolated, purified, and then shown the purified isolate to cause illness, any of the bits of dead cell debris. Many FOI requests have been sent - hundreds of them - asking for the purified proof, and all have been returned with nothing.
What is it You think is proof of a virus?
Your statements are a mere repetition of 'No-Virus' talking points. The legitimacy of the Massey FOI requests has been repeatedly debunked and proven invalid. Additionally, your assertion that no one has ever isolated or purified a virus is entirely false, perpetuating yet another falsehood propagated by 'No-Virus'.
Furthermore, the notion that cell debris bears any resemblance to viruses is utterly false. Cell debris lacks a distinct structure, making it impossible for it to resemble viruses. This claim, originating from the 'No-Virus' ideology, is simply laughable.
I am not saying viruses make people sick, but they are produced within our own cells at whatever quantity is needed to eliminate toxins too caustic for bacteria or other living agents. They have been observed in petri dishes (an unnatural environment that deprives the cell of its usual defenses) where they often cause lysis after being produced and released in great quantity. They have also been extracted from animals and plants. They are different from exosomes and mere debris in their structure and function.
There is a group of scientists who have been making extreme but unfounded claims about virology, and your comment reflects some of their claims, but I encourage you to look deeper and challenge your own position because the truth always seems to be found somewhere in the middle, rather than at the extremes. Jeff Green has debated several members of what he calls the "no-virus group" and if nothing else, those conversations have revealed a shallow grasp of that which they boldly criticize. It is strange to me to witness these disagreements because their positions are not so different, and they would even be compatible if not so defensive and unwilling to consider other perspectives. To me, it seems it comes down to a disagreement in semantics. For example, the 'no-virus group' insists on sticking to a rigid definition of the word 'virus' whereas Green argues that the particles that exhibit a misinterpreted behavior and are called 'viruses' exist. Another example is around the word 'purified'; they argue using impossible standards of purity and a rigid, unrealistic version of the scientific method.
Here is one of Green's articles about the flaws in their arguments:
https://jeffgreenhealth.substack.com/p/studies-show-viruses-without-cell
I looked over that piece by Jeff Green and see that there are particles, and someOne labeled them "viruses." But they don't make Us sick. Just because someOne called a particle They saw a "virus" does not mean that deadly viruses and contagion are real.
EDIT to add: He sure does like to ban People who disagree (courteously, even!). I only saw one commenter NOT banned. Yeah, honest People ban Others right and left who merely dispute the claims made. Sorry, I can't take People like that seriously.
My point is that there is some validity to virology, though their conclusions are generally misguided by the lens of 'germ theory.' This is in stark contrast to the position that the entire field is 'pseudoscience' and fraudulent, an extreme position that does not hold water and will likely never gain the respect of those who work in the field (or those adjacent).
Regarding the banning (and the combative tone these interactions exhibit), I agree it makes it difficult to take Green seriously, but at the same time, I understand why he responds as he does. He has had countless exchanges featuring the same arguments repeated by hundreds of different laypersons who seem to have been 'radicalized' by this group into strict adherence to this 'no-virus' dogma. He continues to make logical, evidence-based arguments that seem to find no purchase in these minds. I imagine it's quite frustrating for him. This is also after many exchanges directly with the primary proponents of the 'no-virus group' that revealed little depth or critical consideration on their part, though I suspect the level of mutual defensiveness played a significant role in this failure in communication. Nevertheless, if you can find and stomach these exchanges, they are quite informative and interesting.
I can also understand where these 'no-virus acolytes' are coming from, having spent a short time there myself. When we recognize hidden truth, it's easy to accept some level of inaccuracy or deception that comes with it. In my view, this is a consequence of reliance on gut or intuition in imbalance with intellect. I'm sure you'll agree that to continue this pursuit of truth, we must walk the razor's edge of balance between the two.
I also think it's important to understand what viruses actually are and the role they play in our health, not just to expose the idiocy around COVID and vaccines, but to improve our understanding of how our bodies work and how to live in harmony with nature.
So We're calling something that does not make Us sick (as all the "virus" stories out there claim viruses do) a "virus?" Am I getting that right?
Whether there's something labeled as "virus" or not, the point is there's nothing that makes You sick in the way They make claims that viruses do. No "SARS Cov2" killing People and We need jabs of toxins to protect from.
Seems a bit dogmatic to poo-poo efforts to point out that no deadly virus or contagion are real because someOne called some benign particle "virus."
I agree that the end result of both positions is more-or-less the same, but I think it's important to tread on solid ground to arrive there. I'm not sure I see how these efforts are dogmatic, though.
"He used this fear in 1918 to vast advantage. The “flu” then killed the jabbed, not the unjabbed (this is starting to sound familiar…)." But..but... there was no jab in 1918. It wasn't trialled till 1942...
You're wrong.
https://www.educate-yourself.org/vcd/poisonedneedle11nov09.shtml
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/11/no_author/did-a-military-experimental-vaccine-in-1918-kill-50-100-million-people-blamed-as-spanish-flu/
https://joakimbanglarsen.wordpress.com/vaccine-scandals-history-not-finished/
https://www.thebernician.net/scientists-proved-viruses-are-not-contagious-in-1918/
And on and on.
"In a 2 June 1918 The Times of London dispatch titled, "The Spanish Epidemic," a correspondent in Madrid reported over 100,000 victims of, "The unknown disease…" Were the eponymous Spanish victims also subjected too the US military vaccine?
You're using a MSM article to establish a fact? Just because it's in the "news" does not mean it's necessary true.
Many other sources say there was nothing in Spain...
1918 Flu Fraud: https://www.winterwatch.net/2023/04/the-truth-revealed-about-the-deadly-1918-spanish-flu-it-was-actually-bacterial-pneumonia/
The Times of London reported on the Spanish extent of the flu epidemic, on civilians, before they could have imported the experimental military vaccine. In 1918. Can you explain why the reporter would be covering for the US Army, in that year, in that context?
Nope. You're right. Have a lovely life.
Very gracious way to end the discussion without replying to crucial questions. A classic tactic. Well played.
Hang on... Was it bacterial pneumonia, or was it an experimental vaccine?
Yes. The masks created the bacterial pneumonia and the jabs killed People.
Masks cannot create bacterial pneumonia. For one, every doctor on Earth would have bacterial pneumonia all year round. Do you have a study or can you articulate how masks produce such illness in any meaningful way?
In Spain? In 1918? Masks were not "creating" bacteria (bacteria aren't created by PPE), then or now. Vaccines weren't available in Spain if they were developed in US labs for the US military. Come on, think it through.
Understanding that good health is all about a strong immune system, how would you explain the explorers that infected and subsequently nearly wiped out the native Americans with "contagions" that they were never exposed to prior?
There no evidence of contagion much more likely fear, starvation and covered up slaughter led to mass deaths.
Well, first, I contend We do not have an "immune" system. We have a detox system.
Second, I ponder the truth in such stories as "infected blankets" and all. It is conceivable that some poison or toxin was introduced to drinking water, or other such nefarious act, and the "infected blankets" was a cover of sorts (no pun intended).
Truthfully, I view all "history" with suspicion, given that victors always write it...
Great article - I will add it too - thanks!!! I'm really pleased that there are still intelligent people out there who have the real insight!!!
🙏🏻 I am humbled by Your payment of appreciation! Thank You so much! I am enriched!
Locking down one part of citizens in a country like restaurant owners and staff while sending others to work under the guise of protection, the gov did one thing unethical that is never allowed to happen: putting the value of one life above another.
There it shows clearly that the political side of a state has no moral, no ethic, no natural laws of both. And No real biological science to back up decisions.
All that under the assumption that viruses and contagion did exist, which both do not, the gov breaks natural ethical rules on which we the people could all easyly agree. My life is not worth more than another AND not less worth, either.
They priced the life of children against elderly and vulnerables (as if children were not), the life of essential workers against redundant workers (killing of self-employment), the life of useful iditiots and elites against "useless eaters".
If there were a real existing biological threat to everyone ("none is safe until everybody bla bla bla") all rational rules imposed over people went out of the window. A virus wouldn't be that clever to distinguish between useful iditiots and useless eaters. It would capture whoever it gets. But it didn't, oddly enough.
"Show me your papers please" was the state's parole.
Oh, indeed, between money and controlmind ("government") promoting psychopaths, it's pretty clear We have psychopaths in control on Our planet.
I call Them the useless ELiters.
Thanks so much for reading!
so what about bacteria? Is that also not real? This article seems to go beyond the "no viruses" and into "no contagions." So I can stop washing my hands and just eat a bunch of poo right, as long as my terrain is all good? If I think viruses are real, does that mean that I cannot withdraw my consent from being ruled? I feel like I can still do that. And I also think terrain theory can still apply and viruses can exist at the same time. And I also think that there can be good viruses and bad viruses, and for that reason why would anyone be afraid of viruses, you can apply terrain theory and protect yourself from bad viruses.
Probabilities is another way to say, not sure but I will use math and that means that I am probably right.
Have you heard of this? "British doctor John Snow couldn't convince other doctors and scientists that cholera, a deadly disease, was spread when people drank contaminated water until a mother washed her baby's diaper in a town well in 1854 and touched off an epidemic that killed 616 people."
If you have to block me like Demi did, no worries, it's all good. But I do like how you end everything with Love Always. And I feel that you are being sincere. Thanks for that!
Bacteria, fungii, and even parasites play a role in dealing with dead tissue and toxins. I highly recommend this video by Dr. Sam Bailey:
Why Pathogens Don't Exist: https://odysee.com/@drsambailey:c/Why-Pathogens-Don't-Exist:d
And yes, if You drink water with toxins ("poo" is Our bodies excreting toxins...), Your body will work to get rid of them. You will "get sick."
If I wanted to watch a video, I would look for a video to watch. If there are bacteria fungi and parasites to deal with dead tissues and toxins, why not viruses? Why is the possibility of viruses existing so threatening to terrain theory? I really don't get it, seriously. "They" can just turn around and frighten people with fungi, bacteria and parasites. Getting rid of viruses saves us from tyranny? Seems like a lot of arguing over nothing. Why not just talk about terrain theory (Which is what I believe in BTW) instead of trying to erase the idea of viruses? Sorry I find it very strange and also I find it suspicious.
We have seen bacteria, We have their genomes, directly from them. As I point out, We have never seen a virus. It's not that viruses threaten terrain theory but 1) they are said to be spread via contagion which no One has ever proven - EVER - and rather have all disproven - and contagion is NOT part of terrain theory. 2) The things They point to by killing cells can be found doing the same things to ANYONE, sick or not. 3) ALL "virus genomes" are created in a computer by stitching bits of genetic material together.
If that is not enough to make anyOne question whether they are real or not...
And if You don't want to learn from Dr. Sam... Do have a lovely life.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The Jewish Vaccine: The Truth ‘Truthers’ Ignore . . .
https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/126859700/the-jewish-vaccine-the-truth-truthers-ignore
_____________________________________________________________________________________
PROTOCOLS OF THE MEETINGS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION . . . Protocol X – Preparing for Power . . . (((SARS-CoV2)))
❝. . . utterly exhaust humanity with dissention, hatred, struggle, envy and even by the use of torture, by starvation, by the inoculation of diseases. by want, so that the “Goyim” see no other issue than to take refuge in our complete sovereignty in money and in all else.❞
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/protocol-x-preparing-for-power-sars
The zionist vaccine. The psychopaths' vaccine. All 15+ million working class People of that group are NOT part of the problem. Just the zionists/psychopaths.
https://rumble.com/v3302bc-the-never-isolated-the-virus.html
@1:30
Wuhan Doctor confesses to NBC, that they never isolated the virus
They have send over 200 FOI requests to various agencies around the globe. ALL of them returned a statement that They did not have an isolate. So far, no One has. Anywhere. Ever. Thanks for reading!
Thats why I call it the CONvid SCAMdemic
That works perfectly! I tend to go with "plannedemic." Haha!
Yes I came across all of this stuff a while back myself. I consider it fortunate in fact that I had a relatively minor adverse reaction to a free 'flu' jab 5 or 6 years ago: hives all over my upper torso after never having had them before in my life - or any other reaction for that matter. The head 'immunologist' at a large teaching hospital here that I was referred to promised to find out the ingredients from the manufacturer to work out what it was I was 'allergic' to. Guess what? They refused to tell him! That's roughly when I became an ant-vaxxer, and later on anti-virus.
Have a look at https://bodysnatchers.substack.com/publish/posts/detail/136738393?referrer=%2Fpublish%2Fposts
and https://bodysnatchers.substack.com/publish/posts/detail/40006857?referrer=%2Fpublish%2Fposts
Btw, that photo of Rocky made be think of two things:
- the old novelist's expression "thin, cruel lips", and
- does that guy have Bell's Palsy?
I clicked the links and was told those were "private." I hope there is a work-around.
I'll check, but sometimes Substack does that to me too and makes me login again
Well, it told Me I was signed in as AmaterasuSolar at My email, and suggested I tell You, or log out and log in as You! LOL!
Maybe I sent you links from my home page which might be private and you just need to go to the publication itself and scroll down. There's not that many posts.
Ah. Not being yet completely familiar with SS, I had no idea what I had encountered there. LOL! Ok, will hunt tomorrow. Bonzo time.
Will check out Your articles. Been a long and grueling day today and just jumped on to catch up and soon off to bed. Tomorrow for sure!
And yeah... Rocky was a darling is so many ways! Haha!
Have you read the history of the Tobacco plant virus?
You might be interested in this:
16 laws we need to exit Extermination Planet
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/laws-to-exit-planet-prison
If we don’t succeed, they’ll impose their 6-sword lethal plan fully exposed here:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
I have looked into it, finding this video:
https://odysee.com/@drsambailey:c/tobacco-mosaic-virus-the-beginning-and-end-of-virology:8
Will look over Your links.
Now I know who “THEY” are & I don’t mean the Jews (or just the jews) so don’t cancel me. 😂😂… “let them eat cake 🎂 “
Indeed, They are psychopaths, and though mostly the Ones We see at the top are "jewish," many are not.
"They are psychopaths, and though mostly the Ones We see at the top are "jewish," many are not." - Amaterasu Solar
Wow. Blatant jew hate. I declare myself an anti-zionist but at least I can distinguish between the 2.
Wow. Blatant misreading. Many of My friends, including My best friend for 40 years, are "jewish." But the fact is that, of the Ones We see on the stage, most of the psychopaths at the top are "jewish" for the happenstance that the psychopaths who were in the right place at the right time in history to seize monetary control were from that group.
They inbred to retain the gene for psychopathy, and pass it and the wealth/power to psychopathic heirs.
The "jew" element is irrelevant, but the psychopaths in control use it to create divides.
Maybe wake up a bit...?
Maybe show your "best" Jewish friend your writing on psychopathic Jews?
She knows that 1% of Us across the board are genetic psychopaths, and that a fraction of the "jewish" Ones are mostly in control. She loves My work.
Maybe You should find someOne else to pester.
You believe in freedom of expression, but get annoyed when someone illuminates the flaws in your writing. If you see this as pestering, that's also illuminating. The flu of 1918 killed civilians not exposed to any experimental vaccine. How do you explain that?
This was excellent. I just read the black nobility on another substack … it seems to have been going on forever 😟
Indeed, a VERY long time! Humble thanks for the payment of attention in reading!