The way most narratives unfold tends to involve the mainstream media providing the official narrative with the alternative media providing the counter-narrative.
Nice article Dawn, but the globalist parasitical scum never just move on one thing at once...we may think they do; but behind the obvious; there is always something else, which we miss or potentially miss.
I am not doubting what you state at all, but would just draw your attention to 1, I repeat 1 of the other matters that has cropped up...I will just put the link up and you will figure it out. They are coming for our pets maybe (jab them or kill them) ?. PS THE MSM has articles on dogs, goldfish and keepingbirds ffs.
I'm well aware that the 'would-be controllers' never use a single strategy. I just expose what I can in each article and even then there are many strands that need to be covered. To write about them all in one article would make it the length of an entire book!!
And backing up Dawn's article, we have.... the CDC!
June 14, 2023:
Roger Andoh, man acting as FOIA Officer in the Office of the Chief Operating Officer, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (CDC/ATSDR), confessed that no one at either of the agencies has any scientific proof of the existence of the alleged “SV40” aka “simian (vacuolating) virus 40” or any other alleged “simian virus”, or even any record of any such purported/imaginary “virus” being purified from a sick “host” (step 1 in obtaining actual science).
Jul 16, 2023·edited Jul 16, 2023Liked by Dawn Lester
"It’s interesting to note that ‘HIV’ is now referred to as a disease." Good observation, Dawn.
As you say, and I also notice that there is no talk about "AIDS" these days, Long ago, they tried to make the "HIV/AIDS" marketing campaign, I guess to fix the idea that a "virus" was the cause of a "new illness" or group of already known "illneses" , and to push the business and fear around the novel, but never found retro-illusion, and now they only talk about HIV as that "disease." Interesting that they started with AIDS, then declared a "virus" HIV (whose proteins are human proteins), and after that, the marketing went from HIV/AIDS to just HIV. Maybe because it's impossible to keep to a definition of what AIDS is or was. I mean, the only "HIV" is a "test (that doesn't test) for HIV" , so let's use just HIV as a "disease."
From what I know, SV40 was sent long ago as the other version of the narrative for the alternative media (a common practice, as you also mention in this article).
And also, SV40, as you know, is from... monkey kidney cells! What a coincidence! Here is some interesting information from Cowan regarding SV40. In this case, as Dr. Cowan explains, it is "food" for the antivax movements while keeping the "virus" myth. Something like: OK, you will criticize the vaccines, but using the never-purified SV40, so you will keep the "virus" hoax.
Yep and even CRISPR is a hoax. They claim viruses can snip DNA.
Ok but they do that toxic culture process which basically does that because of the toxicity. They run their genetic BS tests and then claim it was engineered so they can patent it. What a scam.
Great article, Dawn. It helps solidify my own growing conviction that viruses don't exist. However, don't you think Fauci believes they do? Don't you think the CDC and WHO do? Don't you think Pfizer and Moderna believe they do? Isn't intent what counts? The fact that viruses doesn't exist does not mean some of these guys were not deliberately trying to create one. And who know what else they might have done to the environment in trying to create one. I think Gain of Function and Lab Leak accusations are real based solely on intent. One doesn't have to believe in viruses to prove they were up to no good.
In fact, I think the very idea that they have to try so hard to create one makes the argument against them even stronger. It is the perfect starting point to begin the debate against virus and germ theory.
I love your explanation about how the bats don't get sick. Neither do our dogs or cats catch our colds or spread them to us. That has never made sense to me. We are told colds are species-specific, but with absolutely no given science that backs this up. And if they are species specific, how in the heck can a bat spread something to us? It just doesn't add-up, so they move goal posts and try to put new pieces into the puzzle where they don't fit. But, I truly believe these people believe in what they are telling us.
P.S. However, just because they believe in viruses and think they can create them in a lab does not mean that they actually can. They can of course create chemical 'weapons' and I think that's what I believe they are doing for the most part. But because they use some materials that originated within living beings, whether animal or human, they probably think that they are creating 'biological' weapons.
Bats are one of my favorite animals. I have observed that many people have an aversion to them so maybe they are just easy to scapegoat because people already think they are creepy
Back in the 90s I was travelling UK and living in a truck. I met a lady in Cornwall who told me that scientists were creating pathogens that they called viruses. She said that they had made so many thousands of these poisons that they did not name them, they numbered them.
She was most distressed about this and it stuck in my mind, like an unresolved, messed up Rubik's Cube.
I believed her then and even more so now.....
When science is questioned about the root source of any pathogen they can hardly say that they created it in Porton Down or somewhere similar, can they?
No. They have to fob us off with some cock-and-bull story about contagious disease from animals or insects. What they neglect to mention is that they contaminated those animals in the first place.
Another thing that 'science' likes to do is afflict all natural life with electro-magnetic radiation and then deny that it is causing debilitating symptoms.
Clever - given that it is virtually impossible to detect radiation impacts if you only look at living things materialistically.
My conclusion is that we are a very long way from the truth about health and so I very much appreciate your work, Dawn. Thank you!
I don't think that they actually do create 'pathogens' and I'd need some good evidence to convince me otherwise.
However, they can and do create 'chemical weapons' that may contain biological material, which may be why they think and claim that they can make 'biological weapons'.
Back in the 90s it would not have occurred to anyone to refer to chemical weapons. We did not use those terms then. Pathogens is a word which encompasses all poisons.
I am aware of its original definition. However, as with a lot of words, the meaning of 'pathogen' has been changed by the medical establishment to almost exclusively refer now to 'biological' agents because that suits their purposes. Most people do not think of chemicals when they hear the word pathogen.
Too much messing with our language! It really annoys me because they have taken some of the most beautiful words and given them dark edges.... Words like, prism, rainbow, harp, dew..... sigh.
Nice article Dawn, but the globalist parasitical scum never just move on one thing at once...we may think they do; but behind the obvious; there is always something else, which we miss or potentially miss.
I am not doubting what you state at all, but would just draw your attention to 1, I repeat 1 of the other matters that has cropped up...I will just put the link up and you will figure it out. They are coming for our pets maybe (jab them or kill them) ?. PS THE MSM has articles on dogs, goldfish and keepingbirds ffs.
https://news.sky.com/story/deadly-cat-virus-in-cyprus-could-be-potentially-catastrophic-for-uk-12920884
I'm well aware that the 'would-be controllers' never use a single strategy. I just expose what I can in each article and even then there are many strands that need to be covered. To write about them all in one article would make it the length of an entire book!!
Yes, and they also recommend unsuitable foods for pets.
They're Batty!
And backing up Dawn's article, we have.... the CDC!
June 14, 2023:
Roger Andoh, man acting as FOIA Officer in the Office of the Chief Operating Officer, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (CDC/ATSDR), confessed that no one at either of the agencies has any scientific proof of the existence of the alleged “SV40” aka “simian (vacuolating) virus 40” or any other alleged “simian virus”, or even any record of any such purported/imaginary “virus” being purified from a sick “host” (step 1 in obtaining actual science).
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/CDC-simian-virus-existence-purification-PACKAGE-redacted.pdf
Thanks Christine. 🙏
"It’s interesting to note that ‘HIV’ is now referred to as a disease." Good observation, Dawn.
As you say, and I also notice that there is no talk about "AIDS" these days, Long ago, they tried to make the "HIV/AIDS" marketing campaign, I guess to fix the idea that a "virus" was the cause of a "new illness" or group of already known "illneses" , and to push the business and fear around the novel, but never found retro-illusion, and now they only talk about HIV as that "disease." Interesting that they started with AIDS, then declared a "virus" HIV (whose proteins are human proteins), and after that, the marketing went from HIV/AIDS to just HIV. Maybe because it's impossible to keep to a definition of what AIDS is or was. I mean, the only "HIV" is a "test (that doesn't test) for HIV" , so let's use just HIV as a "disease."
From what I know, SV40 was sent long ago as the other version of the narrative for the alternative media (a common practice, as you also mention in this article).
And also, SV40, as you know, is from... monkey kidney cells! What a coincidence! Here is some interesting information from Cowan regarding SV40. In this case, as Dr. Cowan explains, it is "food" for the antivax movements while keeping the "virus" myth. Something like: OK, you will criticize the vaccines, but using the never-purified SV40, so you will keep the "virus" hoax.
https://odysee.com/@Gamzuletova:9/Dr.-Tom-Cowan-on-the-viruses-in-vaccines-cause-cancer-nonsense-SV-40-in-Polio-vaxx-excerpt-from-Live-QA-Webinar-from-June-29th-2022:2
Yep and even CRISPR is a hoax. They claim viruses can snip DNA.
Ok but they do that toxic culture process which basically does that because of the toxicity. They run their genetic BS tests and then claim it was engineered so they can patent it. What a scam.
Thanks Dawn. A well researched and persuasive article.
Exactly!
When the zoonotics or virus thing comes up, I always go back to my question, “when was the last time your dog ‘caught your cold’?”
I kept saying you can NOT appease tyranny...and here we go again!
Great article, Dawn. It helps solidify my own growing conviction that viruses don't exist. However, don't you think Fauci believes they do? Don't you think the CDC and WHO do? Don't you think Pfizer and Moderna believe they do? Isn't intent what counts? The fact that viruses doesn't exist does not mean some of these guys were not deliberately trying to create one. And who know what else they might have done to the environment in trying to create one. I think Gain of Function and Lab Leak accusations are real based solely on intent. One doesn't have to believe in viruses to prove they were up to no good.
In fact, I think the very idea that they have to try so hard to create one makes the argument against them even stronger. It is the perfect starting point to begin the debate against virus and germ theory.
I love your explanation about how the bats don't get sick. Neither do our dogs or cats catch our colds or spread them to us. That has never made sense to me. We are told colds are species-specific, but with absolutely no given science that backs this up. And if they are species specific, how in the heck can a bat spread something to us? It just doesn't add-up, so they move goal posts and try to put new pieces into the puzzle where they don't fit. But, I truly believe these people believe in what they are telling us.
I'm not sure if people like Fauci believe in 'viruses', although clearly many researchers do.
P.S. However, just because they believe in viruses and think they can create them in a lab does not mean that they actually can. They can of course create chemical 'weapons' and I think that's what I believe they are doing for the most part. But because they use some materials that originated within living beings, whether animal or human, they probably think that they are creating 'biological' weapons.
Bats are one of my favorite animals. I have observed that many people have an aversion to them so maybe they are just easy to scapegoat because people already think they are creepy
Back in the 90s I was travelling UK and living in a truck. I met a lady in Cornwall who told me that scientists were creating pathogens that they called viruses. She said that they had made so many thousands of these poisons that they did not name them, they numbered them.
She was most distressed about this and it stuck in my mind, like an unresolved, messed up Rubik's Cube.
I believed her then and even more so now.....
When science is questioned about the root source of any pathogen they can hardly say that they created it in Porton Down or somewhere similar, can they?
No. They have to fob us off with some cock-and-bull story about contagious disease from animals or insects. What they neglect to mention is that they contaminated those animals in the first place.
Another thing that 'science' likes to do is afflict all natural life with electro-magnetic radiation and then deny that it is causing debilitating symptoms.
Clever - given that it is virtually impossible to detect radiation impacts if you only look at living things materialistically.
My conclusion is that we are a very long way from the truth about health and so I very much appreciate your work, Dawn. Thank you!
Thank you for your kind words.
I don't think that they actually do create 'pathogens' and I'd need some good evidence to convince me otherwise.
However, they can and do create 'chemical weapons' that may contain biological material, which may be why they think and claim that they can make 'biological weapons'.
Back in the 90s it would not have occurred to anyone to refer to chemical weapons. We did not use those terms then. Pathogens is a word which encompasses all poisons.
I am aware of its original definition. However, as with a lot of words, the meaning of 'pathogen' has been changed by the medical establishment to almost exclusively refer now to 'biological' agents because that suits their purposes. Most people do not think of chemicals when they hear the word pathogen.
Too much messing with our language! It really annoys me because they have taken some of the most beautiful words and given them dark edges.... Words like, prism, rainbow, harp, dew..... sigh.
Let me share a video about a cute bat that I just came across.
https://fb.watch/lU2hYQCRzF/