Leonardo da Vinci The madonna of the carnation 1478-80
— Wittgenstein (@backtolife_2022) February 27, 2022
Kash Patel: “John Durham is working on the largest criminal conspiracy in US history. It makes Watergate look like a parking citation.” pic.twitter.com/u5WfJjdaCj
— Luke Goldberg (@LukeGoldberg4) February 27, 2022
“Your organism acts in accordance with your DNA program, and now, well, the program has been hacked and modified by Pfizer.”
What the article shows is that in vitro, using a human liver cell line, Pfizer mRNA vaccine uses a natural reverse transcriptase enzyme called LINE-1, and the genetic code of the vaccine is reverse transcribed into the DNA. It also explains that vaccine mRNA actually does travel to the liver as one of the preferred sites (the other sites, as we heard, are ovaries and more). What does it mean? Normally, our cells do the opposite: the cell nucleus, where the DNA is, expresses certain DNA code based on conditions of the cell, and produces natural, human messenger RNA. That messenger RNA travels out of the nucleus, where it is expressed into proteins needed for cell building. This is how growing organisms express different genetic programs to grow muscle cells or brain cells, etc.
This process is called “transcription”. For many years, Central Dogma of Molecular Biology stated that the “reverse transcription” — moving genetic code from RNA back into the sacred cellular nucleus and recoding the DNA — was impossible. Eventually, scientists realized that it is possible under various conditions. For example, the HIV RNA virus is able to do so and it reprograms our DNA to produce copies of it. HIV is the virus that causes AIDS. To effect reverse transcription, enzymes called “reverse transcriptases” are needed. One of them is called LINE-1. Apparently, per study, the Pfizer mRNA vaccine causes cells to produce that LINE-1 enzyme.
Simplified: As I explained in response to a questioner: “Pfizer mRNA vaccine changes our genetic code that determines how our organisms operate, that you inherited from your mom and dad. Now your DNA was changed from what your mom and dad gave you, by adding a little mysterious “edit” from Pfizer. Your organism acts in accordance with your DNA program, and now, well, the program has been hacked and modified by Pfizer.”
Cancer Code: Considering that Sars-Cov-2 “spike protein” has cancer code from Moderna 2017’ patent 9,587,003, it is imperative to find out the implications of this reverse transcription, and whether the vaccinated now have any undesirable genetic code embedded into their DNA. Of particular interest is whether this mRNA-induced reverse transcription affects the “germ line”, such as eggs and sperm cells, and whether it also affects the fetus of pregnant mothers.
Our astute commenter pointed out an anonymous 4chan post from Dec 2020, long before any of this became known. The date makes us all ask, did this person know too much?
People must simply not understand the grave danger. Vaccinations continue.
Please note that a question arises: gp130 mutations can cause liver tumor, and the entire experiment was performed on a line of immortal liver cancer cells. Could it be that the original article picked up mutated gp130 from the Huh7 liver cancer cells? If that is the case, if the DNA sequence is inherent to Huh7 line itself, it could invalidate a lot of conclusions that the original science article, as well as my own articles, were making. However, the authors were diligent with controls and did NOT see the questioned DNA sequence that I am looking at, in the control cells that did NOT receive the Pfizer vaccine. In addition, the published DNA sequence contained Sars-Cov-2 genes (see BLAST results), so it does come from the effect of the vaccine, not the Huh7 culture cells.
I did perform some cursory checks, to the best of my ability, and the Huh7 line contains p53 mutations, but it does not seem like it contains gp130 mutations. So, keeping my fingers crossed, the mutated gp130 gene that I found, is a genuine finding of lab research, comes from the mRNA vaccine, and not a coincidental pickup from the Huh7 cells. I am guessing that the authors were looking at liver cells specifically, because they knew where to look (that the mRNA delivery system delivers the lipid nanoparticles to the liver). Why did the authors pick liver cells? Maybe because they heard of this 4chan post from 2020, when NOTHING yet was known about the strange mRNA vaccines.
We were Told it will Never Happen
Clarifications: The sequence of mutated gp130 genes, found in the DNA reverse transcribed from Pfizer Covid vaccine,
• Does not mean that it will NECESSARILY cause cancer
• The four “red dot” mutations listed, may be harmless
• Does not mean that it was added to Pfizer vaccine intentionally to cause harm
• Does not mean that it is even expressed as a gp130 protein, as expression of genes depends on cellular context
• What it DOES mean is that we need to look at this closely.
“Macgregor is saying that Russia does not want to engage a civilian population and is making every effort to avoid civilian conflict..”
My spidey senses tell me that Col Douglas Macgregor will not be welcomed back on Fox News after he gave a rather different take on what is happening amid the Russia-Ukraine conflict that does not toe the common media line. Jennifer Griffin was furious. The first presentation was during a segment with Fox Host Dan Bongino. The second presentation of essentially the same analysis was with Trey Gowdy. In both discussions Macgregor’s perspective reconciles the disparity between what the U.S. government, State Dept, and corporate media are saying -vs- what is visible. Essentially, Macgregor is saying that Russia does not want to engage a civilian population and is making every effort to avoid civilian conflict in those population centers.
In part this is because Putin knows the Western approach is a propaganda war that would be fueled by what it would look like if population carnage took place. However, if Ukraine President Zelenskyy does not acquiesce to terms, Putin could easily crush those centers with artillery and rockets. What Macgregor outlines would explain why these skirmishes always seem ‘off in the distance’. The western government and media perspective is to make it seem like Volodymyr Zelenski and the rebellious civilian misfits are beating the Russian army because that frames a better story. However, what Macgregor outlines is Putin not wanting to fuel the United Nations, NATO and State Dept narrative engineering, thus the absence of visible fighting.
The gulf between popular perception and strategic reality continues to grow in Ukraine. If you only read Western media, you would think the Russian military was on the verge of defeat. In reality, they have a clear path to victory. Satellite imagery indicates that a massive Russian armored column, with +800 vehicles, is approaching Kiev from the north. At the same time, Russian forces in the East are working to link up and encircle a large fraction of the Ukrainian military. What we’re witnessing is a funhouse mirror version of the Gulf War. During that conflict, images of smart bombing broadcast into American homes highlighted U.S. dominance. Today, Twitter images of Ukrainian tactical success are creating a false narrative of Russian defeat.
The single least appreciated fact about the current conflict is that Russia has only committed 1/2 to 2/3 of the forces it built up around Ukraine’s borders. It also has the ability to draw Belarus into the war, whose armored divisions would represent a potent “fourth wave.” What Russia *has* suffered is a massive defeat in information warfare. The narrative of Ukrainian success is having real consequences in terms of the willingness of foreign powers to toughen sanctions and provide military aid. We have already seen the Ruble fall to its lowest exchange rate in history (100:1) vs. the Dollar. This is not quite enough to destabilize the Russian economy – in the sense of causing internal political chaos – but it’s enough that ordinary Russians are scared.
Before the war, Western polling showed that Russians favored military intervention in Ukraine to prevent NATO membership by a 2:1 margin. But it’s clear that they did not appreciate that Russia would become a global pariah state. I don’t believe the war enjoys that support now. Today, I’m worried that Western nations may overplay their hand in trying to remove Putin. They have drawn blood in their attempts to harm Russia’s economy, and they will seek to go further in driving the Russian people to rise up and demand an end to the war.
Vladimir Putin is a madman. He’s lost it. At least that is what the leaders of the West would like you to believe. According to their narrative, Putin — isolated, alone, confused, and angry at the unfolding military disaster Russia was undergoing in Ukraine — lashed out, ostensibly threatening the entire world with nuclear annihilation. In a meeting with his top generals on Sunday, the beleaguered Russian president announced, “I order the defense minister and the chief of the general staff of the Russian armed forces to put the deterrence forces of the Russian army into a special mode of combat service.” The reason for this action, Putin noted, centered on the fact that, “Western countries aren’t only taking unfriendly actions against our country in the economic sphere, but top officials from leading NATO members made aggressive statements regarding our country” in relation to the ongoing situation in Ukraine.
The “deterrence forces” Putin spoke of refers to Russia’s nuclear arsenal. What made the Russian president’s words resonate even more was that last Thursday, when announcing the commencement of Russia’s “special military operation” against Ukraine, Putin declared that “no one should have any doubts that a direct attack on our country will lead to the destruction and horrible consequences for any potential aggressor.” He emphasized that Russia is “one of the most potent nuclear powers and also has a certain edge in a range of state-of-the-art weapons.” When Putin issued that threat, The Washington Post described it as “empty, a mere baring of fangs.” The Pentagon, involved as it was in its own review of U.S. nuclear posture designed to address threats such as this, seemed non-plussed, with an anonymous official noting that U.S. policy makers “don’t see an increased threat in that regard.”
[..] by invoking Article IV, NATO was positioning itself for potential offensive military action; its previous military interventions against Serbia in 1999, Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq in 2004, and Libya in 2011, were all done under Article IV of the NATO Charter. Seen in this light, the premise that NATO is an exclusively defensive organization, committed to the promise of collective self-defense, is baseless. Second, while Article V (collective defense) protections only extend to actual NATO members, which Ukraine is not, Article IV allows the umbrella of NATO protection to be extended to those non-NATO members whom the alliance views as an ally, a category Stoltenberg clearly placed Ukraine in.
Finally, Stoltenberg’s anointing of Ukraine as a NATO ally came at the same time he announced the activation and deployment of NATO’s 40,000-strong Response Force, some of which would be deployed to NATO’s eastern flank, abutting Ukraine. The activation of the Response Force is unprecedented in the history of NATO, a fact that underscores the seriousness to which a nation like Russia might attach to the action. When seen in this light, Putin’s comments last Thursday were measured, sane, and responsible. Since the Article IV consultations began, NATO members have begun to supply Ukraine with lethal military aid, with the promise of more in the days and weeks to come.
These shipments can only gain access to Ukraine through a ground route that requires transshipment through NATO members, including Romania and Poland. It goes without saying that any vehicle carrying lethal military equipment into a war zone is a legitimate target under international law; this would apply in full to any NATO-affiliated shipment or delivery done by a NATO member on their own volition. What happens when Russia begins to attack NATO/EU/US/Allied arms deliveries as they arrive on Ukrainian soil? Will NATO, acting under Article IV, create a buffer zone in Ukraine, using the never-before-mobilized Response Force? One naturally follows the other…
“Bitten off more than they can chew.” – @realscottritter explains how the US and NATO’s post-Cold War restructuring left them unable to match a highly capable Russian military.
— MintPress News (@MintPressNews) February 28, 2022
Reporting from mom’s basement.
CNN ‘War Correspondent’ Clarissa Ward accidentally explained why the public is confused about what the corporate media are saying about the Ukraine war with Russia, compared to what is actually visible about the Ukraine war with Russia. During a segment with Brian Stelter, Ms Ward explained how CNN war corresponding in Ukraine consists of talking about material provided to her by CNN production crews who sit and scour through YouTube, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook and social media posts to find the input material for their stories. Clarissa Ward didn’t mean to expose how the propaganda of modern warfare is created, but she did. Ward was thanking the people in the background of CNN who search social media for their Ukraine content; however, in talking about what they do, she affirmed what we already knew was taking place.
People wondering why there is no visible ‘fight’ in this war, now find the baseline which Deputy National Security Advisor Daleep Singh was talking about last week. The State Department, intelligence community and political participants in the U.S. government are constructing the “war” against Vladimir Putin through the prism of social likeability as a cultural weapon. When the goal is to produce content that tells the “better story,” social media becomes the battlefield. War corresponding is reduced to using the corporate media platform to enhance the social media battlefield. Essentially you might call this “World War Reddit.”
The CNN war correspondent doesn’t even need to be in Ukraine, except for the fact they need some form of geographical context to create the credibility. The actual content of Ukraine material for the broadcast can just as easily be assembled in New York, California or mom’s basement in Illinois. The social media content extracted by CNN workers, stationed anywhere, is then transmitted to the network producers who assemble the material, and a “war correspondent’ puts on a helmet and appears live on camera in Ukraine to discuss it. This is modern journalism, aka propaganda creation, aka narrative engineering, and why there’s a lack of actual evidence for anything being attributed to the narrative surrounding the war between Ukraine and Russia.
>> @ClarissaWard describes how CNN staffers have been "combing exhaustively through all of the social media footage" from Ukraine and Russia, working to geolocate it and "place it in its appropriate context…" pic.twitter.com/IMv4DIGs6t
— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) February 27, 2022
We know too little about Lukashenko. So little, our media can make him a cartoon character.
Belarus is making preparations to deploy troops into Ukraine in support of Russian forces as soon as Monday, a Biden administration official told The Washington Post on Sunday evening. Russian President Vladimir Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine last week, with some of his troops coming into Ukraine through Belarus. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko has been a close ally of Putin. He criticized Western sanctions on Russia and said it would push the Kremlin towards a Third World War, according to Russian state media. “It’s very clear Minsk is now an extension of the Kremlin,” the U.S. official told The Washington Post.
Two military transport planes took off from an airfield in western Belarus on Sunday, according to eyewitness accounts on a Telegarm channel analyzed by The Kyiv Independent. Previously, Belarus was only allowing Russian forces to use its territory and providing medical care and intelligence. The most recent reports would bring Belarus directly into the war.
Have your cake and eat it too? Two steps up and one step back?
Defying a coalition of 35 organizations calling for a veto, Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill this week shielding health-care providers from being sued by patients and family members over COVID-19-related injuries, deaths and refusal to try available treatment. The new law provides liability protection to health-care providers that follow “government-issued health standards” that “include the CDC’s COVID-19 guidelines, which many say aren’t working,” the groups wrote in a letter to DeSantis. “Some medical professionals have stated that these CDC protocols have led to unnecessary medicines, ventilation and deaths.” Shawn McBride, director of The American Freedom Information Institute, Inc., who led the 35 groups opposing the bill, said that while DeSantis “signed a bill that may allow CDC protocols to continue in some hospitals, we’ve laid the foundation to help more folks get to medical freedom.”
On the same day DeSantis signed the bill, the Florida Department of Health issued new guidelines allowing for more treatments to be made available. DeSantis and State Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo announced the new guidance without mentioning the bill he signed into law. The guidelines, DeSantis claims, push back on “unscientific corporate masking, reducing isolation for all Floridians including those in schools and daycares, and recommending that physicians should exercise their individual clinical judgement and expertise based on their patients’ needs and preferences.” They also “are empowering health care practitioners to follow science, not Fauci’s status quo,” he added.
The guidelines address corporate mask policies, advise healthcare practitioners and facilities to reevaluate status quo protocols “in favor of scientifically based treatment options to benefit patients,” update school and daycare guidance to limit the student and child isolation timeframe, and reduce the overall isolation period for Floridians who test positive for COVID-19. “The state of Florida has widespread natural and vaccine-induced immunity,” Dr. Ladapo said. “Evidence suggests that most secondary transmission occurs early on. Our state will continue to make decisions for Floridians rooted in sound science, not fear, whether they are working or in school.”
One world government.
The World Health Organization will convene member states and leaders of Covid-19 immunization credential technology groups to recognize different vaccine certificates across nations and regions, a top Vaccination Credential Initiative official told POLITICO’s Ben Leonard. The WHO is bringing together the groups to develop a “trust framework” that would allow countries to verify whether vaccine credentials are legitimate, said Brian Anderson, chief digital health physician at MITRE and a co-founder of the VCI. Why it matters: The effort would aid international travel by allowing proof of vaccination to be more easily shared and verified, Anderson said.
Many countries and regions have different standards for proof of inoculation, creating confusion for travelers and officials. “It’s piecemeal, not coordinated and done nation to nation,” Anderson said. “It can be a real challenge.” The WHO would say only that news on the topic should be coming “soon.” The VCI is behind SMART Health Cards, which have become the de facto standard for digital vaccine credentials in the U.S., with dozens of states developing or adopting the technology. The group will participate in the initiative. It’s unclear whether the U.S. would participate.
The move would be the most significant coordinated international push to enable interoperable credentials among nations and regions. Existing standards include a digital Covid certificate for European Union member nations. The U.S. has no official standard despite SMART Health Cards’ dominance. Advocates have touted the vaccine credentials, commonly known as passports, as a way to facilitate travel and reopening efforts. Many red-leaning states have opposed the technology, but that hesitancy appears to be softening as several of those states have adopted the technology.
Richard Werner, D.Phil. (Oxon) discusses the political agenda behind COVID
Richard notes that recent financial sanctions against peaceful protesters in Canada presage things to come if digital IDs & CBDCs are in place
— Taylor Hudak (@_taylorhudak) February 27, 2022
“..a High Court ruled that her vaccine mandate represented a “gross violation of human rights”
New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was left reeling on Friday after a High Court ruled that her vaccine mandate represented a “gross violation of human rights” for New Zealanders. The landmark case means that the police and NZDF cannot be fired for refusing to take the experimental vaccine. This case will be used to overthrow all of Ardern’s illegal mandates in New Zealand. Justice Francis Cooke ruled that ordering frontline police officers and Defence staff to be vaccinated or face losing their job was not a “reasonably justified” breach of the Bill of Rights. Nzherald.co.nz reports: The lawyer for the police and Defence staff at the centre of the claim is now calling for the suspended workers to return to their jobs immediately, saying many have given decades of service to their community and are still committed to their jobs.
The challenge, put forward by a group of Defence force and police employees, questioned the legality of making an order under the Covid-19 Public Health Response Act to require vaccination for frontline employees. The challenge was supported by a group of 37 employees affected by the mandate, who submitted written affidavits to the court. Minister of Workplace Relations and Safety Michael Wood, Deputy Police Commissioner Tania Kura and NZDF Chief People Officer Brigadier Matthew Weston filed affidavits defending the mandate. As it stands, 164 of the overall police workforce of nearly 15,700 were affected by the mandate after choosing not to be vaccinated. For NZDF, the mandate affected 115 of its 15,500 staff. The group relied on two aspects of the Bill of Rights – the right to decline a medical procedure and the right to religious freedom.
Where’s the risk located?
A bear has arrived for lunch and unfortunately, he’s staying for dinner. We have been up all night working the phones. It has been a Lehman weekend – as in a 24-hour scramble to find and calculate the risk – NOT the size of the risk. The dirty work of going through old positions on bank balance sheets is being done around the clock as we speak. We do know the cost of default protection on French banks has diverged from UK-Asia-centric HSBC meaningfully. After working at Soc Gen for three years we can tell you, the books on most EU banks are a cobweb of darkness. In 2016, when Glencore was going down, every week we found more and more risk tied to Glencore assets. The truth bled out very slowly.
Italian banks have been very close with Russia as well. The point is, it’s very tough for politicians to “target” SWIFT sanctions into this darkness, very tough. In a loud voice the client said – Larry – details matter BIGLY we need to urgently to know exactly what is sanctioned here. They – Olaf – Macron – Biden – will try and dance around risk with a targeted SWIFT but they re probably not qualified to do so. They are messing with the plumbing of the global financial system. If they shoot from the hip, there could be large consequences. Politicians are reaching in the dark to find risk. If they sanctioned the CBR (central bank of Russia) and the transfer agents for Eurobonds, then Russia will default on all foreign debt immediately. And if Russia tries to find a back door through China – will the USA fine or sanction Chinese banks?
Over the weekend another client said “Germany can play SWIFT tough guy all they want – but Macron has to protect the vulnerable Soc Gen and Draghi is probably trying to ring-fence exposed, Moscow cozy Italian banks like Intesa and UniCredit. Lost in the Ukraine tragedy -the Fed’s favorite inflation measure- core PCE has moved from 3.7% in September to 5.2% in January, and the war-torn invasion only pours lighter fluid on this fire. *SCHOLZ: GERMANY TO SPEND MORE THAN 2% OF GDP YEARLY ON DEFENSE + massive social costs across the EU to off set energy prices as well. So long to the planet’s global negative yield anchor. We are heading back to a 1967-1979 regime. Overweight hard assets, take down financial assets and buckle up.
Support the Automatic Earth in virustime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.