CDC/Big Pharma Bio-Weapon Collusion

Bombshell Bio-Weapon Update July 11th! New Interview With Reiner Fuelmich and David E Martin. Scroll further down for a transcript of these shocking revelations.

DOCUMENTS: U.S. Gov’t Sent “mRNA Coronavirus Vaccine Candidates” to University Researchers WEEKS BEFORE “COVID” Outbreak in China! How did they know . . . Unless they caused it?

Confidential documents have surfaced in a Confidentiality Agreement between the U.S. National Institutes of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and Moderna showing they transferred “potential coronavirus vaccine candidates” to the University of North Carolina, on December 12, 2019 . . which was nineteen (19) days BEFORE the outbreak of novel coronavirus in China!

How could they know they would need a Coronavirus Vaccine BEFORE the outbreak, unless they had knowledge the outbreak was going to happen?   

This begs the question: Did they CAUSE the outbreak?

Above is the header portion of Page 105 of the Confidentiality Agreement.  It deals with the actual physical transfer of “mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates” being sent to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

It is signed on December 12 by Ralph Baric, PhD, at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, who is listed as the “Recipient” of the mRNA Coronavirus Vaccine candidates, Image below:

It is also signed by Jacqueline Quay, Director of Licensing and Innovation Support at that same University, with the signature dated December 16, 2019. Image below:

On behalf of the PROVIDER of the mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates, the same agreement is signed by Barney Graham MD PhD, who is shown as an “Investigator” with the NIAID (National Institutes of Allergies and Infectious Diseases) whose signature is not dated, image below:

Also on behalf of the PROVIDER is the electronic stamp signature of Amy F. Petrik, Technology Transfer Specialist, NIAID and that electronic signature bears an electronic time/date stamp showing her approval on 2019.12.12 at 08:05:02  (8:05 AM) and then shows “-0500” which is a reference to how many hours different from GMT time “-0500” minus five hours GMT, which corresponds to the US east coast . . . North Carolina.

Finally, the document is also signed by Sunny Himansu PhD who is shown as the Moderna Investigator. Image below:

and all of it was approved by Shaun Ryan, who is listed as Moderna’s Deputy General Counsel (Lawyer), image below:

Here is a scanned image of the actual signature page showing the signatures, dates and times:

 

All of these signatures took place BEFORE any mention of a novel coronavirus came from China.  All of the individuals who signed, knew they were signing to receive specimens to be researched as “mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates.”

How would any of these people have known that an mRNA Vaccine for a coronavirus would be needed, if word had not yet come out – ANYWHERE – about some new coronavirus outbreak in China?  Such word did not come out until December 31.

Below is a screen shot from the World Health Organization web site showing the Time Line for the novel coronavirus outbreak starting in Wuhan China.   The WHO web site clearly shows the WHO first found out about a new “viral pneumonia” in Wuhan on December 31:

Here is a DIRECT LINK to the exact web page on the World Health Organization web site from which this info was obtained.

Some people are wondering if these people knew on December 12 that a new mRNA Coronavirus vaccine would be needed because they were the ones who CAUSED the outbreak?

Maybe it’s time for law enforcement to start looking into this factual evidence?

They Also Knew About The Coming Injuries & Deaths!

m

Transcript of Reiner Fuelmich Interviewing David Martin

July 2021

David Martin, a self introduction..

From a corporate standpoint we have since 1998 been the world’s largest underwriter of intangible assets used in finance in a 168 countries. So in the majority of the countries around the world our underwriting systems which include the entire corprus of all patents, patent applications, federal grants, procurement records, e-government records etc we have the ability to not only track what is happening, and who is involved in what is happening, but we monitor a series of thematic interests, for a variety of organizations and individuals as well as for our own commercial use. For as you probably know we maintain three global equity indices which are the top performing large cap and mid cap equity indexes worldwide. So our business is to monitor the innovation that is happening around the world and specifically to monitor the economics of that innovation, the degree to which, financial interests are being served, and corporate interests are being served etc. So our business is the business of innovation and, it’s finance.

So obviously from the stand point of this presentation, as you know, we have reviewed the over four thousand patents that have been issued around SARS Coronavirus and we have done a very comprehensive review of the financing of all of the manipulations of Coronavirus which gave rise to SARS as a subclade of the Beta Coronavirus family.

So what I wanted to do was give your a quick overview, timeline wise, as we are not going to go through over 4000 patents in this conversation, and so I have sent to you and your team a document that is exceptionally important. It was made public in the spring of 2020 and this document, which can be posted in the public record, is quite critical in that we took the reported gene sequence, which was reportedly isolated as a Novel Coronavirus, indicated as such by the ICTV, the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses, of the World Health Organization, is quite critical in that we took the reported gene sequences which were reportedly novel and reviewed those against the patent records that were available as of the spring of 2020 and what we found which is what you will see in this report, are over 120 patented pieces of evidence, to suggest that the declaration of a Novel Coronavirus, actually was an entire fallacy. There was no Novel Coronavirus, there are countless, very subtle modifications of Coronavirus sequences that have been uploaded, but their was no single identified Coronavirus at all. As a matter of fact we found records in the patent records, of sequences attributed to novelty, going to patents that were sought as early as 1999. So not only was this not a novel anything, it has actually not been novel for over two decades.

So I will take you through a very short journey through the patent landscape so that people will understand what happened. So, as you know, up until 1999 the topic of Coronavirus, visa-vi the patent activity around Coronavirus was uniquely applied to the Veterinary sciences. The first ‘vaccine’ ever patented for Coronavirus was actually sought by PFIZER. The application for the first vaccine for Coronavirus which was specifically this ‘S Spike Protein’, so the exact same thing that we have ‘alledgedly’ rushed into invention, the first application was filed January 28th, 2000, 21 years ago!

So the idea that we mysteriously stumbled upon the way to intervene upon vaccines is not only ludicrous, it is incredulous… because Timothy Miller, Sharon Klefer, Albert Paul Reid and Elaine Jones, filed on January 28th, 2000 filed what was ultimately issued as US Patent number 6372224 which was the Spike Protein Virus, a vaccine for the Canine Coronavirus, which is actually one of a multiple forms of Coronavirus but as I said the early work up until 1999 was actually focused in the area of vaccines for animals. The two animals receiving the most attention were probably Ralph Barrick’s (Barretts) work on rabbits and the rabbit cardiomyopathy which was associated with significant problems among rabbit breeders. And then, Canine Coronavirus in Pfizer’s work to identify how to develop S and Spike Protein vaccine target candidates giving rise to the obvious evidence that says that neither the coronavirus concept of a vaccine nor the principle of the Coronavirus itself as a pathogen of interest with respect to the Spike Protein’s behavior is anything that is novel at all, as a matter of fact it’s 22 years old based on patent filing.

What is more problematic and which is the most egregious problem is that Anthony Fauci and NIAID found the malleability of Coronavirus to be a potential candidate for HIV vaccines. And so SARS is actually not a natural progression of a genetic modification of Coronavirus, as a matter of fact very specifically in 1999 Anthony Fauci funded research at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, specifically to create, and you cannot help but to lament what I am about to read because this comes directly from a patent application filed on April 19th, 2002, and you heard the date correctly, 2002, where the NIAID built an ‘Infectious Replication Defective Coronavirus’ that was specifically targeted for human lung epithelium, in other words, we made SARS, and we patented it on April 19th 2002 before there was any alleged outbreak in Asia, which as you know, followed that by several months. That patent, issued as Patent 7279327, that patent lays out in very specific gene sequencing the fact that we knew the ace receptor, the ace 2 binding domain, the S1 spike protein, and other elements as of what we have come to know as this “scourge pathogen” was not only engineered, but could be synthetically modified in the laboratory using nothing more than gene sequencing technologies taking computer code and turning it into a pathogen or an intermediate of the pathogen. That technology was funded exclusively in the early days as a means by which we could actually harness Coronavirus as a vector to distribute HIV vaccine.

David to Reiner… “so it gets worse” Reiner replies… Uh Oh!

My organization was asked to monitor Biological and Chemical Weapons treaty violations in the very early days of 2000, you’ll remember the Anthrax events in September of 2001 and we were part of an investigation that gave rise to the Congressional inquiry into not only the Anthrax origins but also into what was unusual behavior of Bayer’s Ciprofloxacin drug which was a drug used as a potential treatment for Anthrax poisoning. Throughout the fall of 2001 we began monitoring an enormous number of bacteria/ and viral pathogens that were being patented through NIH, NIAID, USAMRIID, the US Armed Forces Infectious Disease program, and a number of other agencies internationally but corroborated with them. And our concern was that Coronavirus was being seen as not only a potential manipulative agent for potential use as a vaccine vector, but it was also very clearly being considered as a biological weapon candidate. And so our first public reporting on this took place prior to the SARS outbreak in the latter part of 2001 so you can imagine how disappointed I am to be sitting here 20 years later, having 20 years earlier pointed (out) that there was a problem looming on the horizon with respect to Coronavirus. But after the alleged outbreak and I will always say alleged outbreak because I think it is important for us to understand that Coronavirus as a circulating pathogen inside the viral model that we have, is actually not new to the human condition and is not new to the last few decades. It has actually been part of the sequence of proteins that circulates for quite a long time.

But the alleged outbreak that took place in China in 2002 going into 2003 gave rise to a very problematic April 2003 filing by the United States Center For Disease Control & Prevention, and this topic is very important to get the nuance precise. Because in addition to filing the entire genetic sequence on which became SARS Coronavirus, which is actually a violation of 35 United States Code section 101, you cannot patent a naturally occurring substance. The violation was Patent number 7220852, now that Patent also had a series of derivative Patents associated with it, these are Patent applications that were broken apart because they were of multiple Patentable subject matter. But these include US Patent number 4659270P3, which is actually a very interesting designation, US Patent 7776521. These patents covered not only the gene sequence of SAR’s Coronavirus, but also detected the means of detecting it. Using RT PCR. Now the reason why that’s a problem is you actually both own the patent on the gene itself and you own the patent on it’s detection you have a cunning advantage of being able to control 100% of the provenance of not only the virus itself but also it’s detection. Meaning you have entire scientific and message control. And this patent sought by the CDC was allegedly justified by their public relations team as being sought so that everyone would be free to be able to research Coronavirus. The only problem with that statement is that it’s a lie. And the reason why it’s a lie is that the Patent Office not once, but twice, rejected the patent on the gene sequence as it was un-patentable because the gene sequence was already in the public domain. In other words prior to the CDC filing for a patent the patent office found 99.9% identity with the already existing Coronavirus recorded in the public domain, and over the rejection of the patent examiner, and after having to pay an appeal fine in 2006 and 2007, the CDC over-rode the patent office’s rejection of their patent and ultimately in 2007 got the patent on SARS Coronavirus.

So every public statement that CDC has made that said that this was in the public’s interest is falsifiable by their own paid bribe to the patent office. This is not something that is subtle and to make matters worse, they paid an addittional fee to keep their application private. The last time I checked is that if you are trying to make information available for general public research you would not pay a fee to keep the information private. I wish I could have made up anything I just said but all of that is available in the public patent archive record which any member of the public could review and the Public PAIR, as it is called at the US Patent Office, has not only the evidence, but the actual documents which I have in my possession.

Now… this is critically important. It is critically important because fact checkers have repeatedly stated that the Novel Coronavirus, designated as SARS COV2, is in fact distinct from, the CDC Patent. And here is both the genetic and the patent problem. If you look at the gene sequence that is filed by CDC in 2003, again in 2005, and then again in 2006, what you find is identity in somewhere between 89 and 99% of the sequence overlaps that have been identified in what is called the Novel subclade of what is called SARS COV2.

What we know is that the core designation of SARS Coronavirus, which is actually the ‘clade’ of the Beta Coronavirus family, and the subclade which has been called SARS COV2, have to overlap from a taxonomic point of view. You cannot have SARS designation on a thing without it first being SARS. So the disingenuous fact-checking that has been done saying that somehow or another CDC has nothing to do with patent or this particular pathogen, is beyond the literal credibility of the published sequences and it is also beyond credulity when it comes to the ICTV taxonomy because it very clearly states that this is in fact a subclade of the clade called SARS Coronavirus.

Now… whats important is that on the 28th of April, and listen to the date very carefully because three days after CDC filed the patent on the SAES Coronavirus in 2003, three days later Sequoia Pharmaceuticals, a company that was set up in Maryland, on the 23rd of April 2003 filed a patent on anti-viral agents, treatment and control, of infections by Coronavirus. CDC filed three days earlier, and then the treatment was available three days later. Now just hold that thought for a second, Reiner interjects with who is Sequoia Pharmaceuticals, David replies, Now that is a good question because Sequoia Pharmaceuticals and ultimately Adling Pharmaceuticals, became rolled into the proprietary holdings of Pfizer, Purcell and Johnson&Johnson.

So ask yourself a simple question, how would someone have a patent on a thing that was invented three days earlier. The patent in question the April 28th 2003 patent 7151163 issued to Sequoia Pharmaceuticals, has another ‘problem’. The problem is that it was issued and published before the CDC patent on Coronavirus was actually allowed. So the degree to which the information could have been known by any means other than insider information between those parties is zero. It is not physically possible for you to patent a thing that treats a thing that had not yet been published because CDC had paid to keep it secret. This my friends is the definition of criminal conspiracy, racketeering and collusion. This is not a theory, this is evidence. You cannot have information in the future and form a treatment for a thing that did not exist. Reiner interjects… “this could well blow up into a RICO case ultimately” David replies… it is not’could blow up into it’… it is a RICO case. And the RICO pattern which was established in April 2003 for the first Coronavirus, was played out to exactly the same schedule when we see SARS COV2 show up, when we have Moderna getting the spike protein sequence by phone from the vaccine research center at NIAID prior to, the definition of the Novel subclade. How do you treat a thing, before you actually have the thing.

David… “it’s going to get worse here” Reiner replies… “oh it can’t get worse” David… “oh it does”

In the 5th of June 2008 which is an important date because it is actually around the time that DARPA the Defense Research Program in the United States actively took a interest in Coronavirus as a biological weapon. June 5th 2008 Ablynx which you now know is part of Sanofi filed a series of patents that specifically targeted what we’ve been told is the novel feature of the SARS COV2 virus, and you heard what I just said, this is the 5th of June 2008, specifically they targeted which was called the poly-basic cleavage site for SARS COV The Novel Spike Protein and the Ace2 Receptor Binding Domain which is allegedly novel to SARS COV2, and all of that was patented on the 5th of June 2008 and those patents in sequence were issued between November 24th 2015 which was US patent 9193780, so that one came out after the gain of function moratorium, that one came after the MERS outbreak in the Middle East. So what you find is that, then in 2016, 2017, 2019, a series of patents all covering not only the RNA strands, but also the sub components of the gene strands, were all issued to Ablynx and Sanofi. And then we have Purcell, we have Rubius Therapeutics, we have Childrens Medical Corporation, and we have countless others that include Ludwig Maximillian University, Protein Science Corporation, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, University of Iowa, University of Hong Kong, Chinese Genome Center, all identifying in patent filings, that ranged from 2008 until 2017, every attribute that was allegedly uniquely published by the single reference publication Novel Bat Coronavirus, reveals, quote, Natural Insertions of the S1, S2 To Cleavage Site of the Spike Protein and possible Recombinant 3 Origin of the SARS COV2 Virus. The paper that has been routinely used to identify the Novel Virus, unfortunately if you actually take what they report to be novel, you find 73 patents issued between 2008 and 2019 that have the elements that were allegedly ‘novel; in the SARS COV2 specifically as it relates to the poly-basic cleavage site, the ACE2 binding receptor domain, and the spike protein. So the clinically novel components of the clinically unique, clinically contagious… “you know where I am going with this?” okay… there was no outbreak of SARS, because we had engineered all of the elements of that, and by 2016 the paper that was funded during the ‘gain of function’ moratorium that said that the SARS Coronavirus was poised for human emergence, written by none other than Ralph Barrett, was not only poised for human emergence, but it was patented for commercial exploitation, 73 times.

So those who want to live in the illusion that somehow or another that that is the end of the story be prepared for a disappointment because somebody knew something in 2015 and 2016 which gave rise to my favorite quote of this entire pandemic, and by that I am not being cute, my favorite quote of this pandemic was a statement made in 2015 by Peter Dazak. The statement that was made by Peter Dazak and published in the National Academies of Press publication February 12th 2016 and I am quoting, “we need to increase public understanding of the need for medical countermeasures, such as a Pan Coronavirus Vaccine. A key driver is the media and the economics will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues, investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process.” end quote.

The above transcript is of the first half of the interview only.