Read on Twitter
The Moderna and Pfizer “alleged vaccine” trials have explicitly acknowledged that their gene therapy technology has no impact on viral infection or transmission whatever and merely conveys to the recipient the capacity to produce an S1 spike protein endogenously by introducing...
.... a synthetic mRNA sequence. Therefore, the basis for the Massachusetts statute and the Supreme Court’s determination is moot in this case.
Further, the USPTO, in its REJECTION of Anthony Fauci’s HIV vaccine, made the following statement supporting their rejection of his bogus “invention”
Application/Control Number: 09/869,003 page 5
Art Unit: 1648
Application/Control Number: 09/869,003 page 5
Art Unit: 1648
"These arguments persuade the extent that an antigenic peptide stimulates an immune response that may produce antibodies that bind to a specific peptide or protein but is not persuasive regarding a vaccine.
The immune response produced by a vaccine must be more than merely some immune response, but must be protective. As noted in the previous Office Action, the art recognizes the term “vaccine” to be a compound which prevents infection.
Applicant has not showed that the instantly claimed vaccine meets even the lower standard set forth in the specification, let alone the standard art definition, for being operative.
Therefore, claims 5, 7, and 9 are not operative as an anti-HIV-1 vaccine and therefore lack patentable utility."
18 U.S.C. §2339 C et seq.—Funding and Conspiring to Commit Acts of Terror provides collects funds be used, or with the Indirectly, unlawfully and willfully knowledge that such funds or are to be used, in full or in part, in order to carry out—
(A) an act which constitutes an offense within the scope of a treaty specified in subsection (e)(7), as implemented by the United States, or
(B) any other act intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to a civilian, or to any other person not taking an active part in the hostilities in a situation of armed conflict, when the purpose of such act, by its nature or context, is to intimidate a population,
...or to compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act.... with the intention that such by no later than April 11, 2005, Dr. Anthony Fauci was publicly acknowledging the association of SARS with bioterror potential.
Leveraging the fear of the anthrax bioterrorism of 2001, he publicly celebrated the economic boon that domestic terror had directed towards his budget. He specifically stated that NIAID was actively funding research on a “SARS Chip” DNA microarray to rapidly; detect SARS...
...(something that was not made available during the current “pandemic”) and two candidate vaccines focused on the SARS-CoV spike protein.
[ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3320336]
[ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3320336]
Led by three Chinese researchers under his employment—Zhi-yong Yang, Wing-piu Kong, and Yue Huang—Fauci had at least one DNA vaccine in animal trials by 2004.
This team, part of the Vaccine Research Center at NIAID, was primarily focused on HIV vaccine development but was tasked to identify SARS vaccine candidates as well.
Working in collaboration with Sanofi, Scripps Institute, Harvard, MIT and NIH, Dr. Fauci’s decision to unilaterally; promote vaccines as a primary intervention for several designated “infectious diseases” precluded proven therapies from applying to the sick and dying.
The CDC and NIAID led by Anthony Fauci entered trade among States (including, but not limited to working with EcoHealth Alliance Inc.)
...and with foreign nations (specifically, the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the Chinese Academy of Sciences) through the 2014 et seq National Institutes of Health Grant R01AI110964 to exploit their patent rights.
This research involved surface proteins in coronavirus that could directly; infect human respiratory systems.
In flagrant violation of the NIH moratorium on gain of function research, NIAID and Ralph Baric persisted in working with chimeric coronavirus components specifically to amplify the pathogenicity of the biologic material.
By October 2013, the Wuhan Institute of Virology 1 coronavirus S1 spike protein was described in NIAID’s funded work in China. This work involved NIAID, USAID, and Peter Daszak, the head of EcoHealth Alliance.
This work, funded under R01AI079231, was pivotal in isolating and manipulating viral fragments selected from sites across China which contained high risk for severe human response. [Ge, XY., Li, JL., Yang, XL. et al.
Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor. Nature 503, 535–538 (2013).]
