Home  •  Forum  •  Blogs  •  E-Mail  •  Support Categories
MyCopper Categories Finance Travel Real Estate Games Autos Entertainment
Welcome Guest Active Topics |

Did Klaus Schwab and World Economic Forum Admit the COVID Vaccine Injects Traceable Markers? Their P Options
alkarocky
#1 Posted : Saturday, October 16, 2021 6:34:58 AM

Rank: King



Joined: 10/14/2009
Posts: 63,502
If you don’t understand the significance of that point, then it’s best to just quit right here.


Did Klaus Schwab and World Economic Forum Admit the COVID Vaccine Injects Traceable Markers? Their Promoted “COVIDPass” Blood Test Requires Them

https://thelibertydaily.com/


Did Klaus Schwab and World Economic Forum Admit The COVID Vaccine Injects Traceable Markers? Their Promoted “COVIDPass” Blood Test Requires Them
October 16, 2021 | Sundance | 143 Comments
An article and video promoted by the World Economic Forum, intended to propose and outline a globally accepted “COVIDPass”, actually reveals stunning background admissions. [Article Here – VIDEO Below]

The basic premise of the proposal is for a global COVIDPass that will be universally accepted permitting vaccinated people to travel around the world and enter all venues and facilities that require proof of vaccine. However, there is something in the proposal that tells a story all by itself. First, WATCH the Video:


https://theconservativet...lood-test-requires-them/

Did Klaus Schwab and World Economic Forum Admit The COVID Vaccine Injects Traceable Markers? Their Promoted “COVIDPass” Blood Test Requires Them
October 16, 2021 | Sundance | 146 Comments
An article and video promoted by the World Economic Forum, intended to propose and outline a globally accepted “COVIDPass”, actually reveals stunning background admissions. [Article Here – VIDEO Below]

The basic premise of the proposal is for a global COVIDPass that will be universally accepted permitting vaccinated people to travel around the world and enter all venues and facilities that require proof of vaccine. However, there is something in the proposal that tells a story all by itself. First, WATCH the Video:


.

Don’t get caught up in the esoteric weeds about the COVID passport angle of this; and don’t let yourself focus on the vaxxed vs non-vaxxed aspect. Additionally, for now do not focus on the privacy aspects or the issues with tracing or tracking. Instead, focus like a laser on something far more critical in the background of the proposal itself.

The entire premise of the World Economic Forum’s “COVIDPass” is predicated on a blood test being able to identify whether a person has been vaccinated or not.

Think about that carefully.

Think about that deeply.


Right now, all vaccination ID’s, all COVID passports, are dependent on a registration process that takes place at the time of vaccination within each nation’s unique healthcare system:

(1) You get vaccinated, you get registered in a system that shows you have been vaccinated; and that’s how you eventually get to a place where you establish a linked “QR” code to the vaccination registration -most commonly on your cell phone- that grants you permitted access at checkpoints or gateways.

-OR-

(2) You get vaccinated, you get registered in a system that shows you have been vaccinated; and you are given a paper vaccination card to carry on your person that grants you permitted access at checkpoints or gateways.

Those are essentially the only two registration systems for COVID passports currently in place. Both of them are dependent on registration with the healthcare system or provider who then grants you the paper ID; or triggers the authorization process to connect your vaccination status to a system where you download the QR code.

Regardless of which process is followed, the registration is with the healthcare system.

What the World Economic Forum (WEF) is describing is NOT that…. and this is the critical point.

The WEF proposal is based on a blood sample, or a blood test, to prove you have been vaccinated. The only way that is possible is if the vaccine itself carries some form of marker that permanently stays (at a cellular level) in your body which can then be detected in a blood test.

If the vaccine does not leave an identifiable marker or imprint in your blood, then a blood test for vaccinated status would not be possible.

If you understand that critical point, then keep reading. If you don’t understand the significance of that point, then it’s best to just quit right here.
Sponsor  
 
monk37
#2 Posted : Saturday, October 16, 2021 9:50:45 AM

Rank: King




Joined: 5/21/2011
Posts: 5,812
Location: Nebraska
Prelude to the mark of the Beast ?

Why use graphene lipids in these increasingly mandatory synthetic vaccines and boosters ?

Wake up folks.

BETWEENTHELINES
Mwalacavage
#3 Posted : Saturday, October 16, 2021 12:31:38 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 11/16/2008
Posts: 15,442
monk37 wrote:
Prelude to the mark of the Beast ?

Why use graphene lipids in these increasingly mandatory synthetic vaccines and boosters ?

Wake up folks.

It appears these are only used in 'special' places.

https://health-desk.org/...n-covid-19-mrna-vaccines

"There are 2 bases for any ethical system. (1) Aristocratic code (2) Religion. Liberals reject both which leaves them with exactly nothing… A man without code or religion has no other reason other than mere preference to consider any interests other than his own. Why should “he think in time” beyond his own life [or] hesitate to expoit anyone?"

“Hustlers of the world, there is one mark you cannot beat: the mark inside.”

“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.”

William Seward Burroughs
monk37
#4 Posted : Saturday, October 16, 2021 2:49:54 PM

Rank: King




Joined: 5/21/2011
Posts: 5,812
Location: Nebraska
Mwalacavage wrote:
monk37 wrote:
Prelude to the mark of the Beast ?

Why use graphene lipids in these increasingly mandatory synthetic vaccines and boosters ?

Wake up folks.

It appears these are only used in 'special' places.

https://health-desk.org/...n-covid-19-mrna-vaccines


Thanks for the article with references like the Patent Office. Maybe they came up with a different process but the denials from the "experts" seem to have that old evasive pattern.

https://patents.google.c...0919A/en?oq=CN112220919A

Nano coronavirus recombinant vaccine taking graphene oxide as carrier

Abstract

""The invention belongs to the field of nano materials and biomedicine, and relates to a vaccine, in particular to development of 2019-nCoV coronavirus nuclear recombinant nano vaccine. The invention also comprises a preparation method of the vaccine and application of the vaccine in animal experiments. The new corona vaccine contains graphene oxide, carnosine, CpG and new corona virus RBD; binding carnosine, CpG and neocoronavirus RBD on the backbone of graphene oxide; the CpG coding sequence is shown as SEQ ID NO 1; the novel coronavirus RBD refers to a novel coronavirus protein receptor binding region which can generate a high-titer specific antibody aiming at the RBD in a mouse body, and provides a strong support for prevention and treatment of the novel coronavirus.""


But to be fair

....

""The above description is only for the specific embodiments of the present application, but the scope of the present application is not limited thereto, and any changes or substitutions that can be easily conceived by those skilled in the art within the technical scope of the present disclosure should be covered within the scope of the present application. Therefore, the protection scope of the present application shall be subject to the protection scope of the claims.""


https://www.sciencetimes...e-heres-what-experts.htm

So, Is There or Is There Not?

In an earlier interview with Stew Peters, dated July 5, Dr. Jane Ruby discloses that researchers from the University of Almeria in Spain inspected vials of Pfizer vaccines and reported finding graphene oxide composing more than 99.9 percent of the material.

However, the official fact sheet available on the US Food and Drug Administration website- which contains relevant data such as the ingredient list - for the Pfizer and BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine makes no mention of the graphene oxide anywhere in the document. Similarly, the Associated Press airplane released a statement calling the claim false, citing Pfizer senior manager of science media relations Kit Longley. The international journalism entity also gathered opinions from various medical experts such as MIT chemical engineering professor Allen Myerson or Johns Hopkins infectious disease specialist Dr. Amesh Adalja.

Additionally, the AP secured a response from the University of Almeria, which denied involvement in the supposed exposé. In its own statement, originally in Spanish, the University expressed support for COVID-19 vaccines and disavowed the results from the study of one of its professors. Also, the report, which is not yet peer-reviewed and not officially published, includes a disclaimer that the findings do not represent any institutional position for the University.

Bruce Y. Lee, Professor of Health Policy and Management at the City University of New York (CUNY) School of Public Health, writes in his July 10 column that "the word 'medical expert' is not something that you can just throw out there." He also links readers to Dr. Jane Ruby's website and calls into question Dr. Ruby's credentials.


Didn't have time to look into the other references but have seen other analysis information that confirms not 99.9% but various amounts of graphene oxide in the various vaccines.

Later-

BETWEENTHELINES
Mwalacavage
#5 Posted : Saturday, October 16, 2021 9:01:20 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 11/16/2008
Posts: 15,442
That is a patent for some vaccine. Not Pfizer or Moderna, as they do not contain the actual corona virus bits listed, instead relying on mRNA to have your own muscle cells make replicas of viral bits. I shall have to see if JNJ fits the profile or if the patent was just for someone's idea on how they might make a vaccine. And Ruby apparently is the source of such obvious nonsense as the presence of metal bits.

According to the State of Connecticut, JNJ has no graphene either.

https://portal.ct.gov/Co...Base/Vaccine-Ingredients

"There are 2 bases for any ethical system. (1) Aristocratic code (2) Religion. Liberals reject both which leaves them with exactly nothing… A man without code or religion has no other reason other than mere preference to consider any interests other than his own. Why should “he think in time” beyond his own life [or] hesitate to expoit anyone?"

“Hustlers of the world, there is one mark you cannot beat: the mark inside.”

“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.”

William Seward Burroughs
monk37
#6 Posted : Sunday, October 17, 2021 12:42:31 AM

Rank: King




Joined: 5/21/2011
Posts: 5,812
Location: Nebraska
Mwalacavage wrote:
That is a patent for some vaccine. Not Pfizer or Moderna, as they do not contain the actual corona virus bits listed, instead relying on mRNA to have your own muscle cells make replicas of viral bits. I shall have to see if JNJ fits the profile or if the patent was just for someone's idea on how they might make a vaccine. And Ruby apparently is the source of such obvious nonsense as the presence of metal bits.

According to the State of Connecticut, JNJ has no graphene either.

https://portal.ct.gov/Co...Base/Vaccine-Ingredients


Maybe it was an old or new bad batch analyzed by his team who knows, but 'not peer reviewed' is hardly outright lied. I'm reminded of ingredients on the label not listing the packaging as an ingredient or all the creative technical names they come up with for some of the plain ol junk they use in the product.

The complex biochemical terms and interactions are very challenging for anyone to follow but caveats and evasions and slanders kind of stick out like a sore thumb excuse after all the in depth conversations on many subjects I've had over the years.

One thing I keep in mind is synthetically modifying individual genetic information is messing with far more complex and integrated cellular systems the long term ramifications of which are clearly not understood or even predictable.

Here is an interesting explanation and pitch for the mRNA modification concept they have headlong warp speed tried to impliment-mandate experimentally on us all for the obviously synthetically bio engineered Covid virus.

Note he indicates individually obtained and tailored.

https://rumble.com/vhgsr...-reprogram-your-dna.html

later

BETWEENTHELINES
Mwalacavage
#7 Posted : Sunday, October 17, 2021 12:45:31 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 11/16/2008
Posts: 15,442
monk37 wrote:
Mwalacavage wrote:
That is a patent for some vaccine. Not Pfizer or Moderna, as they do not contain the actual corona virus bits listed, instead relying on mRNA to have your own muscle cells make replicas of viral bits. I shall have to see if JNJ fits the profile or if the patent was just for someone's idea on how they might make a vaccine. And Ruby apparently is the source of such obvious nonsense as the presence of metal bits.

According to the State of Connecticut, JNJ has no graphene either.

https://portal.ct.gov/Co...Base/Vaccine-Ingredients


Maybe it was an old or new bad batch analyzed by his team who knows, but 'not peer reviewed' is hardly outright lied. I'm reminded of ingredients on the label not listing the packaging as an ingredient or all the creative technical names they come up with for some of the plain ol junk they use in the product.

The complex biochemical terms and interactions are very challenging for anyone to follow but caveats and evasions and slanders kind of stick out like a sore thumb excuse after all the in depth conversations on many subjects I've had over the years.

One thing I keep in mind is synthetically modifying individual genetic information is messing with far more complex and integrated cellular systems the long term ramifications of which are clearly not understood or even predictable.

Here is an interesting explanation and pitch for the mRNA modification concept they have headlong warp speed tried to impliment-mandate experimentally on us all for the obviously synthetically bio engineered Covid virus.

Note he indicates individually obtained and tailored.

https://rumble.com/vhgsr...-reprogram-your-dna.html

later

As you may note from the video, mRNA vaccines act without the involvement of DNA. The approach to cancer vaccines requires knowledge of the individual's genome to increase the body's own immune response to the cancer cells. Only when trying to cure genetic disease might they attempt to alter DNA (rather hard to avoid in those cases). And going back and looking at the vaccine patent...that is the Chinese Corona vaccine! Or at least a Chinese vaccine proposal.


Nano coronavirus recombinant vaccine taking graphene oxide as carrier
Abstract
The invention belongs to the field of nano materials and biomedicine, and relates to a vaccine, in particular to development of 2019-nCoV coronavirus nuclear recombinant nano vaccine. The invention also comprises a preparation method of the vaccine and application of the vaccine in animal experiments. The new corona vaccine contains graphene oxide, carnosine, CpG and new corona virus RBD; binding carnosine, CpG and neocoronavirus RBD on the backbone of graphene oxide; the CpG coding sequence is shown as SEQ ID NO 1; the novel coronavirus RBD refers to a novel coronavirus protein receptor binding region which can generate a high-titer specific antibody aiming at the RBD in a mouse body, and provides a strong support for prevention and treatment of the novel coronavirus.
Classifications
A61K39/12 Viral antigens
View 10 more classifications
CN112220919A

China
Download PDF
Find Prior Art
Similar

Other languages
Chinese
Inventor
崔大祥
高昂
梁辉
田静
李雪玲
沈琦
Current Assignee
Shanghai National Engineering Research Center for Nanotechnology Co Ltd
https://patents.google.c...0919A/en?oq=CN112220919A

"There are 2 bases for any ethical system. (1) Aristocratic code (2) Religion. Liberals reject both which leaves them with exactly nothing… A man without code or religion has no other reason other than mere preference to consider any interests other than his own. Why should “he think in time” beyond his own life [or] hesitate to expoit anyone?"

“Hustlers of the world, there is one mark you cannot beat: the mark inside.”

“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.”

William Seward Burroughs
monk37
#8 Posted : Monday, October 18, 2021 6:48:14 PM

Rank: King




Joined: 5/21/2011
Posts: 5,812
Location: Nebraska
Mwalacavage wrote:
monk37 wrote:
Mwalacavage wrote:
That is a patent for some vaccine. Not Pfizer or Moderna, as they do not contain the actual corona virus bits listed, instead relying on mRNA to have your own muscle cells make replicas of viral bits. I shall have to see if JNJ fits the profile or if the patent was just for someone's idea on how they might make a vaccine. And Ruby apparently is the source of such obvious nonsense as the presence of metal bits.

According to the State of Connecticut, JNJ has no graphene either.

https://portal.ct.gov/Co...Base/Vaccine-Ingredients


Maybe it was an old or new bad batch analyzed by his team who knows, but 'not peer reviewed' is hardly outright lied. I'm reminded of ingredients on the label not listing the packaging as an ingredient or all the creative technical names they come up with for some of the plain ol junk they use in the product.

The complex biochemical terms and interactions are very challenging for anyone to follow but caveats and evasions and slanders kind of stick out like a sore thumb excuse after all the in depth conversations on many subjects I've had over the years.

One thing I keep in mind is synthetically modifying individual genetic information is messing with far more complex and integrated cellular systems the long term ramifications of which are clearly not understood or even predictable.

Here is an interesting explanation and pitch for the mRNA modification concept they have headlong warp speed tried to impliment-mandate experimentally on us all for the obviously synthetically bio engineered Covid virus.

Note he indicates individually obtained and tailored.

https://rumble.com/vhgsr...-reprogram-your-dna.html

later

As you may note from the video, mRNA vaccines act without the involvement of DNA. The approach to cancer vaccines requires knowledge of the individual's genome to increase the body's own immune response to the cancer cells. Only when trying to cure genetic disease might they attempt to alter DNA (rather hard to avoid in those cases). And going back and looking at the vaccine patent...that is the Chinese Corona vaccine! Or at least a Chinese vaccine proposal.


Nano coronavirus recombinant vaccine taking graphene oxide as carrier
Abstract
The invention belongs to the field of nano materials and biomedicine, and relates to a vaccine, in particular to development of 2019-nCoV coronavirus nuclear recombinant nano vaccine. The invention also comprises a preparation method of the vaccine and application of the vaccine in animal experiments. The new corona vaccine contains graphene oxide, carnosine, CpG and new corona virus RBD; binding carnosine, CpG and neocoronavirus RBD on the backbone of graphene oxide; the CpG coding sequence is shown as SEQ ID NO 1; the novel coronavirus RBD refers to a novel coronavirus protein receptor binding region which can generate a high-titer specific antibody aiming at the RBD in a mouse body, and provides a strong support for prevention and treatment of the novel coronavirus.
Classifications
A61K39/12 Viral antigens
View 10 more classifications
CN112220919A

China
Download PDF
Find Prior Art
Similar

Other languages
Chinese
Inventor
崔大祥
高昂
梁辉
田静
李雪玲
沈琦
Current Assignee
Shanghai National Engineering Research Center for Nanotechnology Co Ltd
https://patents.google.c...0919A/en?oq=CN112220919A


Well of course I noted the Chicom controlled origin of the patent application and even the dates of submission and publication in sept. 2020 and beginning of 2021. But the issue is correlation with the findings of team analysis by a professor in Spain ... either he-they are all lying or mistaken, but someone is lying.

This is the kind of BS that frustrates even people like the pioneer of mRNA vaccine therapy who can't even get accurate,truthful results or feedback.

https://news.yahoo.com/s...na-expert-173600060.html
...
"This is a fundamental right having to do with clinical research ethics," he said. "And so, my concern is that I know that there are risks. But we don't have access to the data, and the data haven't been captured rigorously enough so that we can accurately assess those risks — and therefore … we don't really have the information that we need to make a reasonable decision." ...


It's called 'informed consent' to the spike' victims.

I'm puzzled by your notion that mRNA natural or synthetically spike' altered is not genetic material.

https://www.britannica.com/science/messenger-RNA
...
""The base triplets of transfer RNA (tRNA) pair with those of mRNA and at the same time deposit their amino acids on the growing protein chain. Finally, the synthesized protein is released to perform its task in the cell or elsewhere in the body. ""







BETWEENTHELINES
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

YAF_Copper Theme Modified from a Jaben Cargman theme (Tiny Gecko)
Powered by YAF | YAF © 2003-2009, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 2.117 seconds.