WelcomeTheEagle Asks Dr. David Martin a question about VAERS today Oct 3, 2023
Bonus: Dave gets pretty fiery about virus/ no virus...
I asked Dave about the 1986 ACT liability shield but I also include the part before when Dr. Stephen Frost basically asks about germ/terrain theory. Oooh wee! Davey got nice and spicy! He actually said more, but I wanted to keep it short. The full interview is HERE, he gets spicy right around the 46min mark. Worth a listen.
How many people over the last few years were clear that whenever David Martin said "coronavirus" he actually meant a non-transmissible protein "sequence"?? Not very many, based on my conversations with people.
"...It was distributed..."
Where, when, how? Evidence please, David.
"...we need to use the criminals' own language to indict them..."
No "we" don't - especially not when we're not even in court and doing so confuses millions of people.
"We have seen throughout the last 3 and a half years nonsense about whether there's viruses or not viruses, whether there's this or that. Stop the nonsense!"
So David wants us to stop exposing the fact that the entire narrative was 100% b.s. and that there was no transmissible "virus" to quackcinate against or to even test for in the first place.
Stop exposing fake-isolation, fake-sequencing and retarded/useless animal experiments.
Stop exposing the problems with EM imaging.
Stop exposing the utter lack of scientific evidence for contagion and all the failed attempts to demonstrate it.
Leave all of that in place so that it can be re-used over and over again. And at the same time, complain that the people exposing the pseudoscience haven't gone far enough! (Which is what David did in the interview where Alec Zeck did such a great job of grilling David on this issue.)
Re his Nobel Prize comment - was this a "Freudian slip" on David's part? Because it's true that as we focus on exposing virology and more people catch on, the chance of a Nobel Prize being given to a quackcine loon diminishes.
And since when can people not do both - expose quackcine issues and virology?
Here's a bit of the spicy excerpt:
Source video:
Charles Kovess, posted October 4, 2023
https://rumble.com/v3mt2bj-dr-david-martin-phd.html
Hat tip: https://welcometheeagle.substack.com/p/welcometheeagle-asks-dr-david-martin
TRANSCRIPT - EXCERPT
46:10
STEPHEN FROST, MD: my view is that there is a real possibility there was no pandemic, and that certainly I'm very doubtful that the diagnosis of covid-19 is possible. And I wonder whether you think, whether you've ever thought— I know that you like to talk about Baric* and the rest of, you know, the gain-of-function stuff in, in Wuhan, and you may well be right, but I wonder whether there's a possibility in your mind, because it's very important that we, you know, correct our course if there's any possibility that we might be wrong, including you, especially with these high-profile cases. Is there any possibility that they used the gain-of-function thing to play into the narrative, lead people astray with a kind of double-bluff? Do you think that that's a possibility or not? Because my view is that the whole—
47:07
DR. DAVID MARTIN: Yeah, Stephen, Stephen, if you've listened to my presentations at either parliament** you know the answer. This all was a bluff, but the part that's not a bluff, and this is the part that concerns me about the conversations about scientific epistemology and dogma, which is not what this is about, this was the creation of a weapon. In 2005 it was defined as the creation of a weapon when Ralph Baric said that he actually was using synthetic corona virus as a biowarfare-enabling technology.
Now I don't know how somebody can read that statement and come away thinking that I'm somehow advocating for a dogmatic view of a scientific theory. I'm simply saying, that on the backbone of an architecture of a protein sequence, which is what that definition means, he built a biological weapon.
There is no question that in 2014 at the National Academy of Sciences and at the proceedings that were published in February 2016, Peter Daszak*** said we were going to use that weapon to get the public to accept a pan-corona virus vaccine. There's no question of that.
In 2016 there's no question that when they said the Wuhan Institute of Virology Virus Chimera Number One was poised for human emergence, there is no question that that was a distribution of a biological weapon.
I have said nothing but this from the beginning.
This was a biological weapon attack. It was distributed. They said it in their own words. They said it on September 18, 2019 that they were going to use a quote, lethal respiratory pathogen to get the public to accept the universal vaccine platform by September 2020. That is what they said.
And I am sick and tired of the number of people who believe that somehow or another I'm supporting a particular scientific narrative or not. What I'm saying is, that they used an architecture of a protein that they turned into a weapon, by their own admission, DARPA funded that weapon, by its own admission in 2005, and persisted through 2019, continues to do that.
And here's the point. You do not use the word accidental or intentional release of a lethal respiratory pathogen, their words, release. That is not an accidental leak. That is not nature zoonotically transferring. When you say humans are releasing a thing, that is an active distribution of a thing. There never was a transmissible anything. There was a deliverable thing, and the deliverable thing is a biological weapon. And we need to use the criminals' own language to indict them.
We have seen throughout the last 3 and a half years nonsense about whether there's viruses or not viruses, whether there's this or that. Stop the nonsense! This was and is a biological weapons attack against humanity. And if we stop focusing on that, and we start focusing on these nonsensical rabbit trails that have nothing to do with the attack, we would not be giving a Nobel Prize to the manufacturers of a system that actually we know is a pro-oncologic system. We would not give that Nobel Prize out if we weren't doing the same thing that we did when Obama got a Nobel Prize for the possibility of transferring our assassination programs to UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles]. We've got to stop bullsh*tting ourselves. This is a weapon being brought against humanity. Period.
51:098
[END OF EXCERPT]
# # #
TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES
Dr. David Martin's sites:
https://twitter.com/DrDMartinWorld
https://www.davidmartin.world/
https://www.fullylive.world/
https://www.m-cam.com/
* Dr. Ralph S. Baric, Professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health. His webpage is https://sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/ralph-s-baric-phd/
** Dr. David Martin at the European Parliament (with slides)
13:22-34:40
International COVID Summit III, European Parliament, Brussels, May 3, 2023
https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/chd-tv/events/fluoride-report-or-systematic-review-of-the-science-or-may-4-or-12-30pm-et/fluoride-report-systematic-review-of-the-science-may-4/
Backup clips of Dr. David Martin's presentation:
without slides:
https://twitter.com/DrDMartinWorld/status/1661901690528825345
with slides:
https://rumble.com/v2ncp8w-dr-david-e.-martin-phd-covid-summit-european-union-parliament-may-2023.html
[screenshot and screenshots of slides]
Transcript: https://transcriberb.dreamwidth.org/97438.html
*** Dr. Peter Daszak is President of EcoHealth Alliance
https://www.ecohealthalliance.org/personnel/dr-peter-daszak