The Covid-19 Vaccination Will Be Dangerous
Patrick Bet-David interviews Del Bigtree, producer of a documentary film, VAXXED, on the dangers of vaccination. VAXXED was banned by Netflix, Apple, and the Tribeca Film Festival. Below is a little more than 3 minutes of the audio portion of the video by Bet-David of Bigtree where Bigtree explains the under-reporting of vaccine injuries and the dangers of the proposed COVID-19 vaccination.
COVID-19 Testing is Not Going Well
The concerns regarding the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine voiced by Del Bigtree are real. For example, on July 15, 2020, Daniel Payne reported that “[a] recent A highly anticipated clinical trial for a potential COVID-19 vaccine managed in part by the American drug company Moderna has resulted in some adverse effects in more than half of the trial’s participants, with one test group reporting ‘severe’ symptoms.”
When you read the actual study report, you can see that the adverse side effects of pain, myalgia, headache, chills, fatigue, localized symptoms, and systemic symptoms were felt by 80% or more of test subjects for the higher dosages during the second vaccination.
And those are only the short term symptoms. Who knows what the long term effects of a COVID-19 vaccine will be.
Big-Pharma Does Not Care if the COVID-19 Vaccine is Safe or Effective
The four paragraphs below are cut and pasted from an article that appeared in the July 16, 2020, Wall Street Journal. The article reveals for all to see that the vaccine manufacturers do not care if a vaccine is safe or effective. Notice that Johnson & Johnson is gearing up to manufacture more than one billion dosages of a vaccine that they have not even determined is safe or effective. Indeed, they have invested in “manufacturing sites” and “filing sites” and everything that is necessary to deliver one billion vaccines next year.
All of that expense on gearing up to manufacture a vaccine that they have not even begun to test whether it is safe or effective! They don’t even know if their vaccine will cure the patient or harm the patient. They don’t care! Why? Because they have immunity granted by the government for any injury that they cause to any recipient of their vaccine.
Johnson & Johnson JNJ 0.07% said Thursday it plans to begin the first human studies of its experimental coronavirus vaccine next week, as it races to make the shot available starting early next year.
The New Brunswick, N.J., company’s initial study will aim to enroll more than 1,000 healthy adults, starting first in Belgium on July 22 and then the following week in the U.S. Researchers will assess the vaccine’s safety and ability to induce an immune response, J&J Chief Scientific Officer Paul Stoffels said Thursday on a conference call with analysts. The company also plans studies in additional countries.
The more definitive testing will take place as soon as September. J&J said it is still having discussions with the U.S. National Institutes of Health for a large phase 3 clinical trial that could begin in late September, which would test whether the vaccine protects people from Covid-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus.
J&J could get an answer about whether the vaccine safely prevents Covid-19 by the end of the year, Dr. Stoffels said. If successful, the company expects the shot to become available in early 2021, and J&J plans to manufacture up to one billion doses by the end of next year.
“We have the manufacturing sites, we have the filling sites, we have everything that’s needed to deliver that one billion vaccines” next year, Dr. Stoffels said.
There is No Financial Incentive to Make a Safe or Effective COVID-19 Vaccine
Why would Johnson & Johnson invest so heavily in manufacturing a vaccine that has not even been tested for safety or effectiveness? Because it does not matter to Johnson & Johnson whether their vaccine is safe or effective. They know that they can sell all that the vaccines they make regardless of their safety or effectiveness.
Mary S. Holland has written an excellent law review article in the Emory Law Journal that explains the moral hazard created by Congress in enacting the 1986 U.S. National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NVICP) and the subsequent 2005 PREP Act.
Holland explains the issue: “The success of the national vaccine program has come at a cost. Some children are permanently disabled or die from their vaccine exposures. … Between 1980 and 1986, people who claimed vaccine injury brought over three billion dollars of damages claims to U.S. civil courts against vaccine manufacturers.”
In response to the litigation that held them accountable for the injuries caused by their vaccines, the vaccine manufacturers lobbied Congress, and in 1986 they were able to get the NVICP law passed. That law had the effect of protecting them from civil liability for injuries caused by vaccines that they manufactured.
The underlying legal reasoning of Congress for the 1986 NVICP law was a concept borrowed from the Restatement of Torts law that vaccines were “unavoidably unsafe.” Holland explains that “[t]he Restatement describes all vaccines as ‘unavoidably unsafe’ products and implicitly recommended that manufacturers not be liable for injuries if doctors administered them properly.”
Holland describes the aftermath of the law. “After the NVICP began accepting claims in 1988, no vaccine manufacturer could be liable for a vaccine-related injury or death so long as ‘the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings.’”
Then, in 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court shut the door entirely on the thin thread hanging that allowed for some legal liability for vaccine manufacturers. In Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC, 562 U.S. 223 (2011), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NVICP preempts all design defect civil claims against vaccine manufacturers. The NVICP act states in pertinent part:
No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings.
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-22(b)(1) (2012).
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that language in the statute categorically preempts design defect claims against vaccine manufacturers.
Justice Sotomayor in her dissent from the majority opinion pointed out the obvious problem with that language in the statute. She stated that the NVICP’s no-fault scheme cannot possibly spur vaccine manufacturers to innovate because it imposes no legal duty on them to ensure that they provide the safest products possible in light of scientific and technological advances. See 562 U.S. at 269–70 (Sotomayor, J., dissenting). The specter of civil liability would ordinarily keep the vaccine manufacturers on their toes to ensure safety. The NIVICP removes that threat and thus the vaccine manufacturers are under no legal duty to ensure that their vaccines are safe or effective.
Holland points out:
The Bruesewitz decision removed incentives for pharmaceutical corporations to conduct the extensive research and development necessary to ensure that FDA-approved vaccines remain as safe and effective as possible after licensure. FDA approval alone has not been a sufficient guarantee of drug safety, owing in part to the FDA’s limited authority to compel further safety research after final approval.
Holland explains the real-world consequences of the NIVICP for vaccine recipients:
[Gayle] DeLong showed that the proportion of people that reported a serious complication from a vaccine after [enactment of the NIVICP in] 1986 is more than double the proportion of people who experienced a serious complication from a disease before a vaccine for it was available. The difference is statistically significant and is likely greater because of underreporting.
DeLong’s analysis suggests that the Vaccine Act “gave firms greater incentives to capture the regulator: If consumers cannot sue firms for product liability, the only barrier to sales is regulatory approval.”
Quoting Gayle DeLong, Is “Delitigation” Associated with a Change in Product Safety? The Case of Vaccines, Rev. Ind. Org. (June 14, 2017).
Delong logically concluded that “the Vaccine Act (NIVICP) may be creating ‘moral hazard’ because vaccine manufacturers do not have to answer to people damaged by their products.” Id.
Just when you thought it couldn’t get worse, Congress stepped in and added insult to injury.
In 2005, Congress passed a tort shield law, the PREP Act, to protect manufacturers of drugs and other “covered countermeasure[s],” including vaccines, from the risk of damages in the event of a declared public health emergency. This statute goes considerably further than the Vaccine Act (NIVICP) to create an exclusive limited administrative remedy. The PREP Act disallows those injured to apply to the NVICP; they must apply to an administrative program that HHS administers itself. The PREP Act covers vaccines, antidotes, medications, medical devices, and other products used to respond to pandemics and biological and chemical threats.
The clear and present danger posed by the PREP Act was foreseen and will be felt by the public. Holland describes the outrage of some of the Congressmen after the law was passed.
The PREP Act became law over significant consumer and congressional opposition. Senator Kennedy and twenty colleagues in Congress wrote a letter to the Speaker of the House and majority leader to repeal the PREP Act. 281 In their letter, they characterized the PREP Act as “a travesty of the legislative process,” and stated that it could “be used to allow manufacturers of virtually any drug or vaccine to escape responsibility for gross negligence or even criminal acts.” They accused the law’s sponsors of creating “an empty shell of a compensation program for injured patients with none of the funding needed to make compensation a reality.”
Vaccine Manufacturers to the Public: “Too Bad, So Sad, It Sucks to Be You”
A “declared public health emergency” as described in the PREP Act is the legal landscape under which the COVID-19 vaccine is being developed. Under the PREP Act, there is a moral hazard where manufactures of the COVID-19 vaccines will be protected from any liability for injuries caused by their COVID-19 vaccines. They have no financial incentive to make a vaccine that is safe or effective. They can sit back and count their billions in profits as they injure the public with impunity. The demand for the product is guaranteed by a marketplace that is rigged by the U.S. and state governments, which will pay for the vaccine and then mandate that the public consume that vaccine. The attitude of the vaccine manufacturers toward the consumer who is injured is “oh well, too bad, so sad, it sucks to be you.”
“For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.” 1 Timothy 6:10.
The Federal Government Just Agreed to Buy $Billions Worth of COVID-19 Vaccines That Have Not Yet Been Tested for Safety or Effectiveness
Must Watch Debate on the COVID-19 Vaccine: Robert Kennedy vs. Alan Dershowitz
Full Interview of Del Bigtree
Vaccines Increase Mortality of Infants
Vaccines Cause Autism
Vaxxed I Documentary
The Mass Hysteria to Coerce the Public to Accept the COVID-19 Vaccine
Pandemic II: In-doctor-nation
The Hidden Dangers of the COVID-19 Vaccine
The “New Normal” Is a Torture Plot to Coerce Us Into Accepting Vaccinations
Bill Gates’ Planned Vaccine
Bill Gates has ominously stated that the pandemic will only end with a vaccine. Gates said the following in a promotional video:
So, the Gates Foundation, along with a great number of partners, are looking at these different efforts. We’ve never created a new vaccine in less than 5 years. So this is urgent and it’s gonna require incredible collaboration. It’s gonna have to go to 7 billion people. So I am optimistic that one of the vaccine efforts will give us vaccines in the next 18 months. And we’ll make sure that it’s produced in volume. And that it’s accessible to everyone in the world. That’s how we’re gonna end this pandemic.
Gates has made it clear that the restrictions on liberty will not end until the world’s population is vaccinated.
They won’t be back to normal until we either have that phenomenal vaccine or a therapeutic that’s, like, over 95% effective. And so we have to assume that’s going to be almost 18 months from now.
James Corbett has pointed out that “since Gates began delivering this same talking point in every one of his many media appearances of late, it has been picked up and repeated by heads of state, health officials, doctors and media talking heads, right down to the scientifically arbitrary but very specific 18-month time frame.”
For example, Justin Trudeau stated: “This will be the new normal until a vaccine is developed.” Dr. Norman Swan said: “The only thing that will really allow life as we once knew it to resume is a vaccine.”
In a voice-over Kelly O’Donell of NBC News stated: “For a self-described wartime president, victory over COVID-19 equals a vaccine.” That was followed by a video showing President Trump saying: “I hope we can have a vaccine, and we’re going to fast-track it like you’ve never seen before.”
In an interview with Stephen Colbert, Bill Gates inartfully referred to the planned COVID-19 vaccine as “the final solution.”
GATES: And then the final solution—which is a year or two years off—is the vaccine. So we’ve got to go full-speed ahead on all three fronts.
COLBERT: Just to head off the conspiracy theorists, maybe we shouldn’t call the vaccine “the final solution.”
GATES: Good point.
COLBERT: Maybe just “the best solution.”
Bill Gates does not care who he hurts. He has a track record of ruining lives through his vaccines. James Corbet reports:
There’s the 2017 confirmation that the Gates-supported oral polio vaccine was actually responsible for the majority of new polio cases and the 2018 follow up showing that 80% of polio cases are now vaccine-derived.
There’s the 2018 paper in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health concluding that over 490,000 people in India developed paralysis as a result of the oral polio vaccine between 2000 and 2017.
In order to conceal this tragedy form the world, the world health authorities redefined what is actually polio as “Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis” (NPAFP). The symptoms and pathology for NPAFP are identical to polio, yet the world health authorities deny it is polio. NPAFP rates correlated directly with the oral polio vaccine rates. The correlation was so striking that there was little difficulty in drawing a causing link between the Bill Gates oral polio vaccine that the outbreak of polio (relabelled as NPAFP).
The Planned COVID-19 Vaccine Will Be Made With Aborted Fetal Cells
The Goal is Digital Vaccine Certificates
Bill Gates admits that his goal (and the goal of those who control him) is a digital vaccine certificate. Gates stated: “Eventually, what we’ll have to have is certificates of who is a recovered person, who is a vaccinated person.”
In a March 2020 Reddit post Bill Gates clarified that the certificate he envisioned would be some sort of digital certificate. “Eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered or been tested recently or when we have a vaccine who has received it.”
James Corbett of The Corbett Report explains:
It is now being reported that Onfido, a tech startup specializing in AI-based biometric ID verification, is in talks with the British government to provide the type of “digital certification” Gates mentioned, dubbed an “immunity passport.” The proposed system would require would-be workers to use the Onfido-provided app to scan their face or other biometric data, link that information to a SARS-CoV-2 antibody test (or, eventually proof of coronavirus vaccination), and then have their picture taken and immunity verified every time they wish to access a restricted space or work environment.
And who is financially behind Onfido? James Corbett reports: “Last month, Onfido announced that it had raised $50 million in a round of investments led by Bill Gates’ old company, Microsoft.” Incidentally, Microsoft is not really Gates’ old company. While Gates stepped down from the board of directors in 2020, Gates is still one of the largest single shareholders in Microsoft. As of 2019, Gates owned 330 million shares of Microsoft, which today is worth more than $66 billion.
The Groundwork for Mandatory Vaccines is Now Being Laid With a Planned Digital Health Passport
The Digital Vaccine Certificate Will Be Injected
Bill Gates plans to have the digital vaccine certificate delivered into the body of the recipients along with the vaccine. James Corbett explains:
Although vaccines and identity may seem unrelated, Bill Gates has spent the last few years funding research that can bring the two ideas together.
Late last year, Gates once again turned to Robert Langer and his MIT colleagues to investigate new ways to permanently store and record the vaccination information of each individual. The result of their research was a new vaccine delivery method. They found that by using “dissolvable microneedles that deliver patterns of near-infrared light-emitting microparticles to the skin,” they could create “particle patterns” in the skin of vaccine recipients which are “invisible to the eye but can be imaged using modified smartphones.”
Rice University describes the quantum dot tags left behind by the microneedles as “something like a bar-code tattoo.”
So who was behind this development? As lead researcher Kevin McHugh explains:
“The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation came to us and said, ‘Hey, we have a real problem—knowing who’s vaccinated [. . .] So our idea was to put the record on the person. This way, later on, people can scan over the area to see what vaccines have been administered and give only the ones still needed.”
The microparticles that form the fluorescent quantum-dot tags are delivered along with the vaccine, but they cannot be delivered by a traditional syringe. Instead, they must be delivered by a patch of microneedles made from a mixture of dissolvable sugar and a polymer, called PVA, as well as the quantum-dot dye and the vaccine.
The Digital Vaccine Certificate Will Act as a License
Bill Gates, seems to be in control of the COVID-19 response to the pandemic. Indeed, he is (since the U.S. Government has pulled out funding) the single largest source of funding for the World Health Organization (WHO). He is pulling the strings. And it seems that the most significant string is the requirement for certificates of who is a vaccinated person.
Stop and think about it. Why is it so important to have a certificate of vaccination against COVID-19? The only purpose of a certificate is to show other people in order to prove that the person with the certificate has been vaccinated. And the only reason that is important is if the certificate is going to act as a license. A person with a certificate will have a license to do certain things that a person who does not have a certificate cannot do. The government could require that a person have a digital vaccine certificate to travel on a plane, to enter stores, to attend school, etc. The digital certificate advocated by Gates only makes sense under Gates’ scheme if the certificate acts as a license. It can serve no other function.
Corona World Order
The concept of digital vaccine certificate, which has been described as an immunity passport by Infido and others, is unsurprisingly being embraced by the nations of the world. Indeed, it seems that a digital passport is central to the control plans of the new world order. Sputnik News reported: “The COVID-19 outbreak may lead nations to create a new kind of ‘immunity passport’ to try to ensure that travelers entering various countries are in a good state of health, [according to] a study by Germany’s Deutsche Bank.”
The immunity passport would not be just for international travel. It would be used internally to control the population within a national border. The Guardian reported: “‘Immunity passports’ for key workers could be a way of getting people who have had coronavirus back into the workforce more quickly, scientists and politicians in the UK have suggested.”
They’re not talking about immunity passports to travel internationally. No, this is to go to work [or] to access public transit. To do anything in the public sphere is going to require an immunity passport to show that either you’ve got the antibodies or you’ve got the vaccine. If you’ve taken the vaccine, you’ll get your immunity passport and you’ll be allowed to travel, to work, to make money, in order to put food on your family’s table. So it’s completely opt-in guys. You can choose if you want to do this; it’s just if you want access to anything in the public sphere, you’re gonna have to take the shot. Hmm, so you see how this is starting to become a world not just of borders between nations but borders within nations, [with] internal checkpoints and complete tracking and surveillance of everything you do, everywhere you go, everyone that you talked to, everything that you purchase, every moment of your life detailed and laid bare for these apps to track in order to make sure you’re not spreading any diseases.
That is Bill Gates’ vision. Indeed that is the vision of all the authoritarian governments of the world. For example, Communist China, which doesn’t have to be concerned with the pesky God-given rights guaranteed in a constitution, has already rolled out that dystopian nightmare, beginning in Hangzhou, and soon to spread to the rest of China.
The Puppets are Beginning the Call for Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccinations
On May 28, 2020, the New York Bar Association Health Law Section issued a report opining that “[a] COVID-19 vaccination should be mandatory for all New Yorkers except those whose doctors exempt them.” The New York Bar Association explained that “[t]he Health Law Section said a rapid mass vaccination plan should be launched in New York as soon as a safe and viable vaccine becomes available.”
On June 16, 2020, the Federal Senator for Victoria, Australia, Raff Ciccone stated that those who refuse to receive the COVID-19 vaccination should suffer social consequences for their actions. Ciccone stated:
To anti-vaxxers, I have one message: our tolerance for your wilful ignorance is over. We cannot afford, morally or economically, to give any ground to those who choose not to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
Let me be clear. I’m not advocating that we vaccinate people against their will. That would be wrong. We must ensure that the safety of our community is the number one priority. That means that participation in everyday life cannot put others at risk. If you do not want to be vaccinated against COVID-19, you ought to bear the consequences of that decision.
As a community, we should consider to what extent we allow organizations to prevent those who object to being vaccinated against COVID-19 to enter their premises, participate in their activities and, in some circumstances, seek their employment.
Governments have gone some way to doing this by implementing policies such as withholding family tax benefits and preventing children from being accepted into childcare unless vaccinations are proven. Further restrictions would be a natural extension of these policies.
Restaurants could be allowed the right to refuse entry to those who are not vaccinated against COVID-19. Businesses, especially those involved in the care or service of vulnerable communities, might be allowed the right to refuse employment to those without a COVID-19 vaccination. Organisers of mass gatherings could deny the sale of tickets on this basis.
On January 21, 2020, German News website DW.com reported:
German MP Karl Lauterbach, of the German social democratic SPD party, said in an interview with newspaper Die Welt on Monday that he would advocate making vaccinations manadatory.
Lauterbach said he would bring up the issue with German Health Minister Jens Spahn with the hope of starting the discussion. The SPD politician believes such a nationwide conversation is needed “because the previous campaigns in favor of voluntary vaccination have proved to be insufficient.”
A New Dystopian World Order
The GAVI vaccine alliance is a Bill Gates government and private sector alliance whose stated purpose is “market shaping.” What does that mean? The GAVI website states flatly that they are “[w]orking to improve the health of markets for vaccines and other immunisation products.” That is they are trying to create demand for vaccines in markets in order to make money. “The health” referred to in the GAVI statement of purpose is not the health of individuals but rather “the health of markets for vaccines and other immunization products.” It could not be clearer. All of the other philanthropic objectives that are stated by GAVI are just window dressing to conceal the true objective – to make money, and lots of it through compulsory vaccinations.
There is an old adage, and it is true, if one wants to make money, you want to sell whatever the government is buying. That is because the government always overpays, and in that over-payment is to be found massive profits. What better Machiavelian way to make money than to use the governments of the world to purchase your vaccinations and then compel its citizens to submit to those vaccinations (for which they prepaid through their taxes). And when the citizens fall ill from the predictable side-effects of the vaccines, the same pharmaceutical company that created the vaccine is there with their patent medicines to treat and ameliorate those side-effects.
GAVI is an interlocking partner in the ID2020 Alliance, which describes itself as “building a new global model for the design, funding, and implementation of digital ID solutions and technologies.” It is basically a plan to have every man, woman, and child in the world furnished with a “portable digital ID” (i.e., microchip) through which the governments of the world can track their every personal and business transaction.
The Gates-backed GAVI vaccine alliance has joined with Mastercard. The GAVI-Mastercard joint venture has created a “Wellness Pass.” This GAVI-Mastercard “Wellness Pass” is a digital vaccine record and a financial identity system in one. The GAVI-Mastercard joint venture has adopted a digital identity platform created by Trust Stamp. It is powered by artificial intelligence technology called NuData. In a July 10, 2020, article, Raul Diego explains that “Mastercard, in addition to professing its commitment to promoting ‘centralized record keeping of childhood immunization’ also describes itself as a leader toward a ‘World Beyond Cash,’ and its partnership with GAVI marks a novel approach towards linking a biometric digital identity system, vaccination records, and a payment system into a single cohesive platform.”
Diego reveals that “[i]n early June, GAVI reported that Mastercard’s Wellness Pass program would be adapted in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Around a month later, Mastercard announced that Trust Stamp’s biometric identity platform would be integrated into Wellness Pass as Trust Stamp’s system is capable of providing biometric identity.” They are rolling out this new biometric identity system, initially, in West African countries. But once the bugs are worked out, you can bet that the system will be spread worldwide. Diego explains that the biometric digital identity and transaction system “will be coupled with a COVID-19 vaccination program once a vaccine becomes available.”
Diego reported that “[i]n early June, GAVI reported that Mastercard’s Wellness Pass program would be adapted in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.” That is the scary part. There is going to be an integration of financial transactions with COVID-19 vaccination records. Thus, the GAVI-Mastercard alliance with the new biometric digital identity and record-keeping capabilities could act as a gatekeeper to approve or disapprove transactions based upon a person’s immunization record. If you have not had your COVID-19 vaccination your financial transactions could be denied.
There is seemingly competition in this digital dystopia. Raul Diego describes another proposed COVID-19 tracking technology. “A British cybersecurity company, in partnership with several tech firms, is rolling out the COVI-PASS in 15 countries across the world.” Diego explains that “COVI-PASS will determine whether you can go to a restaurant, if you need a medical test, or are due for a talking-to by authorities in a post-COVID world. Consent is voluntary, but enforcement will be compulsory.”
The Future of Vaccines December 24, 2020
The precursor to the Mark of the Beast
“And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.” Revelation 13:16-18.
As we have read, Bill Gates and others are not stopping with digital vaccine certificates. Indeed, the plan is to control the entire world under a blanket of surveillance that will plot your every move. The digital vaccine certificate will go along with one’s digital financial records so that only approved financial transactions can take place. Gates explains that under a digitally surveilled world non-approved transactions will be blocked. Gates states that a digital financial scheme will not work effectively unless the entire system is digitized:
Once financial flows go underground—where you have lots of legitimate transactions mixed in with the ones you want to track—and once they’re going over a digital system that the US has no connection to, it’s far more difficult to find the transactions that you want to be aware of or that you want to block.
James Corbett concludes:
The different parts of this population control grid fit together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. The vaccination drive ties into the biometric identity drive which ties into the cashless society drive.
In Gates’ vision, everyone will receive the government-mandated vaccinations, and everyone will have their biometric details recorded in nationally administered, globally integrated digital IDs. These digital identities will be tied to all of our actions and transactions, and, if and when they are deemed illegal, they will simply be shut off by the government—or even the payment providers themselves.
James Corbett reveals that, in fact, Bill Gates is spearheading that very thing in India.
A decade ago, the government of India began what has been called “The Largest Social Experiment on Earth“: enrolling over one billion people in the largest biometric identification database ever constructed. The project—involving iris scanning and fingerprinting the entirety of the Indian population, recording their biometric details in a centralized database, and issuing them a 12-digit identity number that could be used to prove residence and access government services, all within the span of a few years—presented an incredible societal, legal and technological challenge.
It’s no surprise, then, that the person who was brought in as the chief architect of the Aadhaar project when it was launched—Nandan Nilekani, co-founder of Indian multi-national Infosys—is also a long-time friend of Bill Gates and a partner with Bill and Melinda Gates on a “philanthropic” venture called Co-Impact, which supports “initiatives to address major social challenges at scale.”
The Aadhaar project involves a card that contains a 12 digit number. That card is increasingly being required for all important financial transactions in India. Indeed, India.com reported that “[t]hough it is not mandatory to have Aadhaar card, the government has linked various schemes wherein Aadhaar card or Aadhaar number is mandatory.” That is just the beginning. Once the Aadhaar system is completed in India, virtually every aspect of life could be controlled by the government. Much like the social credit score in communist China, if one displeases the government, it can simply turn off the offending party’s digital privileges.
It is notable that the ubiquitous Universal Product Code (UPC) that marks virtually every product sold in the world, like the Aadhaar card, also contains a 12 digit number. But the notable difference with the UPC bar code is that it contains a hidden code for 666.
The UPC symbol contains the number 666 hidden within the lines of the symbol. The UPC depicted below is typical of the most common UPC seen on goods in the marketplace of today. The UPC has two sets of numbers. Each set has distinct computer codes that are represented by two parallel lines per number. In the second set of codes, the number 6 is represented by two equally thin parallel lines (II).
Notice that there are three double lines in the UPC symbol that do not have an Arabic number to identify them. One set of lines are in the middle and there are two other sets of lines, one on each end. Those three sets of lines together represent the number 666. Look at any product in your home and you will see the same hidden code for the number 666.
The numbers that appear on either end of the UPC symbol below (6 and 3) correspond to the double line codes that are inside the double line codes for the end 6’s. Note that there are two sets of line codes for the numbers 0-9. The first set is to the left of the middle double lines (II), and the second set is to the right of the middle double lines. The 3 sets of double lines without numbers are always the line codes for the number 6 from the second set of codes. As you will notice, the 6 from the first set of codes is represented by a thin line on the left with a thick line on the right, whereas the line code for 6 from the second set of codes is represented by two thin lines (II).
Why is it that the only lines that do not have an Arabic number identifying are the lines that together read 666? Because the UPC symbol is part of the groundwork being laid to control the world’s commerce. The world’s goods are being marked with the number of the beast. It is a hidden code so as not to alarm the slumbering masses. The Bible states that one day people will be marked with a similar code in their right hand or forehead and that refusal to receive the mark will preclude them from being able to buy or sell anything. “And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” (Revelation 13:17)
“Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.” (Revelation 13:18)
7 thoughts on “The Devious Plan for Coerced Covid-19 Vaccinations”
Thank you for sharing this important information. I will alert others. May God bless you for Christ sake.