Quote Dr. David Martin said Peter Daszak wrote in 2015 ‘they needed the media to hype up the need for coronavirus vaccines to sell them’. The very next year Dr Ralf Baric wrote in 2016: ‘..’the (WIV) virus was human ready’ a clear indication a weapon was being readied for human transmission. Seems to me J. Jyrkkanen ‘Collusion and Conspiracy to commit a crime for profit’.
Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for moreVSRF LIVE – Vax Mass Homicide With Special Guest, Denis Rancourt, PhDThursday, February 1: 7pm Eastern | 4pm Pacific Steve KirschFeb 1READ IN APPYou will NOT want to miss this! Tonight on VSRF LIVE I’ll be sitting down with Dr. Denis G. Rancourt, PhD. to discuss the COVID-19 vaccines’ potential role in wide-scale genocide occurring over the last 4 years.Dr. Rancourt is a former professor of over 20 years at the University of Ottawa, achieving the highest position of Full Professor until his departure in 2009. He has authored more than 100 articles published in leading peer-reviewed scientific journals in the fields of physics and environmental science. He is currently an independent social theorist and science critic covering the topics of medicine, COVID-19, individual health, climate change, geopolitics, civil rights, political theory, and sociology. Dr. Rancourt is an active volunteer with the Ontario Civil Liberties Association and also now collaborates closely with the registered non-profit “CORRELATION Research in the Public Interest” where he serves as Chair of the Board and an Associate Researcher.In 2020 Rancourt self-published the highly controversial, “All-cause mortality during COVID-19: No plague and a likely signature of mass homicide by government response” which postulated that COVID-19 vaccines and botched treatment protocols in public health settings were responsible for killing up to 17 million people worldwide. This research has been well received by many esteemed scientists and doctors worldwide and has truly blown open the COVID-19 vaccine and treatment debate on a global scale. We will be discussing this in detail.
Did we really need a vaccine or was there a drug out there that worked?
The above suggest the immune system was compromised but how?
EXCLUSIVE: Hunter Biden Bio Firm Partnered With Ukrainian Researchers ‘Isolating Deadly Pathogens’ Using Funds From Obama’s Defense Department.
An investment firm directed by President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden was a leading financial backer of a pandemic tracking and response firm that collaborated on identifying and isolating deadly pathogens in Ukrainian laboratories, receiving funds from the Obama administration’s Department of Defense in the process, The National Pulse can exclusively reveal.
Rosemont Seneca Technology Partners (RSTP) – a subsidiary of the Hunter Biden and Christopher Heinz-founded Rosemont Capital – counted both Biden and Heinz as managing directors. Heinz is the stepson of former U.S. Secretary of State and current Climate czar John Kerry.
Amongst the companies listed on archived versions of the RSTP’s portfolio is Metabiota – an ostensibly San Francisco-based company that purports to detect, track, and analyze emerging infectious diseases.
Financial reports reveal that RSTP led the company’s first round of funding in 2015, which amounted to $30 million. Former managing director and co-founder of RSTP Neil Callahan – a name that also appears many times on Hunter Biden’s hard drive – sits on Metabiota’s Board of Advisors alongside former Clinton official Rob Walker who discussed, in another unearthed Hunter Biden hard drive e-mail, reaching out to the Obama Department of Defense with regard to Metabiota.
Exclusive: New e-mails confirm the Metabiota/DOD/Ukraine links.
In July 2021, The National Pulse exclusively revealed the connection between Metabiota, Hunter Biden, and the pandemic-linked EcoHealth Alliance which worked closely with Anthony Fauci’s National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) and the notorious Wuhan laboratory.
Today, we can exclusively reveal an official connection between the Biden-linked pandemic firm and biological laboratories based in Ukraine. In early March we revealed how these labs were handling “especially dangerous pathogens” through programs funded by the U.S. government. The potential for such entities to fall into the hands of invading Russian forces has come under hotly disputed scrutiny in recent weeks.
‘Zoonotic Diseases’
A feature in the Science and Technology Center in Ukraine’s (STCU) 2016 AnnualReport recounts a “Trilateral Meeting with Ukraine, Poland, and the United States Regional Collaboration on Biological Security, Safety, and Surveillance.”
The article describes in particular an October 2016 meeting involving U.S. military officials and their Ukrainian counterparts discussing “cooperation in surveillance and prevention of especially dangerous infectious diseases, including zoonotic diseases in Ukraine and neighboring countries.”
2016 meeting.
In attendance were representatives from the Biden-linked Metabiota, roughly one year after Hunter’s investment funds put cash into the company. Attendees also included:
US Department of Defense [Defense Threat Reduction Agency] (DTRA) (K. Garrett, G. Braunstein, W. Sosnowski, and J. Wintrol);
Black & Veatch and Metabiota corporations (D. Mustra, Dr. M. Guttieri, S. Anderson, T. Borth and others);
Curtis “BJ” Bjelajac, Executive Director, and Vlada Pashynska, Senior Specialist represented the STCU.
“The meeting focused on existing frameworks, regulatory coordination, and ongoing cooperative projects in research, surveillance and diagnostics of a number of dangerous zoonotic diseases, such as avian influenza, leptospirosis, Crimea Congo hemorrhagic fever, and brucellosis,” explains the summary:
STUC Annual Report (p. 6)
A separate page from the STCU website details another meeting between Metabiota representatives, Ukrainian scientists, and U.S. Department of Defense officials aimed at increasing collaboration while attending a Swine Fever workshop just months later:
“In the framework of the workshop, special breakout meetings of Ukrainian scientists with their European and American counterparts were jointly organized by the STCU, DTRA and Metabiota Inc.. During those breakout meetings, specialists from each country worked to establish effective contacts in order to encourage future cooperation, as well as to identify future scientific projects with Ukrainian and western veterinary institutions in the area of ASF control and investigation.”
Government contracts also corroborate the working relationship between Metabiota, Ukrainian laboratories, and the U.S. Defense Department, with the firm receiving an $18.4 million grant from the U.S. agency in 2014. A total of $307,091, allocated to Metabiota on September 25th, was itemized for “Ukraine research projects.”
Several scientific papers – including those isolating strains of deadly pathogens like “virulent African Swine Fever Virus” – appear to have been published following the grant.
A 2019 paper titled “Complete Genome Sequence of a Virulent African Swine Fever Virus from a Domestic Pig in Ukraine” was authored by researchers from Metabiota and three Ukraine-based institutes.
The researchers, whose work is described as being “funded by the U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) through the Biological Threat Reduction Program in Ukraine,” isolated the strain of the deadly virus using a pig from Ukraine:
“Tissue samples were collected from a domestic pig from ASF outbreak number 131 in Kyiv Oblast, Ukraine, in 2016. The samples were frozen, and total DNA was extracted in duplicate from spleen tissue using the PowerMicrobiome RNA isolation kit (Mo Bio) following the manufacturer’s protocol.”
‘Anthrax’
Furthermore, a 2014 paper “Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Livestock Anthrax in Ukraine During the Past Century (1913-2012)” lists an author, Artem Skrypnyk, then affiliated with a Ukraine-based branch of the pandemic firm.
“Our primary objective was to examine the spatiotemporal dynamics of the disease and identify areas where anthrax may persist in the present day,” posits the paper.
Skrypnyk‘s Ukraine Anthrax study, funded by the U.S. government.
“Examining the historical epizootiology of a disease can identify the geographic extent of environmental foci, define areas prone to repeat outbreaks, and lead to a better understanding of natural disease cycles.”
Page 10 of the Anthrax study reveals the U.S. government funding.
Skrypnyk is also listed as a Metabiota scientist in other papers including “Dynamics of anthrax cases in Ukraine during 1970-2013,” “Anthrax in Dogs,” and “Serological Anthrax Surveillance in Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) in Ukraine.”
One paper aimed “to better understand anthrax epizootiology in Ukraine,” collecting samples from anthrax hotspots with funds from the U.S. DTRA’s Cooperative Biological Engagement Program in Ukraine.
“We tested wild boar serum samples collected across Ukraine for antibodies to B. anthracis and determined whether exposed boars were associated with livestock anthrax hotspots,” explains the paper.
Studying Anthrax in dogs.
Skrypnyk, the Metabiota-affiliated researcher, worked as Veterinary Project Coordinator for the Biden-linked firm before moving on to serve in his current role of Technical Officer for Laboratories for the World Health Organization (WHO).
Additionally, two researchers – Nataliya Mykhaylovska and Bradford Raymond Brooks – are listed as Ukraine-based Metabiota researchers in a paper titled “Implementation of a Regional Training Program on African Swine Fever As Part of the Cooperative Biological Engagement Program across the Caucasus Region.”
The aforementioned paper even references a Metabiota office in Ukraine’s capital city of Kiev, whose existence appears to be corroborated by a summary of the company’s operational structure.
“The company’s international footprint includes operations in 20 countries and offices in San Francisco, Washington, Ukraine, China, Canada, and Sierra Leone,” explains the summary.
Additionally, LinkedIn profiles of former Metabiota employees detail the work conducted by the company’s Kyiv outpost.
Former Country Science Manager for Eastern Europe David Mustra explains how he “manga[ed] Metabiota’s team of twelve Ukrainian-National personnel” and served as “the Biosurveillance and Research Manager for Metabiota’s work as a subcontractor, under the direction of prime contractor Black & Veatch (B&V), on the Defense Threat Reduction Agency’s (DTRA) Cooperative Biological Engagement Program (CBEP) Biological Threat Reduction Integrating Contract (BTRIC) – Ukraine.”
He also explains how the company liaised with “Government of Ukraine officials” from agencies including the Ministry of Defense.
Another Metabiota employee – Dr. Petro Mutovkin – who served as a Human Biosurveillance Specialist and Project Manager from 2015 to 2016 reveals his role in “facilitating activities within US Department of Defence Cooperative Biological Engagement Program (CBEP) in Ukraine” on his LinkedIn profile.
“Laboratory facility assessment, laboratory diagnostic and BS&S training, [and] biological risk assessment and mitigation” are among the other tasks he engaged in.
The revelation surrounding President Joe Biden’s son’s financial involvement with Ukrainian biological laboratories experimenting with pathogens, animals, and anthrax follows The National Pulse unearthing Metabiota’s ties to EcoHealth Alliance, a key entity in the origins of COVID-19 and cover-up efforts.
The Iowa senator introduced legislation to permanently defund EcoHealth Alliance. WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) is calling on Congress to put an immediate and permanent end to taxpayer funding of EcoHealth Alliance following the release of an investigation today that found the organization mismanaged coronavirus experiments in Wuhan, China. Senator Ernst requested the investigation by the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) upon learning that EcoHealth was spending tax dollars on dangerous coronaviruses in Communist China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and was not disclosing information about those projects to the public, as required by law.The investigation found EcoHealth, WIV, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were all at fault for mismanagement: EcoHealth did not immediately notify NIH when a coronavirus was enhanced to become more lethal, as required; and, when it did, NIH did not quickly act to have the pathogen reviewed for pandemic potential. EcoHealth misspent tens of thousands of tax dollars on bonuses, junkets, and other unallowable costs. China’s WIV did not cooperate. The OIG suggests that WIV should be permanently barred from receiving U.S. taxpayer dollars, EcoHealth should return misspent taxpayer money, and NIH should increase oversight of EcoHealth and other projects involving pathogens with pandemic potential. Ernst’s response to the HHS investigation: “While NIH certainly shares in the blame, EcoHealth Alliance is ultimately at fault for failing to tell the world what was really going on at China’s Wuhan Institute. They are guilty of either complacency or a cover-up, or maybe a little of both,” said Ernst.“EcoHealth was paid millions, promising their hunt for bat viruses would protect the world from a pandemic…well, the world got a pandemic, and EcoHealth keeps getting millions. We can’t afford any more of EcoHealth’s ‘prevention’ efforts. That’s why we mustpermanently ban them from receiving taxpayer dollars ever again.” Since the world learned of the COVID-19 pandemic at the beginning of 2020 – including the role EcoHealth might have played in a potential lab leak— EcoHealth has been given more than $40 million in taxpayer dollars. Just last month, the Biden administration awarded the group $3 million out of the Department of Defense (DOD) budget. Ernst’s response to the administration’s latest check to EcoHealth: “The Biden administration is funding EcoHealth to search for risky viruses in places all across the globe, except where they might actually find them: in their own lab experiments! Washington is looking for ways to trim spending, so let’s start by cutting the millions of dollars flowing to EcoHealth’s batty experiments,” said Ernst.2. Yesterday Russia claimed Labs in Ukraine created the covid problem.
3. Zelensky Ordered Destruction of All State Docs Associated with METABIOTA on 02/24/22. WAS METABIOTA DOING ILLEGAL STUFF regarding covid in Ukraine and why would Selensky order Dept of Defense Records on METABIOTA destroyed??
Legal Ramifications of Conducting Secret Research on biowarfare capable pathogens stem from an International Convention on Pathogensx for the purpose of military use. The Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), or Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC), is a disarmament treaty that effectively bans biological and toxin weapons by prohibiting their development, production, acquisition, transfer, stockpiling and use. The Convention Articles Biological Weapons Convention Preamble Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction The States Parties to this Convention, Determined to act with a view to achieving effective progress towards general and complete disarmament, including the prohibition and elimination of all types of weapons of mass destruction, and convinced that the prohibition of the development, production and stockpiling of chemical and bacteriological (biological) weapons and their elimination, through effective measures, will facilitate the achievement of general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, Recognising the important significance of the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, signed at Geneva on 17 June 1925, and conscious also of the contribution which the said Protocol has already made and continues to make, to mitigating the horrors of war, Reaffirming their adherence to the principles and objectives of that Protocol and calling upon all States to comply strictly with them, Recalling that the General Assembly of the United Nations has repeatedly condemned all actions contrary to the principles and objectives of the Geneva Protocol of 17 June 1925, Desiring to contribute to the strengthening of confidence between peoples and the general improvement of the international atmosphere, Desiring also to contribute to the realisation of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, Convinced of the importance and urgency of eliminating from the arsenals of States, through effective measures, such dangerous weapons of mass destruction as those using chemical or bacteriological (biological) agents, Recognising that an agreement on the prohibition of bacteriological (biological) and toxin weapons represents a first possible step towards the achievement of agreement on effective measures also for the prohibition of the development, production and stockpiling of chemical weapons, and determined to continue negotiations to that end, Determined, for the sake of all mankind, to exclude completely the possibility of bacteriological (biological) agents and toxins being used as weapons, Convinced that such use would be repugnant to the conscience of mankind and that no effort should be spared to minimise this risk, Have agreed as follows: Article I Each State Party to this Convention undertakes never in any circumstances to develop, produce, stockpile or otherwise acquire or retain: (1) microbial or other biological agents, or toxins whatever their origin or method of production, of types and in quantities that have no justification for prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purposes; (2) weapons, equipment or means of delivery designed to use such agents or toxins for hostile purposes or in armed conflict. Article II Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to destroy, or to divert to peaceful purposes, as soon as possible but not later than nine months after the entry into force of the Convention, all agents, toxins, weapons, equipment and means of delivery specified in Article I of the Convention, which are in its possession or under its jurisdiction or control. In implementing the provisions of this Article all necessary safety precautions shall be observed to protect populations and the environment. Article III Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever, directly or indirectly, and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any State, group of States or international organisations to manufacture or otherwise acquire any of the agents, toxins, weapons, equipment or means of delivery specified in Article I of the Convention. Article IV Each State Party to this Convention shall, in accordance with its constitutional processes, take any necessary measures to prohibit and prevent the development, production, stockpiling, acquisition or retention of the agents, toxins, weapons, equipment and means of delivery specified in Article I of the Convention, within the territory of such State, under its jurisdiction or under its control anywhere. Article V The States Parties to this Convention undertake to consult one another and to co-operate in solving any problems which may arise in relation to the objective of, or in the application of the provisions of, the Convention. Consultation and co-operation pursuant to this Article may also be undertaken through appropriate international procedures within the framework of the United Nations and in accordance with its Charter. Article VI (1) Any State Party to this Convention which finds that any other State Party is acting in breach of obligations deriving from the provisions of the Convention may lodge a complaint with the Security Council of the United Nations. Such a complaint should include all possible evidence confirming its validity, as well as a request for its consideration by the Security Council. (2) Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to co-operate in carrying out any investigation which the Security Council may initiate, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, on the basis of the complaint received by the Council. The Security Council shall inform the States Parties to the Convention of the results of the investigation. Article VII Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to provide or support assistance, in accordance with the United Nations Charter, to any Party to the Convention which so requests, if the Security Council decides that such Party has been exposed to danger as a result of violation of the Convention. Article VIII Nothing in this Convention shall be interpreted as in any way limiting or detracting from the obligations assumed by any State under the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, signed at Geneva on 17 June 1925. Article IX Each State Party to this Convention affirms the recognised objective of effective prohibition of chemical weapons and, to this end, undertakes to continue negotiations in good faith with a view to reaching early agreement on effective measures for the prohibition of their development, production and stockpiling and for their destruction, and on appropriate measures concerning equipment and means of delivery specifically designed for the production or use of chemical agents for weapons purposes. Article X (1) The States Parties to this Convention undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the use of bacteriological (biological) agents and toxins for peaceful purposes. Parties to the Convention in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing individually or together with other States or international organisations to the further development and application of scientific discoveries in the field of bacteriology (biology) for the prevention of disease, or for other peaceful purposes. (2) This Convention shall be implemented in a manner designed to avoid hampering the economic or technological development of States Parties to the Convention or international co-operation in the field of peaceful bacteriological (biological) activities, including the international exchange of bacteriological (biological) agents and toxins and equipment for the processing, use or production of bacteriological (biological) agents and toxins for peaceful purposes in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. Article XI Any State Party may propose amendments to this Convention. Amendments shall enter into force for each State Party accepting the amendments upon their acceptance by a majority of the States Parties to the Convention and thereafter for each remaining State Party on the date of acceptance by it. Article XII Five years after the entry into force of this Convention, or earlier if it is requested by a majority of Parties to the Convention by submitting a proposal to this effect to the Depositary Governments, a conference of States Parties to the Convention shall be held at Geneva, Switzerland, to review the operation of the Convention, with a view to assuring that the purposes of the preamble and the provisions of the Convention, including the provisions concerning negotiations on chemical weapons, are being realised. Such review shall take into account any new scientific and technological developments relevant to the Convention. Article XIII (1) This Convention shall be of unlimited duration. (2) Each State Party to this Convention shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Convention if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of the Convention, have jeopardised the supreme interests of its country. It shall give notice of such withdrawal to all other States Parties to the Convention and to the United Nations Security Council three months in advance. Such notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events it regards as having jeopardised its supreme interests. Article XIV (1) This Convention shall be open to all States for signature. Any State which does not sign the Convention before its entry into force in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article may accede to it at any time. (2) This Convention shall be subject to ratification by signatory States. Instruments of ratification and instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Governments of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America, which are hereby designated the Depositary Governments. (3) This Convention shall enter into force after the deposit of instruments of ratification by twenty-two Governments, including the Governments designated as Depositaries of the Convention. (4) For States whose instruments of ratification or accession are deposited subsequent to the entry into force of this Convention, it shall enter into force on the date of the deposit of their instruments of ratification or accession. (5) The Depositary Governments shall promptly inform all signatory and acceding States of the date of each signature, the date of deposit of each instrument of ratification or of accession and the date of the entry into force of this Convention, and of the receipt of other notices. (6) This Convention shall be registered by the Depositary Governments pursuant to Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations. Article XV This Convention, the English, Russian, French, Spanish and Chinese texts of which are equally authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the Depositary Governments. Duly certified copies of the Convention shall be transmitted by the Depositary Governments to the Governments of the signatory and acceding States. Edits. This page was last edited on 15 February 2021, at 20:26.THE AFOREMENTIONED DOCUMENTS HAVE STRONG CLUES THAT THE AMERICAN ADMINISTRATION AND BIDENS IN PARTICULAR MAY HAVE VIOLATED THE INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL WEAONS BY COVERT FUNDING OF PATHOGENS CAPABLE OF CAUSING A PANDEMIC AAND SHOULD BE REFERRED TO INTERPOL AND THE ICC AND UN SECRETARIAT ON BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS FOR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.
Personal Page of Jorma Jyrkkanen, Composer, Author, Researcher 