12. The Conspiracy Basket
1.27.2023 A recent collection of all the best conspiracy theories
Click HERE to see The (prior) Conspiracy Basket
Click HERE to see The (most-recent & free) Basket
What you will find in this article:
Fake Placebo in mRNA Trials?
Nixon Was Torpedoed
Unredacted Fauci Emails Show Cover-up
Covid DoD Op
Moral Bioenhancement
UK Prophet
4X Post-Partum Hemorrhage Rate in 3x Vaxed
Humans Can’t Conceive
Gov Kemp’s Two Scandals
ATF’s Pistol Brace Ban
Population Trends Hurt Real Estate
Another IgG4 Study
Pfizer’s $6.7 Inflammation Gamble
Soros Out For WEF
WEF Rumble Primer
WHO Communications Manual
Tyson Chicken Monopoly
WEF’s “Safety by Design”
HR 34 Consent Law Change
Vaccinated in Trouble from XBB
Ireland Huge Increase in ACM
mRNA Factories EVERYWHERE
Fox Newman Dies Age 47
Elon’s Vax Injury Stories
What is Metabiota?
Smart City Streetlights Surveillance
Not A Single Safety Signal Ya Say
Al Gore’s $300M Climate Boondoggle
Post-Vax Troubles for Diabetics
Three Sources Show: More Vax = More Harm
Damar Dead?
England Care Home Homicides
Scott Adams’ (Dilbert Creator) U-Turn
‘A Dystopian Nightmare’
CCP Getting Into mRNA
PREP Act Bonanza
Pfizer Knew the Vax Would Kill
Gene Genie
Fake Placebo in mRNA Trials?
I have never been comfortable with the use of the word “placebo” (as most of you are aware) in the context of the COVID-19 injectable products and have postulated that the “placebo” groups were in fact being administered empty LNPs and not saline, due to the rates of severe adverse events in the context of “placebo”.
If this was saline, why would there be a 400% increase in death following the 2nd injection?
They have the following options:
The placebo was not saline and induced SAEs - I want to know what that placebo is in this case (FOIA)
The placebo was saline as indicated and something else induced the SAEs - a reasonable explanation would be SAEs induced by other vaccines given as per the schedule.
In the former case, you are in quite a bit of trouble.
Nixon Was Torpedoed
Unredacted Fauci Emails Show Cover-up
Garry and several of the paper’s other coauthors were themselves initially suspicious that SARS-CoV-2 may have emerged from a lab. They communicated their suspicions to Fauci, Collins and others in late January and early February 2020, and what ensued was a period of intense and confidential deliberation about the origin of the virus.
The conversations convey a sense of anxious urgency and included speculation about the specific types of laboratory techniques that might have caused the virus’s emergence.
“The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (<0.1%) so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered,” Andersen wrote in the e-mail.
In one e-mail to Fauci, Collins, and another NIH official, Farrar wrote, “On a spectrum if 0 is nature and 100 is release—I am honestly at 50!”
Farrar then summarized the perspectives of several other scientists, including Michael Farzan, of UF Scripps Institute. Farzan, Farrar wrote, was particularly puzzled by the presence in the virus’s genome of a furin cleavage site, which is a feature that has not been found in other SARS-related coronaviruses.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to ClownBasket to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.