I have obtained access to dozens of "confidential" Moderna documents and I would greatly appreciate help from anyone and everyone who would be willing to help read, review and analyze these documents.
At the beginning of this pLandemic, I used to hand out flyers to total strangers I would see when we went anywhere. And every time I posted a new post in my blog, I sent the announcement of it worldwide. At the age of 82, I don't know how much more I can do
Contact Highwire. This is there bread and butter with a first class Attorney who always seems to win Covid cases. They will almost certainly make a big video feature if this and have an enormous fan base to help.
The two examples you shared are wow. Imagine routinely ignoring potential causality without any real investigation.
I wonder if you can make a not of any similar reports that have a DATE associated with them and then the eager researchers are OpenVAERS and VAERSAware or similar could use them to cross check if they match and correspond to other reported adverse events. There may be data that was reported to Moderna but never uploaded to VAERS that would be an interesting omission.
Good luck and thank you for continuing with the good fight.
Have you responded to Will R. Thomas & lined him up to be on your show?
He's a brilliant mind who's ready to handle the Truth. "Some people can't handle the Truth" He scares to tell the whole truth and nothing but the Truth. So help him God.
It might well be an Idea to contact Dr Ana Mihalcea, she has a substack and regularly examines Vaccines and blood samples under Dark field microscope, she is already aware that DARPA Funded Moderna And I want to remind people that DARPA was the organization that in 2013 funded Moderna to develop the mRNA platform. And there have been many other fundings of biotechnological companies to do this.
Also Pfizer recruited the worlds top expert in Nanotech to create vaccines many years ago. the transcript of This report is terrifying.
For the time being I have no English version. However, all tables and figures are already on English.
1. MODeRNA tried to cover up the feature modification of the RNA by using the term mRNA in a totally misleading manner. In their glossaries they stated "mRNA = messenger ribonucleic acid". This is false, however. it is modRNA!
2. They avoided to tell correctly that modification was used to prolong the half-life by inhibiting the RNAses. They did not tell or officially investigate what the actual half-life of their modRNA was.
3. As modRNA is not well accepted by the RNAses, it would be naive to think that modRNA would be well accepted by the ribosomes. We should, and they should have anticipated broad production of nonsense peptides for this (frame shift) or that (stop of reading, false restart) reason.
Thinking of the objectives of people like Gates and big pharma, production of nonsense peptides might have been welcomed.
4. The true effect of all the C19 vaccines, in particular of the two modRNA vaccines, was to inhibit the reverse transcriptase (RT) prior to the PCR-Test; i.e. in vitro after the nasal swab. The RT is required to transform RNA into DNA; only DNA can be doubled in the PCR!
How lucky that coronaviruses are thought to be RNA viruses ...
Meaning: If you inhibit the RT, you will no more get a positive PCR-Test.
The inhibition of the RT could be achieved by a small peptide. Such peptide is obviously expressed in sufficient amounts and occurs at that nasal mucosa 12 days after the first injection; an estimate that Pfizer very exact found in their C4591001 trial.
In my expert opinion on Spikevax I listed more than 20 arguments for this hypothesis.
My earlier expert opinion (in English!) on Comirnaty listed 3-5 less arguments:
5. Not only Pfizer ("Process 2"), but also MODeRNAs switched to another production scheme in 2021. Completely against all rules for equivalence considerations of "biologicals". MODeRNAs switch was hardly recognized by the scene of C19 critics.
Title: The Illusion of Technocracy: A Deep Dive into Our Technological Future
Subtitle: Understanding the Control and Deception Behind Modern Technology
In an era marked by rapid technological advancement, the concept of technocracy looms large, often enveloped in a shroud of confusion and skepticism. As an observer, reflecting on the intersection of technology and societal control, I feel compelled to explore the intricate layers of this phenomenon. Technocracy, fundamentally, signifies a system where decision-making is driven by technological experts rather than democratically elected representatives. This essay seeks to unravel the implications of this shift, examining the historical context, the mechanisms of control, the psychological manipulation involved, and the potential future we face as we navigate this complex landscape.
The Historical Context of Technocracy
To grasp the present implications of technocracy, we must first look back at its historical roots. The term "technocracy" emerged in the early 20th century, reflecting a response to the inefficiencies of the existing political and economic systems. Early proponents envisioned a society where engineers and scientists would replace politicians in governance, making decisions based on data and efficiency rather than ideology. However, this seemingly utopian vision carried inherent risks. The concentration of power in the hands of a few experts could lead to a detachment from the democratic principles that underpin our societies.
Historically, societies have oscillated between democratic governance and authoritarian control. Technocracy represents a modern iteration of this cycle, where the allure of efficiency can eclipse the fundamental democratic values of individual freedom and accountability. As we witness the increasing reliance on technology to govern our lives—be it through data collection, surveillance, or algorithmic decision-making—we must ask ourselves: at what cost do we trade our autonomy for perceived efficiency?
If you would like to help, please send me a text message or call me at 310-619-3055
Are you on Signal with this number James?
Yes
Are these the phmpt documents at https://phmpt.org/moderna-documents/ or another set?
At the beginning of this pLandemic, I used to hand out flyers to total strangers I would see when we went anywhere. And every time I posted a new post in my blog, I sent the announcement of it worldwide. At the age of 82, I don't know how much more I can do
Peace,
Arlene Johnson
Publisher/Author
http://www.truedemocracy.net
To access my work, which is top secret history, click on the icon that says Magazine. It's free.
I will contact you. I want to help.
Stephane Bancel is a criminal.
https://rumble.com/v26ke8c-stephane-bancel-is-a-communist-who-built-the-wuhan-lab-01-21-23-preyinghawk.html
Contact Highwire. This is there bread and butter with a first class Attorney who always seems to win Covid cases. They will almost certainly make a big video feature if this and have an enormous fan base to help.
CONTACT US
Informed Consent Action Network
1401 Lavaca Street Unit #7022
Austin, Texas 78701
info@icandecide.org
whistleblower@icandecide.org
512-522-8739
The same ICAN that produced draft legislation "to increase vaccine confidence."!
Hi James you emailed me #32 but I cannot open it. Can you get it to me on this app?
Please text your email to me at 310-619-3055
The two examples you shared are wow. Imagine routinely ignoring potential causality without any real investigation.
I wonder if you can make a not of any similar reports that have a DATE associated with them and then the eager researchers are OpenVAERS and VAERSAware or similar could use them to cross check if they match and correspond to other reported adverse events. There may be data that was reported to Moderna but never uploaded to VAERS that would be an interesting omission.
Good luck and thank you for continuing with the good fight.
I'm in Australia, but can I help?
Send me a text message or an email.
310-619-3055
James.Roguski@gmail.com
Far away and only on the phone. Wish I could help.
Have you responded to Will R. Thomas & lined him up to be on your show?
He's a brilliant mind who's ready to handle the Truth. "Some people can't handle the Truth" He scares to tell the whole truth and nothing but the Truth. So help him God.
It might well be an Idea to contact Dr Ana Mihalcea, she has a substack and regularly examines Vaccines and blood samples under Dark field microscope, she is already aware that DARPA Funded Moderna And I want to remind people that DARPA was the organization that in 2013 funded Moderna to develop the mRNA platform. And there have been many other fundings of biotechnological companies to do this.
Also Pfizer recruited the worlds top expert in Nanotech to create vaccines many years ago. the transcript of This report is terrifying.
https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/p/iron-will-podcast-we-are-all-infected
For the time being I have no capacity for searching within documents; please excuse.
However, I can recommend concentration on 4 to 5 major issues.
For background information re. issues 1-4 (as outlined below) please cf.
Gutachten zu Nutzen und Risiken von Spikevax®, dem modRNA-COVID-19-Impfstoff von Moderna
263 Seiten, 73 Abbildungen, 65 Tabellen, 203 Referenzen.
https://kremer.tentary.com/p/snSQiH
For the time being I have no English version. However, all tables and figures are already on English.
1. MODeRNA tried to cover up the feature modification of the RNA by using the term mRNA in a totally misleading manner. In their glossaries they stated "mRNA = messenger ribonucleic acid". This is false, however. it is modRNA!
2. They avoided to tell correctly that modification was used to prolong the half-life by inhibiting the RNAses. They did not tell or officially investigate what the actual half-life of their modRNA was.
3. As modRNA is not well accepted by the RNAses, it would be naive to think that modRNA would be well accepted by the ribosomes. We should, and they should have anticipated broad production of nonsense peptides for this (frame shift) or that (stop of reading, false restart) reason.
Thinking of the objectives of people like Gates and big pharma, production of nonsense peptides might have been welcomed.
4. The true effect of all the C19 vaccines, in particular of the two modRNA vaccines, was to inhibit the reverse transcriptase (RT) prior to the PCR-Test; i.e. in vitro after the nasal swab. The RT is required to transform RNA into DNA; only DNA can be doubled in the PCR!
How lucky that coronaviruses are thought to be RNA viruses ...
Meaning: If you inhibit the RT, you will no more get a positive PCR-Test.
The inhibition of the RT could be achieved by a small peptide. Such peptide is obviously expressed in sufficient amounts and occurs at that nasal mucosa 12 days after the first injection; an estimate that Pfizer very exact found in their C4591001 trial.
In my expert opinion on Spikevax I listed more than 20 arguments for this hypothesis.
My earlier expert opinion (in English!) on Comirnaty listed 3-5 less arguments:
https://kremer.tentary.com/p/GNV9M3
5. Not only Pfizer ("Process 2"), but also MODeRNAs switched to another production scheme in 2021. Completely against all rules for equivalence considerations of "biologicals". MODeRNAs switch was hardly recognized by the scene of C19 critics.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss this further and I invite you be interviewed.
James.Roguski@gmail.com
310-619-3055
i have read shwabs fourth industrial revolution...scary shit man..
sure...im a canadian in belize. you can send me watsapp..+1 501 623 6623 or email micasaesloca@yahoo.ca
Thank you so much. I sent an email to you.
Title: The Illusion of Technocracy: A Deep Dive into Our Technological Future
Subtitle: Understanding the Control and Deception Behind Modern Technology
In an era marked by rapid technological advancement, the concept of technocracy looms large, often enveloped in a shroud of confusion and skepticism. As an observer, reflecting on the intersection of technology and societal control, I feel compelled to explore the intricate layers of this phenomenon. Technocracy, fundamentally, signifies a system where decision-making is driven by technological experts rather than democratically elected representatives. This essay seeks to unravel the implications of this shift, examining the historical context, the mechanisms of control, the psychological manipulation involved, and the potential future we face as we navigate this complex landscape.
The Historical Context of Technocracy
To grasp the present implications of technocracy, we must first look back at its historical roots. The term "technocracy" emerged in the early 20th century, reflecting a response to the inefficiencies of the existing political and economic systems. Early proponents envisioned a society where engineers and scientists would replace politicians in governance, making decisions based on data and efficiency rather than ideology. However, this seemingly utopian vision carried inherent risks. The concentration of power in the hands of a few experts could lead to a detachment from the democratic principles that underpin our societies.
Historically, societies have oscillated between democratic governance and authoritarian control. Technocracy represents a modern iteration of this cycle, where the allure of efficiency can eclipse the fundamental democratic values of individual freedom and accountability. As we witness the increasing reliance on technology to govern our lives—be it through data collection, surveillance, or algorithmic decision-making—we must ask ourselves: at what cost do we trade our autonomy for perceived efficiency?
The industrial revolution set the stage for…
Read more link:
https://prosepma.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?p=317#p317